Posted at 1:11 am. Updated at 05:00
The fruit is ripe
Marc-André Bodet, Professor of Political Science at the University of Laval, is convinced: “We in Quebec are ready to think about the way in which laws and guidelines are passed.” »
“Our approach was introduced in the 1930s,” he recalls. The means of communication are no longer the same. But if you’re ready for reform, it’s better to take the time to think about it. Some seemingly good ideas can turn out to be bad decisions. An example, he says: Putting an end to the applause in the Blue Room.
PHOTO EDOUARD PLANTE-FRÉCHETTE, THE PRESS
Marc-André Bodet, political scientist and professor at the University of Laval
“It kills the energy and reduces interest in the debates. It makes bad TV in a deadly atmosphere. The strength of politics is the almost sporting notion that one group opposes another. It takes passion. We complain that we don’t have very good speakers anymore, but it’s hard to be a good speaker when there’s no audience left,” he says.
We need people in large numbers
During the high Mass of a Quebec political day, Question Time in the Blue Room would be revised in both form and content. According to Marc-André Bodet, the National Assembly should first of all become larger.
“Our legislature is undersized by any measure, even compared to the equivalent population around the world. We could have up to 200 MEPs and that wouldn’t be unusual,” he said.
“If we had more deputies, people could specialize and have expertise. The English Parliament is typical in this respect. There are backbenchers who have become specialists in health-funding policy. They have time to split the files and there are a large number of deputies dealing with specific projects,” he adds.
Talk to each other in the whites of your eyes
Mr Bodet also regrets that the distance between elected officials in the Blue Room is too great compared to other British-style parliaments.
In Australia, for example, certain debates take place between people at a table placed in the middle of the room. The other deputies listen to the change of seats.
In London, the gap between elected officials is being narrowed. “Yelling at the opponent is less common because you look really crazy. It’s not very elegant. Proximity changes the nature of exchange. We are in a logic of confrontation but of dialogue,” he explains.
In Quebec, Mr. Bodet would reduce offices to a minimum. “Sitting on benches intensifies things. They bring people together and also increase the number of MPs. »
It’s all up to the research
In order to improve the quality of exchanges and allow the opposition to base their proposals on reliable data, Marc-André Bodet proposes to significantly improve the research service.
“The resources are grossly inadequate, especially compared to the United States. There, MPs working on specific projects have the opportunity to run economic simulations,” he explains.
In a context where it is difficult to give the opposition access to the public service, it is necessary to provide it with “resources paid for by the Assembly to conduct detailed research on specific, bipartisan issues”.
“MEPs often have ideas but don’t know how much it will cost, if it’s feasible or if it’s within the regulatory framework. “A research service allows you to ground a policy proposal in reality,” he adds.
And France, you?
Australia, the United States, the United Kingdom…but can Quebec, proud of its French roots, import some approaches from France? Jean-Pierre Beaud, an expert on French politics at the University of Quebec in Montreal (UQAM), doubts this.
“Shall we be inspired by that? Unless we obviously want a Parliament where we go for a walk and say things that aren’t very nice, I don’t think so,” he decides.
In his opinion, British-style parliamentarianism has many flaws, such as an inadequate representation of popular vote, but it produces strong and stable majorities. In France, the system works well even when the government has a majority, but “which is no longer the case”.
“When we debate, we tend to berate each other, especially today. The French Parliament is a reflection of what is happening in the United States between Democrats and Republicans. We can no longer talk to each other,” explains Mr Beaud.
“So what can we learn from this? Do we want to take back the insults, the bird names, as we called them? The real strength of an assembly in a British-style Parliament is that we can insult one another, but we face each other. At some point we have to say nice things to each other,” he adds.
A long overdue reform
Before the last elections, the main political parties presented their proposals to reform Quebec’s parliamentary system. Several ideas were put forward: extending the time allotted for Question Time, ensuring a minimum number of questions, or even organizing Question Time once a year to challenge the Prime Minister.
At the beginning of the second term of office of the Coalition avenir Québec (CAQ), Prime Minister Simon Jolin-Barrette reiterated that reviving this reform was a priority. Aside from some advances negotiated between the parties to shape the work of the 43rd legislature (e.g. the addition of MEPs’ statements), “we have no new announcements to make at this time,” we were told. -we answered .