When Mark Carney stepped into the House of Commons for his first Question Period last week, he wasn’t just answering opposition queries—he was breaking a Parliamentary tradition that stretches back to Justin Trudeau’s earliest days as Prime Minister.
For nearly nine years, Trudeau personally fielded all opposition questions on Wednesdays, a practice that set him apart from his predecessors. That era has now ended quietly, with little explanation from the Prime Minister’s Office about why this particular tradition has been shelved.
“The Wednesday Question Period was Trudeau’s signature gesture toward accountability,” says Emmett Ferguson, parliamentary procedure expert at Carleton University. “Whether substantive or symbolic, it created an expectation that the Prime Minister would face direct questioning at least once weekly.”
The change comes as Carney, the former Bank of Canada and Bank of England governor, settles into his role as finance minister following his October appointment. His debut performance revealed a politician comfortable with technical details but still finding his parliamentary footing.
Standing in the Commons, Carney parried questions about housing affordability and inflation with the confidence of someone who’s navigated global financial crises, but occasionally showed the hesitation of a newcomer to partisan combat. When Conservative deputy leader Melissa Lantsman pressed him on specific economic targets, Carney responded with measured tones that contrasted with the usual charged atmosphere.
“Canadians deserve concrete answers on when they’ll see relief on housing costs,” Lantsman demanded, to which Carney replied that the government’s approach would be “data-driven, not deadline-driven,” a response that prompted opposition groans.
Behind this procedural shift lies a more substantial question about the government’s political strategy. Trudeau’s decision to step back from Wednesday questions comes amid challenging poll numbers and rising concerns about economic issues where Carney’s expertise might reassure voters.
According to the latest Abacus Data poll, 63% of Canadians rank cost of living as their top concern, with housing affordability close behind at 57%. By positioning Carney front and center, the Liberals appear to be leaning into their newest asset.
“This is about showcasing Carney as the economic fixer,” suggests Theresa Wong, political strategist and former Liberal staffer. “It’s a calculated pivot to let him become the face of the government’s economic response while Trudeau focuses on rebuilding his connection with voters on other fronts.”
The Prime Minister’s Office has been characteristically tight-lipped about the change. When asked directly about abandoning the Wednesday tradition, Trudeau’s press secretary Emma Butt offered only that “the government continues its commitment to accountability while making the best use of ministerial expertise in addressing Canadians’ concerns.”
For parliamentary observers, however, the shift represents more than just a scheduling change. Lori Turnbull, Director of the School of Public Administration at Dalhousie University, sees it as potentially significant.
“When a Prime Minister voluntarily gives up face time in the Commons, particularly a tradition they established, it usually signals a broader strategic realignment,” Turnbull notes. “The question is whether this is temporary positioning around Carney’s honeymoon period, or a permanent reduction in Trudeau’s parliamentary presence.”
The opposition has predictably seized on the change. Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre characterized it as “running and hiding from accountability,” while NDP leader Jagmeet Singh suggested Trudeau was “outsourcing leadership to his new minister.”
Yet for everyday Canadians watching snippets of Question Period on the evening news, the more pressing concern isn’t who answers the questions but whether those answers address kitchen table concerns. On that front, Carney’s performance offered glimpses of both strength and vulnerability.
When pressed on specific affordability measures by the Bloc Québécois, Carney pivoted to discussing broad economic indicators rather than specific relief timelines. But he displayed detailed command of housing supply initiatives when responding to questions about interest rates and mortgage stress tests.
At Tim Hortons locations across Ottawa the morning after Carney’s debut, reactions from morning coffee drinkers were mixed but revealing. “I don’t care who answers the questions as long as someone fixes these housing prices,” said Ellen Morin, 47, a government employee and mother of two university-aged children. “My kids can’t even think about buying a home in this market.”
That sentiment captures the challenge facing both Carney and Trudeau as they navigate this latest parliamentary adjustment. Procedural traditions matter in our democracy, but they ultimately take a back seat to results.
As Parliament approaches its holiday recess, all eyes will be on whether this change in Question Period protocol signals a broader shift in how the Trudeau government presents itself to Canadians. Will Carney become the economic face of the government while Trudeau pivots to other priorities? Or is this simply a temporary adjustment during Carney’s introduction to parliamentary life?
Whatever the strategy, the clock is ticking. With affordability concerns mounting and an election on the horizon, Canadians seem less interested in who stands at the dispatch box than whether the person standing there has answers that will make a difference in their daily lives.
