Member of parliament: a job with no job description.

• Author: Loat, Alison
• Position: Report

This article is based on a larger study that used exit interviews with former MPs to determine, among other things, how the MPs described their jobs. The study found that there is little consistency in the ways our elected members viewed the job description of an MP, and outlined five broad and overlapping categories. It also suggests certain implications that flow from the absence of any shared understanding of the MP's job.

**********

Sixty-five former MPs were interviewed for this project in 2009-10. They served in public life for an average of 10 years, and left during or after the 38th and 39th Parliaments, which sat from 2004 to 2008. Each MP served in at least one minority Parliament. Many came to Ottawa at a particular point in our political history: when the Bloc Quebecois, the Reform Party and later the merged Conservative Party of Canada became as important players on the national stage?

When asked to describe the role of an MP and how they thought about the job, there were nearly as many responses as there were MPs.

We were surprised that the former MPs interviewed lacked a shared understanding of the job's key components, responsibilities and expectations. For example, two-thirds of them spent at least a portion of their time in Ottawa on the opposition benches, so it came as a surprise that only a few mentioned holding a government accountable as part of their job.

A similarly small number mentioned engaging the public in determining the policies that shape our country and communities. Even those who defined their role as representing constituents were unlikely to talk of such engagement.

It is important to look at this in context. Unlike traditional professions--and indeed unlike the vast majority of jobs across the country--which come with generally accepted and agreed upon responsibilities and codes of conduct, there is no job description for a Member of Parliament.

Theory and Practice

The Westminster system of government, on which the Canadian Parliament is based, has three traditional roles. The first is to consider, refine and pass legislation. In other words, to establish policy and pass laws.

The second is to hold government accountable for its administration of the laws and to authorize the expenditure of required funds. That is, to ensure that the laws are being carried out properly, and that tax dollars are being spent responsibly.

The third role is to determine the life of the government by providing or withholding support. This means to vote for things you support, and against things you do not support.

Today's MPs perform a variety of roles in addition to those outlined above. Most notably, they are also responsible for the constituency and party duties that have emerged with a growing population, a larger Parliament and the evolution of Canada's party system. (2) As it turns out, modern politics and political life are much more complicated than the classic Westminster description suggests.

Perhaps as a result of this growing complexity, there was little consistency in the ways the Members of Parliament described the essential purpose of an MP or how they balanced the competing aspects of the role.

We were surprised that none of the MPs in our group described their jobs in terms consonant with this traditional Westminster definition--only a few were even close.

One MP was brave enough to acknowledge that he was not entirely sure what the job entailed. "I thought one should have a dear understanding of what an MP does. But even when I explained it to people, I did not entirely know ... and when I asked others, I did not get a dear answer."

When we asked MPs to describe how they conceived of their role, five general categories emerged, and each included substantial degrees of difference within it. The wide disparity in the way MPs described their own jobs is echoed by Professor Suzanne Dovi, "The concept of political representation is misleadingly simple: everyone seems to know what it is, yet few can agree on any particular definition." (3)

The Philosophers

Many of the MPs to whom we spoke described their role in ways that correlated with two classic competing definitions of a political representative's role: what political scientists refer to as trustees (representatives who follow their own understanding of the best action to pursue) and delegates (representatives who follow the expressed preferences of their constituents).

Unlike the other groups described in this report, the philosophers' views on the role of an MP correlated somewhat with political affiliation. There was no clear majority of trustees or delegates among Parliamentarians from the Liberals, New Democrats or the Bloc Quebecois. Each of those parties had MPs in both groups. Yet while several Conservative MPs described themselves as trustees, the overwhelming majority indicated that they approached their role as delegates.

The majority of MPs who defined their roles in philosophical terms described themselves as trustees, elected by the public to use their own judgment in making decisions. One Liberal claimed, "I am not there as some kind of thoughtless representation of local views. Voters have chosen me and I have to apply my best judgment to the situation. It may not always be popular with the constituents, but if they wanted a popularity contest or poll, they would not need an MP."

A New Democrat described it this way, "My job as an MP was to do the thinking and the listening at the committee hearings and the meetings--albeit out of a certain perspective that I was up-front about when I ran--and then to make judgments. My constituents will hold me accountable at elections and in between with their input with letters of criticism or support."

A smaller number of MPs described themselves as delegates, viewing their role as the representatives of their constituents above all else. "They select you to be their representative in Ottawa, to speak for them, to vote on legislation and, in some cases, to develop legislation that they feel is wanted. Basically to work for their interests and to deliver for them whatever benefits might flow," said one Conservative MP. "MPs should be in Ottawa to represent their constituents," said a Liberal MP.

Others described themselves primarily as delegates, but expanded the description beyond simply representing their constituents' views. "The purpose of an MP is to facilitate the opportunity for the people who you...