Why is Question Period the way it is? A few theories.

1) With the advent of national news broadcasts and fewer journalists from local papers in Ottawa, parties likely go after the short clip on the news as a way of reaching the voter who doesn’t follow the minute details of politics.

2) You’re probably more likely to get that short clip if you go for a theatrical/partisan performance.

3) Your intra-party incentives are likely to be seen getting a good zinger, too. You want to be seen as a strong political performer.

4) QP is the theatrical part of politics today. That’s what it’s for. In arguing that it shouldn’t be theatrical, you’re arguing it shouldn’t serve it’s niche function.

5) Committees, written questions, constituency work, etc, serve other functions.

6) QP helps opposition parties issues in the media, ie keeping them on the agenda by bring them up again and again.

7) QP seems to bring out the ‘team spirit’ side of politics, which is likely important for morale and cohesion.

Now, does that mean QP needs to be nasty and meatheaded as it sometimes gets? No.

But that’s a separate issue. The theatrical form and the substance of the performance are separate issues.

We can want a better performance while still recognizing the value of political theatre

Finally, is there room for political theatre during a pandemic? In a way, it’s as important as ever. It’s arguably one of the few avenues for opposition parties to get a word in, owing to the dynamics of crisis government.

Anyway, the political communications folk have surely studied this to death, but we can defend QP as a form while wanting it to be more substantial.