Questioning Parliamentary Questions

Personalization of parliamentary behaviour: Conceptualization and empirical evidence from Belgium (1995–2014)

“…Scrutiny activities and particularly parliamentary questions are more likely to be used to generate media attention and public interest, or to address specific constituency grievances, and are hence more likely to be used by MPs to build up a personal reputation (Chiru, 2018; Martin, 2011) than (any kind of) law-making activities (single- or co-authored). In addition, whereas in practice the bulk of legislative bills is typically co-authored (especially with MPs from other parties if they want to be successful) (Brunner, 2012), parliamentary questions are always on an individual basis, which allows individual MPs to highlight themselves instead of the party (Rozenberg and Martin, 2011). Furthermore – and here is where informal uses come into play – even when legislative bills are single-authored, they are generally subject to party scrutiny (Dumont and De Winter, 2006), among others because legislative proposals might invoke a vote in standing committees or plenary sessions which could bring intra-party or intra-coalition divisions to the surface.…”

“…Indicator three looks at oral questions in the plenary session, which is also a common feature of most democracies (Serban, 2017). The idea behind this tool is that the scarcity of the plenary agenda forces party groups to make choices (Rozenberg and Martin, 2011), and these choices can be concentrated around one or a handful of MPs or they can be dispersed. And finally, indicator four refers to a phenomenon (i.e.…”

From agenda setters to agenda takers? The determinants of party issue attention in times of crisis

“…To measure parliamentary attention, the present analysis relied on the most politically relevant form of oral questioning that is available in each country, which is usually referred to by the name of its British version: ‘question time’. An MP may ask a specific question for many reasons, ranging ‘from highly focused issues – for instance obtaining an official commitment about the funding of a school – to very large issues – for instance sympathizing after a natural catastrophe in a foreign country’ (Rozenberg and Martin, 2011: 394). It is only in extremely rare cases that asking a question is in itself enough to promote the adoption of a legislative act or the dismissal of a cabinet.…”

“…What is more, TV coverage ensures that questions and the unfolding debates engage actors outside of the parliamentary arena (Salmond, 2014). Second, since the time available is limited, questions are selected under the supervision of the party whip, if not entirely pre-arranged at the party group level (Rozenberg and Martin, 2011). This should reduce, though not entirely rule out, the use of oral questions for reasons of self-promotion or constituency service (which are more typical of written questions).…”

Back from Holyrood: How mixed-member proportional representation and ballot structure shape the personal vote

“… 9. Recent scholarship has examined the legislative activities of members of the British Parliament, the Northern Ireland Assembly, and the Dáil Eireann as proxies of particular representational styles and the personal vote, including Early Day Motions (Kellerman, 2013), written questions (Kellerman, 2016; Martin, 2011), oral questions (Rozenberg and Martin, 2011), and private member’s bills (Bowler, 2010). We do much the same. …”