OTTAWA—MPs don’t have a consensus on their job description which could affect their ability to do their jobs effectively, says a sweeping new report based on interviews with 65 former MPs.

“When roles and responsibilities are not clear in any organization, problems ensue. Critical tasks will be overlooked, or efforts will be duplicated. Important work will not be achieved,” says a report entitled Welcome to Parliament: A Job With No Description.

The report, released Nov. 30 by Samara, an organization dedicated to political leadership, citizen participation, and public affairs journalism. The report is a follow up to Samara’s first report, “The Accidental Citizen,” which resulted from exit interviews with 65 MPs who left the 38th and 39th Parliaments.

“While some variation can be expected, we were surprised that there was so little consistency in the MPs’ collective understanding of the key components, responsibilities and expectations of their role,” said Michael MacMillan and Alison Loat, Samara co-founders, in a press release. “This lack of consistency may be a reason—and one that is rarely considered—behind Canadians’ wider dissatisfaction with the culture of our politics. If MPs don’t agree on what they’re elected to do, should we be surprised if citizens are also confused or disillusioned? It may be time to discuss and consider more closely the role of an MP, a position for which there is currently no job description.”

The report noted that while most MPs first came to Parliament with awe, they were also “overwhelmed and unsure” of what they could expect.

One MP noted in the report: “I was overwhelmed. I grew up modestly and never aspired to any of this stuff. I wasn’t one of those people who was thinking about this when I was 12. I was naïve.” Another MP said, “All of a sudden I said, ‘I’m going to Ottawa.’ I had never planned to do that. It was just one of those things that happened.”

Because many newly-elected MPs had never really planned for politics but got into as a mid-life career change, adjusting to Parliamentary life was difficult, especially since there is no structured orientation, formal training or easy handbook to rely on.

“The orientation is terrible,” one MP said in the report.

Another MP also said: “You get there, they take you in the House, they give you a book [on] constituency rights and responsibilities, the former Speaker talks about being in the House, and that’s it. There’s no orientation. There is no training. There is nothing on how to be effective,” and, as yet another MP said, “You learn by the seat of your pants.”

Even more experienced MPs could not answer the probing questions from their younger colleagues. One MP recalled in the report that when he asked someone for advice, they said, “I don’t know; I’ve been here for three years, and I really don’t know.” That MP then thought: “Gosh, it takes a long time to learn things.”

The report noted, however, that some newly-elected Bloc Québécois MPs were paired up with mentors who were helpful in showing them the ropes.

One former Bloc MP said, “I didn’t even know that when the bell rang I was supposed to enter the Chamber. I didn’t know that; I didn’t know anything.”

Samara’s report notes that there are some reasons the public should worry “about an unprepared and unsupported Parliament.”

Not only can it affect MPs’ effectiveness, but it can also confuse the media that watch Parliament, Samara’s report said. “Organizations whose leaders operate without a shared sense of purpose or responsibility are difficult to understand and explain. This challenge is only compounded by the reduction in journalistic resources devoted to the coverage of national affairs in news organizations across Canada,” the report said.

In addition, it can confuse the public in general. “This confusion results from impressions formed by the media’s coverage of national politics, and from direct interaction with politicians whose views on their essential function are so widely divergent.”

The report found that MPs categorized their jobs in five ways: the philosophers, geographers, partisans, service providers and ‘none of the above.’ This was the difference between those who wanted to come to Ottawa to support their constituents by bringing local voices to the national debate and to build a better Canada by implementing the partisan policies the MP ran on, among other sentiments. The report also found, however, that two-thirds of MPs interviewed had spent some time on the opposition benches, but “it came as a surprise that only a few mentioned holding a government accountable as part of their job.”

According to the Westminster style of government on which Canada’s Parliament is based, MPs have three traditional roles: “to consider, refine and pass legislation”; hold government accountable by authorizing or not public expenditures; and “to determine the life of the government by providing or withholding support,” or, as it is more commonly know, making sure the confidence convention is adhered to.

One MP noted: “I can give you the canned thing of why they tell us we’re there and I can share with you what I believe is the truth. In a nutshell, we’re there to adopt national policy for the betterment of all in the country. The truth is, you’re there to develop policy that is beneficial to your party in order to keep you in power and get you re-elected. That national premise is, kind of, always there, but there is politics involved in everything.”

Samara interviewed 65 MPs whose average terms were 10 years in Parliament. In the end, “most coped by simply acknowledging that the learning curve was steep, and that the only way forward was to learn by doing.” One MP said in the report that “it takes time to figure out how it works... and [to figure out] what I want to do here. What can I do here? You don’t do that in a month, or a year. It’s an evolution over time.”

Another interesting point the report makes is the fact that MPs come to Parliament with prior backgrounds and expertise in subject areas and are then put on committees that have nothing to do with that experience.

“Given the importance of committees to the overall work of Parliament, it was a surprise that so many MPs described their initial appointments as unexpected or unsuitable,” the report said. “Although many MPs acknowledged that regional and gender balance was important to committee composition, they still felt frustrated when their appointments did not accord with their experience or interests.”

One MP noted that he had been put on the Public Accounts Committee, even though he was not keen on it. Instead of getting moved to another committee, he ended up becoming the vice-chair. “The result was not only confusion, but at times a misapplication or waste of one’s expertise,” the report said.

The report concludes that while every MP cannot and does not do their job in the same way every time, the lack of a consistent job description is something that needs to be looked at. “The dearth of preparation in a system in which there is little orientation or training and the total absence of an agreed-upon role means that, in many cases, MPs must find their own way,” the report said. “They arrive in Ottawa and are forced to wing it. While this provides much more latitude for individual MPs to pursue their own objectives than we commonly appreciate, it also further contributes to the political behaviour and corresponding public confusion and cynicism that turn many away from public life in the first place.”

bvongdou@hilltimes.com

The Hill Times

Statistics on MPs who participated in Samara’s exit interviews

• The average age at which the MPs entered federal office was 46.8 years. The median age was 48 years.

• The MPs’ average tenure was 10.3 years. Their median tenure was 12.3 years.

• The MPs held a variety of legislative roles, and many held more than one:

          • One served as Prime Minister

          • 31% were Cabinet Ministers

          • 35% were Parliamentary Secretaries

          • 65% held a critic portfolio

          • 58% chaired at least one committee

• 22% are female

• 11% are immigrants

• 41% represented urban ridings

• 23% suburban ridings

• 36% rural or remote ridings

• 82% indicated English as their preferred language

• 18% indicated French as their preferred language

• 86% of the MPs have at least one college or university degree. Nearly half have more than one degree.

• 57% of the MPs left politics due to retirement and 43% left as the result of electoral defeat.

—Source: Samara report, Welcome to Parliament: A Job With No Description