No, the National Assembly is not “out of date”

Is the National Assembly an “outdated” institution?

This was declared by the supportive MP Catherine Dorion when she announced that she would not be seeking a new mandate in the next provincial elections.

Those who have followed the career of M^me Dorion will not be surprised: the thinking of the MNA for Taschereau is part of the anarchist movement which, like the libertarian movement, opposes all political, media and other institutions.

That M^me Dorion feels cramped within our own parliamentary system. But his discomfort should not translate into an attempt at disinformation. His highly publicized outing about the National Assembly is not only unfair, it is inaccurate. Unfair to his colleagues in the National Assembly – including the members of his own party – who make it a living institution that advances Quebec society. And inaccurate because the National Assembly, like all Quebec institutions, evolves and modernizes over the years. It is wrong to say that it is frozen in time.

The National Assembly of Quebec is a very open institution, political scientist Éric Montigny reminds us. It is a model based on participatory democracy which inspires many states.

While the war is raging in Ukraine to the detriment of all democratic principles, it is good to remember that it is in the legislative assemblies that President Zelensky comes to plead his case.

M^me Dorion, who studied at the London School of Economics, is a cultured woman. She is surely aware that our National Assembly has undergone several reforms. One of the most significant was initiated by Jean-Charles Bonenfant in the 1960s. It is to him that we owe the Quebecization of our assembly, which was rid of all British symbols – tricorn, wigs, gloves… On his initiative, the “speech from the throne” became the “opening speech”, and the televising of parliamentary debates began.

Feminist displayed, M^me Dorion cannot ignore the fact that it is in the National Assembly that Quebec women have made the most gains through laws voted by all MNAs: pay equity, sharing of family patrimony, childcare centres, midwives… Far from being outdated, this institution reflects the values ​​of our society.

Does parliamentary work take time? Yes, absolutely. As Thérèse Mailloux, president of the Groupe Femmes, Politique et Démocratie points out, “there is no unanimity in the search for solutions. You have to talk and it takes time. That’s what a parliament is for.”

Finally, let us recall that our National Assembly has been, in recent years, the site of absolutely admirable cross-partisan work that should make us proud. Let’s think about the Act respecting end-of-life care or, at the Court specialized in matters of sexual and conjugal violence. These accomplishments are the fruit of the work of all the members who set aside the party line and partisanship for the benefit of the common good. Beyond the highly publicized question period, where clashes between the parties are sometimes a rat race, noteworthy work is being done that the general public is less familiar with.

Is the National Assembly perfect? Of course not. Like any institution, it is perfectible. In the spring of 2020, its president, François Paradis, proposed a vast reflection project to undertake parliamentary reform. Entitled A dynamic, modern and responsive National Assembly, it calls for the participation of all parties, including Québec solidaire, which presented 27 proposals. An additional illustration of the democratic vitality of this institution.

As Jean-Charles Bonenfant said so well, the value of political institutions corresponds to the qualities of the men and women who drive them.

That M^me Dorion no longer wants to intervene in the precincts of the National Assembly is his strictest right. But that’s no reason to denigrate her.