| Sumario: | Parliamentary questions are important democratic accountability instruments, but little is known about how these procedures are reformed, and with what consequences. This paper uses the introduction of Prime Minister's Question Period (PMQP) in the Canadian House of Commons in 2017 as a case study of questioning procedure reform. Under PMQP, the Prime Minister would answer all questions once a week, diverging from the traditional Question Period where the Prime Minister answered a few questions daily alongside ministers. As this is a way in which other parliaments have reformed questioning procedures, the case has wider comparative relevance. Using quantitative analysis of prime ministerial attendance and questions, as well as interviews, this paper explores the effects of the reform. Findings indicate that PMQP is similar to other individualized questioning procedures such as the UK's Prime Minister's Questions, but retains features of Question Period such as party control, and a confrontational style.
|
|---|