It’s not called Answer Period, but that’s not such a bad thing

THURSDAY MORNING EDITORIAL — There’s nothing new in the fact that Question Period — whether it be in Ottawa or in Victoria — doesn’t have a lot to do with getting answers. It’s about asking questions and not expecting anything back.

That’s why it’s often pointed out that it’s not called “Question and Answer Period.”

The axiom was proven again Wednesday as the new B.C. legislative session swung into action, including Question Period. The highlight, if you can call it that, was the grilling by the NDP of Premier Christy Clark over the release of cabinet documents submitted to the Supreme Court with respect to the case against the government by the B.C. Teachers Federation.

That case has recently been ruled upon but confidential cabinet documents submitted to the judge haven’t been released because the government doesn’t have to, and because the judge kept them confidential.

The NDP surely didn’t expect Clark to stand up in the legislature and say, ”OK, you win, here they are!” In fact, she didn’t stand up at all, not once during the debate on this particular issue, letting Justice Minister Suzanne Anton take the heat instead.

Eleven times the question was asked of Clark, and 11 times Anton said the matter was before the courts and that’s that.

One could use this as an example of why QP should be abolished but, like the Senate, it has its uses. It allows the government to be put on the hot seat, and that’s not a bad thing.

Our democracy is formed around the notion that opposition parties are there to hold the government to account, and QP is the living embodiment of that.

The answers might often be of little use, but the questions are. That’s why it’s called Question Period.