Michael Ignatieff, Jack Layton, their entire caucuses, the editorial board of the Globe and Mail, and several Canadian citizens are still outraged that Stephen Harper did the p-thing and that Parliament won’t sit for a while longer. In protest, they have brought their caucuses to Ottawa. Darn it, Harper won’t stop them from working. No, he won’t.

If Parliament were sitting, however, it is not exactly clear, if the past is any good as a predictor of the future, what would happen.

Ignatieff, it seems, does not think that the prime minister is doing a particularly good job. He believes that he could do better. If Parliament were sitting and the House of Commons were in session, he would believe so devoutly in the importance of that chamber’s role in holding the government to account that he would often spend three hours a week doing that very thing. (On Fridays Question Period starts at 11:15 am rather than 2:15 so that members can get away early for the weekend. Apparently, the government doesn’t need to be held to account on Friday afternoons.) The leaders of the NDP and the BQ will spend the same amount of time each week keeping a close watch over the shifty prime minister. Otherwise you will rarely see them in the House either.

Questions posed by parties’ leaders are rarely penetrating and often rely on the previous night’s news and the morning’s newspapers. Often they never rise far above the level of an exchange of insults. Take this exchange, which opened Question Period on December 7, 2009.

Mr. Michael Ignatieff (Leader of the Opposition, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, for months now, the Minister of National Defence has been claiming that there is no evidence that Afghan prisoners transferred by the Canadian Forces were tortured. However, the sworn testimony of Canadian officials is contradicting the minister. Obviously, the minister has misled Canadians. Will he admit it and finally tell the truth?

Hon. John Baird (Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, CPC):
Mr. Speaker, the story the Leader of the Opposition raises is one that was raised in this House more than two and a-half years ago. The Vice Chief of Defence Staff, now the CDS, issued a statement over two and a-half years ago stating that the Afghan in question was not detained, was not captured and was not transferred by the Canadian Forces. I hope the member opposite will stand in this place and apologize to the men and women in uniform.

Mr. Michael Ignatieff (Leader of the Opposition, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, the point is that the Canadian Forces did their job; the question is whether the government did its job. The issue here is that the minister says one thing, but a Canadian field officer's diary and sworn testimony say another. I would prefer to believe the testimony of the officer and not the minister opposite. Can he give me a reason to believe anything he says?

Hon. John Baird (Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities, CPC):
Mr. Speaker, for more than three years, we have seen the Liberal Party and the members opposite smear our brave men and women in uniform.

This is an extreme example, but unfortunately not rare. Exchanges during Question Period rarely change public policy, and I think it is fair to say that debates in the House of Commons or even discussions in committees have little influence on the outcome of legislation.

If I could be convinced that Ignatieff, or Layton, or Duceppe had a clear idea why they wanted Parliament to meet, and a plan of action for what they would do when it did, I would feel more sympathy for their feigned outrage. However, as long as the opposition treats the House of Commons with the same cavalier disregard as the government, they are merely hypocrites waiting for their time in office.