The Pearson Centre for Progressive Policy

Progressive Dialogue and Policy for a Better Canada

RETIRING MPs plead for less partisanship in Parliament

By

September 30, 2019

RETIRING MPs plead for less partisanship in Parliament

By

(Picture of retired MP Irene Mathyssen,R (London-Fanshaw) and her daughter Lindsay Mathyssen,L the new MP for the riding – probably the first mother and daughter to be MPs. Views of Irene Mathyssen noted below.)

RETIRING MPs PLEAD FOR LESS PARTISANSHIP

(Compiled by Kyra Mullen)

Seven retiring MPs say there is too much partisanship in politics to the detriment of good policy and plead for less partisanship in the next Parliament.

To date no party has addressed how they might create a more productive style of politics.

The highlights of their time in politics usually referred to serving their constituents or furthering good policy.

The Pearson Centre asked all the retiring MPs from various parties to share with us their thoughts about their time in politics. We asked them to address specifically, why they decided to run, the high and low points in politics and what their recommendations about the future of politics in Parliament. Here are their responses in their words:
– Frank Baylis
– MarjolainE Boutin-Sweet
– Celina Caesar-Chavannes
– Tony Clement
– Nathan Cullen
– Jim Eglinski
– Irene Mathyssen
_______________________________________________

FRANK BAYLIS, Pierrefonds-Dollard, QC (Liberal)

Why did you originally decide to run?

The decision to enter politics, from my perspective, is that it is a calling. I have always had an interest in representing my country; I felt called to do so. In this light, I consider myself very fortunate to have had this honour. Our society is built on the contributions of a great many citizens. There are people that volunteer in all sorts of areas; there are people who give back to our country by serving in the armed forces, there are people whose careers are based on helping our fellow citizens. I personally felt that I could contribute to improving Canada as a politician and this was the fundamental reason I decided to run.

What were some high and low points of your time in office?

The high points for me were all about the people I had the good fortune to meet. I met people from all walks of life in my riding. Pierrefonds-Dollard is a very diverse community, whether it be along linguistic, religious, racial, ethnic, wealth, urban and part rural, or other lines. As such I was able to meet and learn about all these wonderful communities. In addition to this, in Ottawa I was able to meet parliamentarians from every corner of Canada. I was very impressed by my colleagues, and note that I consider all Members of Parliament to be my colleagues, regardless of which political party they represented.

The low point for me, was the lack of civility and general respect combined with the lack of true debate and productivity in Ottawa. I firmly believe that we can all do better and that we should all do better.

What are your recommendations for the next Parliament, and others to come either about policy issues or the nature of politics?

During my time in Ottawa, I tried to change the tone and behavior of parliament. I was not successful in doing so. I put forth the motion 231 to make important changes to the standing orders so as to promote collaboration over confrontation. It would be my hope that the next Parliament take up this cause and work to improve our overall functioning. As for specific policy issues, I believe that the world is changing at an ever faster pace. As such, parliament must be more productive in order to keep our laws up to date with the new realities. One such example is unregulated world of social media, which is presently guilty of serious privacy intrusions. Therefore better productivity in law making procedures is critical.

MARJOLAINE BOUTIN-SWEET, Hochelaga, QC (NDP)

Why did you originally decide to run?

I was approached by the NDP. I was over 50, wanting to find a new job, had always voted NDP and was a co-founder of my trade union. I thought I could continue to do the same work I had been doing with the union, listening to and helping people, but at a different level. My personal values and that of the NDP were identical.
Le NPD m’a approchée. J’avais plus de 50 ans, essayais de changer d’emploi, avais toujours voté NPD et était co-fondatrice de mon syndicat de travailleurs. Je me suis dit que je pourrais continuer à écouter et aider les gens, mais à un niveau différent. Mes valeurs personnelles collaient parfaitement à celles du NPD.

What were some high and low points of your time in office?

High points:
– My pan-canadian housing tour: to find out about the general situation, the problems on the ground, and the possible solutions. This, and my persistence, allowed me to influence the government’s policies, despite the fact I sit on the Opposition benches.
– My closeness with the citizens of my riding: I was able to show them that a politician can be someone who cares, who is human and approachable, wants to help, and therefore undo some of the cynicism about politicians
– Being able to speak in front of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, for example about Missing and Murdered Aboriginal Women in Canada
– My work as whip to make parliament more family friendly: a family room, highchairs in the cafeterias and dining rooms, access to a nanny service, maternity leave within the NDP for new mothers (there is no such thing in the House of Commons!) and parental leave for fathers

– Ma tournée pancanadienne en logement : pour identifier les problèmes, les solutions possibles, et avoir une idée de la situation générale. Je pense que grâce à ces informations et à ma persistance, j’ai pu influencer les politiques gouvernementales en logement, malgré le fait que je suis à l’Opposition.
– Le fait que je sois proche des citoyens m’a permis de leur démontrer qu’une députée peut être une personne qui écoute, qu’on peut approcher et qui a leur bien-être à cœur. Ça a aidé un peu à combattre le cynisme des gens envers les politiciens.
– J’ai pu m’adresse à l’Assemblée parlementaire du Conseil de l’Europe! Mon dernier discours portait sur les Femmes Autochtones Assassinées et portées Disparues au Canada
– Mon travail en tant que whip m’a permis d’améliorer la conciliation travail-famille au parlement : une salle pour les jeunes parents, des chaises hautes dans les cafétérias et salles à manger, accès à un service de nounous, un congé de maternité au sein du caucus NPD pour les nouvelles mamans (ce type de congé n’existe pas au parlement!) et un congé parental pour les papas
–
Low points:
– Partisan politics: the government voting against an Opposition bill just because it comes from the Opposition, then bringing back and passing a very similar bill just to take the credit

– La politique partisane: les députés au pouvoir votent contre les projets de loi de l’Opposition, tout simplement parce qu’ils sont présentés par l’Opposition. Ensuite ils ramènent et font passer un projet de loi très semblable, pour prendre tout le crédit

What are your recommendations for the next Parliament, and others to
come either about policy issues or the nature of politics?
– In order to pass relevant and meaningful laws and have policies that make a real difference in people’s lives, Parliament needs to be more representative of the population: we need to change the electoral process from First passed the post to a Mixed proportional system

– Si on veut des lois et des politiques qui font une réelle différence pour M et Mme tout le Monde, il faut des parlementaires représentatifs de la population : nous avons donc besoin d’un mode de scrutin proportionnel et non pas celui que nous avons en ce moment

CELINA CAESAR-CHAVANNES, Whitby, ON (Independent; elected as a Liberal)

Why did you originally decide to run?
During the politics component of the Executive MBA program at Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto in December 2013, the professor referred to political capital and how it can be used to influence policy to help people and businesses. I was intrigued by the concept and decided to explore a little further as I had never been interested in politics and this was my very first “poli-sci” type class. I decided to join the Liberal Party (because I had always voted Liberal), as a means of getting involved a couple months later in February 2014. When I received an email asking women of different backgrounds to run, on International Women’s Day (March 08, 2014), I was convinced that the invitation was for me, and I replied. It would be an opportunity for me to marry my passion for business and research, with policy, that could help people in a profound way.

High and low points
Highest points were:
1) helping to advocate for $5B investment in Budget 2019 for mental health services for youth
2) Advocating for Viola Desmond to be the first woman on Canadian currency
3) The inclusion of the Black community in the federal budget for the first time in 150 years
4) #HereForCelina
The lowest points were:
1) Leaving my family and missing important event and achievements with them
2) the attacks on social media, mail etc.
3) Leaving, especially when I know that I am good at this job

What are your recommendations for the next parliament?
1) Stay true and authentic.
2) Learn to appreciate people across the aisle. Some of my lowest moment were buoyed by notes from Conservative and NDP members
3) Always stand up for what you believe in
4) Do not take the easy way out, or the way which “polls best” when developing policy. There are people depending on you to get it right
5) If you have another opportunity to get rid of first past the post, just do it!

TONY CLEMENT, Parry Sound-Muskoka, ON (Independent; elected as a Conservative)

Why did you originally decide to run?
I had been in provincial politics for almost 9 years and that career ended with an election loss but I saw the need for change at the federal level. There had been successive liberal governments at the time, I felt that the country needed a change and that I, having the experience that I had in senior cabinet positions in the Mike Harris and Ernie Eves governments, could add my voice to federal politics. So after some convincing of my local electoral association that I was the right candidate, I felt that I could continue to add to the public life of my country.

High and low points?
High points:
Definitely being a senior cabinet member in the Stephen Harper government. Having positions in Health and Treasury meant that I was involved in making many senior decisions including how to deal with the greatest recession since the great depression and how to balance the budget. Another high point was being part of the cabinet in government, I was involved in positions of war and peace, how to deal with some of our foreign foes, and keep Canada safe.
Low points:
Contending with the defeat of our government and some of the adjustments that went with being a backbench opposition member versus being a high ranking cabinet member, that took some getting used to. Overall though I have no regrets.

Advice for the next parliament?
I think we have to continue to inject more civility into politics. However, that doesn’t mean less partisanship, partisanship is part of the nature of our democracy and I want passionate people who believe passionately in their views to make up the parliament, so that those views can be argued in the free market place of ideas so when people say, “you guys should agree more, you disagree all the time”, parliament is the place to disagree, it’s the place where you have vehement, passionate arguments about the future of the country. You can have hose disagreements and not be disagreeable, so I’m not for less partisanship but I am for more civility in Parliament.

NATHAN CULLEN, Skeena-Bulkley Valley, BC (NDP)

Why did you originally decide to run?

I had never run for office at any level before so this was a huge leap. The initial motivation to even be involved came out of listening to a speech given by the then MP and MLA for our region at a Chamber breakfast. Particularly their ignorance and dismissiveness towards indigenous people living in the northwest. I contacted the NDP (and the Liberals – they didn’t phone back) and the NDP eventually urged me to not just help out but run. Only once I thought of how to make the campaign work more like an NGO (issue and people-focused, not party and leader) was I convinced it was worthwhile.

– What were some high and low points of your time in office?

Jack Layton’s death was the low point without question. On a policy level the breaking of the electoral reform promise and the recommitment to Afghanistan war (with a number of MPs ‘absent’ from the vote) stand out as particularly difficult.
High points are too many to name: passage of C-48, many, many indigenous feasts and memorials in which I was offered an incredible insight into history and culture and the opportunity to pay homage and respect for colleagues who have served and passed on. Speaking in the House was always, always, a distinct privilege.

– What are your recommendations for the next Parliament and others, either about policy issues or the nature of politics?

Be careful who you take advice from. Including me. Hold to some core principles, remind yourself of them often, don’t make them a ‘political’ thing but something for you and your family to be held accountable to. Go home. Often. The ‘bubble’ can distort and comfort elected folks into believing alternative realities to what Canadians face. Decide on your story, your gifts, your offer and worry a little less about climbing the ladder and just do the best job you can.

Parties are simply vehicles we’ve invented to get us from here to there and get something done. Don’t make the work about the vehicle but rather the larger purpose.

JIM EGLINSKI, Yellowhead, AB (Conservagtive)

Why did you originally decide to run?
I decided to run after having a conversation with the then Member of Parliament for Yellowhead, the Hon. Rob Merrifield. Originally, I had no aspirations of entering federal politics. I did have a number of
years of experience in municipal politics. Mr. Merrifield wanted to retire immediately and asked me to run because of my background in law enforcement, municipal politics and other government services. The best way I could explain as to why I said yes, is that I thought it would be a great way of ending my working career — having the honour to serve the riding of Yellowhead.

High and low points
The highest for me was when the committees I served on were able to publish unanimous reports. The highest, was the opportunity to build relationships, and friendships with colleagues from all parties. I am not a partisan type person. I have always believed in working as a team.
This leads me to the low point of my time in office — the strong partisanship dislikes, distrusts, and grandstanding. We are here to represent our ridings, to represent Canadians as government officials, as their voice in Ottawa. I believe this is sometimes forgotten by persons that may put themselves before their constituents.

What are your recommendations for the next Parliament?
The next parliament will see a change in leadership with better and more robust policies. The nature of politics needs to be brought into check and more professional decorum must be adhered to especially, in the House and by the Speaker of the House’s leadership. There is no room for partisanship in that role.

IRENE MATHYSSEN, London-Fanshaw, ON (NDP)

Why did you originally decide to run?
I decided to run because after so many years of supporting the ideals of the NDP, voting NDP and teaching my secondary school students that they had an obligation to community and to this country, I figured I’d better put my money where my mouth was. I wanted to make a difference and I wanted to help people in difficulty. Being an advocate and someone who is willing to assist in times of trouble is satisfying and important work.

What were some high and low points of your time in office?
There have been some great and happy moments for me because my staff and I have been able to work as a team to assist those in jeopardy and those who just need some fairness in their lives. Some years ago, a church group approached our office because they had a parishioner who had been a political refugee and was desperately trying to get her young children to Canada. She was a landed immigrant and her husband has been a minor official in Uganda. He was away from home when vigilantes attacked their village killing as many people as they could find. The young woman hid her children but was caught, attacked and left for dead. She managed to escape, came to Canada but knew that her assailants were aware of her identity and that she had survived. That put her children, 5 all under the age of 10, in great danger. Her mother-in-law was taking care of the children but she lived in a home without water, electricity and plumbing. The young woman and her husband were re-united in London, Ontario and were working with the church to bring their children here. They were having no luck. The federal government wasn’t interested and the immigration system was very difficult to navigate. The grandmother did her best to secure medical checks, DNA certificates and the documents needed to complete the process. Documents were lost and had to be replaced, the children were sometimes ill and the danger was ever present. My staff and I worked on this case for 8 months. I even appealed directly to the minister; but she simply wasn’t at all interested. After a long and persistent struggle, we finally secured the necessary documents and brought the children to Canada. It was a beautiful day when they all came in to my office to meet me and my staff.

What are your recommendations for the next Parliament, and others to come either about policy issues or the nature of politics?
Parliament should be the key to decision making. I want an end to super majorities and governments that refuse to be collaborative. The government should not have the power to ignore, overrule, browbeat and refuse the ideas of the opposition. I hope the MPs who are elected to the 43rd parliament will stand up for the good ideas no matter the source of those good ideas and rely on evidence based policy suggestions and evidence based science. I would also ask future MPs to respect and reach out to the officers of parliament for direction and support in decision making.