Content area
Abstract
"Question Time" (QT) is a prominent part of legislative politics in many industrialized countries. It provides a rare opportunity for the parliamentary opposition to set the agenda; is it the most regular and direct accountability mechanism the executive faces, and therefore it is the only legislative forum in which some controversial issues are discussed. For these reasons, QT is the subject of much preparation by politicians and scrutiny by the media.
Does QT matter to broader patterns of politics? Social scientists do not yet know. My dissertation answers this question by examining QTs across the advanced democracies, focusing on their impact on citizens. I argue that QTs featuring shorter speeches, surprise questions, and more vitriol are more likely to induce citizen engagement with politics than are more staid, structured, and civil QTs. This is because the more vitriolic, circus-like "open QTs" provide more newsworthy material for the media and are more accessible and enjoyable for citizens, who encounter QT on the evening news and in the newspaper. One important implication of my argument is that politics engages citizens better when politicians dispense with elite-level discourse and debate issues in everyday language.
I find strong empirical support for my argument linking more open QTs with increases in participatory engagement. I also find that the open QT effect is strongest on young citizens. This differential effect, coupled with the high propensity of younger adults to seek spectacular entertainment elsewhere, supports my argument that the rambunctious, vitriolic tone of the QT debate is, at least partly, causing the increases in participation.
Exploring my finding's implications, I discover evidence of increased delegation to bureaucrats when there is not an open QT forum that opposition MPs can use to blame Ministers for bureaucratic error. I also find that open QT institutions move government policy left. Additionally, I find that increases in participation flowing from open QTs do not also enhance citizen perceptions of the political process, challenging the received wisdom that evaluations of and participation in the political process usually run together.
