Irreversibly Lost? Spontaneity of Politics

[FiveParadox]

It would seem that one of the most exciting elements of politics — standing up to speak spontaneously on an issue with unscripted statements, questions and debate — has all-but-died in the world of Canadian politics. Whenever a member raises to speak — whether for a full speech on a piece of legislation, a question (or answer) during question period, even what are supposed to be questions based on another member’s speech, they are all prescripted: Read on cue cards, a laptop, or note paper. My problem with this is the fact that we select these people to speak for us as our elected representatives; they should be able to respond to questions and comments and to follow the ebb and flow of conversation in the House. They should know the subject matter that they’re debating. They should have read the bill that they’re discussing, and this obviously isn’t the case.

I would love to see a question period without pre-scripted questions and answers.

Isn’t that what politics is really supposed to be about? The free exchange and discussion of ideas, as the conversation happens? Maybe if members of the Commons were forbidden to bring other resources into the House — just their own knowledge, and the bills before them — they would actually discuss the issues, and maybe some of them could even change each other’s minds on issues.

 

[AnnaG]

It would seem that one of the most exciting elements of politics — standing up to speak spontaneously on an issue with unscripted statements, questions and debate — has all-but-died in the world of Canadian politics. Whenever a member raises to speak — whether for a full speech on a piece of legislation, a question (or answer) during question period, even what are supposed to be questions based on another member’s speech, they are all prescripted: Read on cue cards, a laptop, or note paper. My problem with this is the fact that we select these people to speak for us as our elected representatives; they should be able to respond to questions and comments and to follow the ebb and flow of conversation in the House. They should know the subject matter that they’re debating. They should have read the bill that they’re discussing, and this obviously isn’t the case.

I would love to see a question period without pre-scripted questions and answers.

Isn’t that what politics is really supposed to be about? The free exchange and discussion of ideas, as the conversation happens? Maybe if members of the Commons were forbidden to bring other resources into the House — just their own knowledge, and the bills before them — they would actually discuss the issues, and maybe some of them could even change each other’s minds on issues.

It'd be nice. All we have to provoke unscripted responses from the two-faced, lying creeps is the newsmedia. Oh, I am just bubbling over with confidence in those types. :roll:

 

[JLM]

It would seem that one of the most exciting elements of politics — standing up to speak spontaneously on an issue with unscripted statements, questions and debate — has all-but-died in the world of Canadian politics. Whenever a member raises to speak — whether for a full speech on a piece of legislation, a question (or answer) during question period, even what are supposed to be questions based on another member’s speech, they are all prescripted: Read on cue cards, a laptop, or note paper. My problem with this is the fact that we select these people to speak for us as our elected representatives; they should be able to respond to questions and comments and to follow the ebb and flow of conversation in the House. They should know the subject matter that they’re debating. They should have read the bill that they’re discussing, and this obviously isn’t the case.

I would love to see a question period without pre-scripted questions and answers.

Isn’t that what politics is really supposed to be about? The free exchange and discussion of ideas, as the conversation happens? Maybe if members of the Commons were forbidden to bring other resources into the House — just their own knowledge, and the bills before them — they would actually discuss the issues, and maybe some of them could even change each other’s minds on issues.

There is one sure way to fix that- cut their salary to a tenth of what it is, letting them know that it will be increased slowly commensurate with their abilities. There are a lot a young whiz kids out there who would give their eye teeth for a career in politics and if they witnessed something like that happening, it would delay any ideas they may have about become useless at an early age. What we presently have in politics is a case of the tail (them) wagging the dog (the electorate).

P.S. - If they were to get any ideas in their heads about strike..good ....we'd get along just fine for a long time without them albeit it it might be with a little struggling, but we'd save enough to make it well worth it.