Liberals look to shorten MP's workweek to 4 days

[The Bread Guy]

But the point was not to encourage efficiency, productivity, or even additional time with their constituents; the Liberals were quite clear that this is so that the MPs can spend more time with their families.

Now that presumes they're not working or spending time with their constituents when they're in the constituency with their families, no?

I agree with those wondering how much legislative work will be done with a shorter "time in the House" week, especially in light of the ambitious agenda ahead of "new management."  But an MP's "workplace" is as much the constituency, where they're supposed to keep in touch with their constituents, as the Hill.  And as much as I whine about politicians, I, too, wouldn't want to trade places with them, at ANY level of government.

 

[Kat Stevens]

You knew the job was dangerous when you took it, Fred.

 

[jmt18325]

Are you the betting sort?  op:

I wouldn't be surprised by an extra week or two.  Like a few people so far have said though, their job doesn't begin or end in Ottawa.  That's just part of who they are as MPs.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I have a fair bit of sympathy for the rural MP’s and the ones from the North, coming to Parliament and back to deal with their constituents concerns is hard on them, I noted the faded look my MP took on after 1 term. The house is mostly theatre and the real work is grindingly boring committee meetings that go on and on. (for the army folks imagine a never ending O group). One wonders if there is another way using electronic sittings part of the time or allowing x – number of electronic votes per session.

 

[Cloud Cover]

You knew the job was dangerous when you took it, Fred.

Pardon? I work at a college, not very dangerous except for the slender students with knee high boots and leggings.

I would like to see Parliament sit less for voting, question period etc. Questions should be intelligent questions, attacks are for the lobby gallery and not for CPAC. I would like to see the return of the MP educational sessions of the St. Laurent era, with the public having access to the very same materials, in real time, that the MP's have. I really do not care how many hours per week an MP works, as long as they are effective and have the best interests of their constituency and the country in mind. I also do not believe a person should be able to sit more than 3 terms as an MP, 2 terms as a PM.  The qualifications to run as an MP should include an aptitude test and a performance measurement that allows for recall by petition.

As for the comment about MP's keeping their 'real world' employment while sitting- no. I do not want Michael O'Leary to keep his day job and sit as an MP or perhaps lead a political party. In any event, Justin Trudeau never worked in the real world, so how would that even work out?

About Hy's- if it's closed, good. Too many fat lobbyists and journalists in Ottawa. I hope they put a Movati there, and all "off the record" discussions and leaks can occur on the treadmill, "run with this....."

 

[Remius]

About Hy's- if it's closed, good.

Small businesses closing is never good.

 

[Cloud Cover]

Yeah true, but I meant that in a more anti-establishment way. I think I am turning into an "occupy democracy" kind of guy. 

 

[The Bread Guy]

... Questions should be intelligent questions, attacks are for the lobby gallery and not for CPAC ...

And answers, really answers?

... The qualifications to run as an MP should include an aptitude test and a performance measurement that allows for recall by petition ...

Like, maybe, the citizenship test as a start?

 

[Cloud Cover]

And answers, really answers?Like, maybe, the citizenship test as a start?

Advanced level thinking- economic realism, healthy human behaviours, responsibility to secure and defend, critical thinking and analysis, real Canadian history, actuarial accounting, law, ethics, most of the everyday principles of social science. You know, mature stuff, and all without an advisor to write the test for them.

 

[dapaterson]

I oppose such tests only because Gov'ts would game the system to their own advantage.  Do not want politicians to decide who can be a politician.

 

[Journeyman]

Advanced level thinking- economic realism, healthy human behaviours, responsibility to secure and defend, critical thinking and analysis, real Canadian history, actuarial accounting, law, ethics, most of the everyday principles of social science. You know, mature stuff, and all without an advisor to write the test for them.

Getting agreement on the DS solution to that would be an adventure in itself, given how modern academe 'defines' most of those topics today

....with 'define' in quotes, because even describing the parameters of such issues is likely oppressive and offensive.  :nod:

 

[Cloud Cover]

Game it. It's just a thought experiment anyway. As if pragmatism would ever have a chance...

 

[Cloud Cover]

I oppose such tests only because Gov'ts would game the system to their own advantage.  Do not want politicians to decide who can be a politician.

Would require, likely, a Constitutional and Charter effort (how dare they demand that an MP have some critical skills!!!! :threat, and even then oversight by a non-aligned third party.

All of my students seem to oppose tests for one reason or another. In a past career, all of my employees seem to oppose PER's. Never saw anybody turn down a degree, promotion or a bonus for making the effort.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Advanced level thinking- economic realism, healthy human behaviours, responsibility to secure and defend, critical thinking and analysis, real Canadian history, actuarial accounting, law, ethics, most of the everyday principles of social science.

I know several people I'd prefer as an MP representing my interests than a lot of folks who may be able to BS their way through this stuff.

 

[Cloud Cover]

At least they would be BS'ing through something....right now, one gets nominated, meets very low criteria, raises some cash and they are off to the races. You can't tell me that it's working well for us .....

 

[SupersonicMax]

If we elect incompentent MPs, we only have one group of people to blame: Canadian Citizen.  In a democracy, election is the ultimate test in one's ability to represent his people.

 

[McG]

If we elect incompentent MPs, we only have one group of people to blame: Canadian Citizen.

Does the Canadian citizen need a "reject all" option on the ballot before we lay blame there?

 

[SupersonicMax]

Vote, but spoil your ballot.  This is in effect rejecting the candidates you are offered.

 

[McG]

Vote, but spoil your ballot.  This is in effect rejecting the candidates you are offered.

Spoiled ballots are not a rejection.  There is no differentiation between ballots spoiled in protest or ballots spoiled because the operator lacked the faculties to complete it properly.  No amount of spoiled ballots will prevent the plurality winner of accepted ballots from being elected.  So, you want to blame voters if incompetent MPs are elected.  I ask again, can you do that if voters don't have a mechanism to reject all when the choices are dumb and dumber?

 

[Scoobie Newbie]

Guy Fawkes  rancing: