Keep byelection spat out of legislature

Opinion

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 24/11/2022 (761 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

The provincial byelection campaign in Kirkfield Park is turning into quite the donnybrook.

I guess we should have expected this. While the stakes of the race are rather low, the parties are hoping a favourable outcome can shape the narrative leading into the provincial election slated for next year.

A Progressive Conservative win will reinvigorate the Tories and perhaps convince some voters that, despite low poll numbers, Premier Heather Stefanson has a shot at re-election. But an NDP victory will be seen as a waypoint on Wab Kinew’s march to the premier’s office.

Much of the controversy in the byelection campaign has focused on the high-profile PC candidate, former councillor and mayoral candidate Kevin Klein.

Both NDP and Liberal MLAs have targeted Klein in question period in the legislature, alleging discrepancies in his employment history and highlighting links between Klein and disgraced former fashion executive Peter Nygard.

Klein says he only worked with Nygard briefly in 2012 and 2014, but the opposition parties allege these claims understate the ties between the two men.

Nygard is currently facing a number of high-profile and disturbing criminal charges, so a cynic might be inclined to think the opposition parties are simply hoping to associate Klein with Nygard in the minds of voters.

Klein’s response to all this has been to forcefully deny the accusations, calling them part of a partisan “witch hunt” and noting the attacks are hurtful for his family. At one point, the PC candidate hugged his crying wife in front of the cameras.

In particular, Klein lashed out at NDP and Liberal MLAs for making accusations in the provincial legislature, where elected members are protected from liability for defamation by the doctrine of parliamentary privilege.

Klein vowed to do away with privilege. “I am going to be fighting that rule and changing it so that every politician has to stand up and be held accountable for what they say,” he declared.

There are lots of interesting things to unpack here, but two in particular:

First, many people think question period is little more than a time for politicians to pointlessly yell at each other and make asses of themselves. In fact, question period plays a crucial role in our system of parliamentary government.

In a system in which both executive and legislative power are fused in the premier and the cabinet, question period is one of the few occasions when a government can actually be held accountable.

Opposition MPs do this by holding the government’s feet to the fire and, yes, frequently engaging in theatrics to attract attention while doing so.

Given this, and given that there is currently quite a bit for which to hold the government accountable, is it really appropriate for the NDP and Liberals to be using question period not to raise concerns about the government’s performance, but rather to dredge up personal allegations about a candidate in an ongoing byelection campaign?

I think not. While this would be far from the first time politicians have taken liberties with the legislative tools provided to them, we should always take a dim view of such tactics.

Second, Klein’s assertion that we ought to do away with parliamentary privilege might raise a few eyebrows, particularly among Tory MLAs who might be surprised by their candidate’s freelancing on the issue.

Immunity from charges of defamation — in other words, freedom of speech in the legislature — is one privilege enjoyed by parliamentarians.

A long tradition in parliamentary forms of government, privileges such as this exist because it is recognized that politicians couldn’t effectively do their jobs without them.

This is particularly true of freedom of speech inside democratic chambers, which was described by a parliamentary committee as a “fundamental right” of representatives.

Freedom of speech permits MPs to “speak in the House without inhibition, to refer to any matter, or express any opinion as they see fit, to say what they feel needs to be said in the furtherance of the national interest and the aspirations of their constituent.”

MLAs must be free to speak out on what they think is best for Manitoba, without any kind of chill from potential defamation suits. Parliamentary privilege allows them to do so within the legislature.

While some politicians may exercise their privilege in questionable ways by attacking opponents, freedom of speech within democratic chambers is fundamentally important for the functioning of our form of government.

Anyway, there’s a simple test one can use to check whether a politician is abusing parliamentary privilege: ask them to step outside. Not to fight (which would be very unparliamentary), but rather to see if they’re willing to repeat what they have just said in the legislature.

If they’re unwilling to do so, then it may be worth taking their statements with a grain of salt.

Royce Koop is a professor of political studies at the University of Manitoba and academic director of the Centre for Social Science Research and Policy.