Gormless blather


Andrew Steele draws the line between raucous debate and what it is that we have.

Politics is a clash of ideas. Those ideas arouse passions. Parliament should not be a garden party. But at the same time, it should not be a cattle call. The role of MP in Canada’s current era of the minority government to that of chess piece, vote token, and occasional theatrical chorus member…

Our House of Commons has rarely been anywhere near the Lincoln-Douglas debates, but it would be nice if we could elevate our game to at least the caustic feud of Pearson and Diefenbaker rather than the morass of gormless blather we can anticipate.


Gormless blather

  1. Gormless blather was much more civil in the 1950s and 1960s.

  2. Gormless blather was so much more civil in the 1950s and 1960s.

  3. For that to happen, you'd need a government that allowed its own party free votes, and presumably freedom to disagree with the party.

    Hey.. didn't one of the parties promise just that? I wonder what happened to it?

  4. How about a government that conversed with the opposition? Or one that wouldn't talk about its rivals as though they belonged to some ebola-spreading class of parasites? How about a government that even tried to play nice half-of the time?
    And a media that wasn't so intent on playing 'match this quote' and 'gotcha!' clever charade games.

Sign in to comment.