Finally, more than 30 minutes into Question Period, a question worthy of an answer.
Liberal Leader Jon Gerrard rose to pose a question about the NDP government's plan to build an all-weather road directly through the Grass River Provincial Park. Why, Gerrard queried, didn't the province look for routes outside the park lands proper to avoid disturbing the unique flora and fauna in this protected area?
Tory Leader Hugh McFadyen may need to ask tougher questions.
Transportation Minister Ron Lemieux rose to answer Gerrard's first question, but he failed to provide a reasonable answer. When Gerrard pressed in a second question, it was Premier Gary Doer who got up on his feet. The fact Doer rose to handle the question was a clear tell the government side of the chamber was a tad concerned about what Gerrard might make out of the proposed Grass River road.
Unfortunately, that was really one of the only salient moments in the May 13 edition of Question Period at the Manitoba Legislature. Tory Leader Hugh McFadyen had an interesting exchange with Doer on proposed changes to electoral laws, and Tory MLA Len Derkach delivered a solid question about bovine tuberculosis concerns near Riding Mountain park. But all in all, question period was what it has been for a very long time: A veritable graveyard for meaningful debate.
No matter how you slice it, QP seems to have lost its relevance to, and impact on, life outside the legislature. Why is a difficult question. Opposition, government and, yes, the media all have some responsibility here.
Certainly, the economics of journalism have made it more difficult for political stories to claim ground in the newspapers and newscasts.
Back in the early 1990s when newspapers not only had more pages but larger pages, the Free Press had three reporters covering daily events at the Legislature and each of them would write two or three stories, many the result of exchanges in question period. And there was greater competition. In the 1980s, for example, in addition to a full complement of local journalists, correspondents for the Toronto Star and The Globe and Mail would write daily dispatches from question period in the Manitoba Legislature.
Many opposition critics believe the media is satisfied to regurgitate whatever news release the government issues that day. They allege that sorting out the facts in a spirited QP debate is just too much work for today's working journalists. As lazy as they can be at times, experienced political reporters can still tell the difference between an effective opposition question and ineffective questions that get swatted away like houseflies.
In yesterday's QP, for example, the predominant exchanges between the opposition and government were about Bill 37 and changes to electoral law. McFadyen did elicit a nugget of new information from Doer on the subject of the appointment of an officer of the legislature to oversee a proposed lobbyist register. However, the remainder of the questions about Bill 37 were more angry than illuminating.
McFadyen called Bill 37 the NDP's "election fixing" bill, a suggestion the ruling party was trying to stack the deck for the next election with its changes. Tory MLA Heather Stefanson accused Doer of "trampling the rights of Manitobans" and trying to create "a one-party state." Doer responded by mocking the Tories, the party of the now infamous 1995 vote-splitting scandal, for accusing anyone else of "fixing" an election.
It's mildly entertaining to be sure, but it's not newsworthy. The "you're-so-stupid-no-you're-stupid" questions and answers failed to provide any real elucidation about Bill 37.
McFadyen recently supported an idea to shorten QP and change the rules to provoke more direct answers from ministers. Incredulous that anyone would suggest shortening QP, Doer accused McFadyen of "waving a white flag" and surrendering any hope of bettering the government in a debate.
McFadyen might claim the moral high ground on this issue by focusing his efforts, and those of his MLAs, to asking the kind of question that Gerrard unleashed yesterday. The often-overlooked Grit was succinct, direct and lucid in his attack on government. And he did what the Tories were generally unable to do yesterday: He got the government to flinch.
Regardless of the level of interest in the media, the worst strategy for any opposition party is satisfy itself by using question period to deliver a flurry of insults. The best strategy is to ask questions that are so direct and well constructed, the premier is left scrambling to save one of his ministers.
That is something that over time will catch everyone's attention.
dan.lett@freepress.mb.ca
PREVIOUS
