It has been said that being a member of Parliament is a job without a job description. Apart from the strict application of party discipline in legislative voting, MPs are free to organize their representational activities largely as they wish. In this welcome addition to the growing literature on the local dimension of Canadian politics, Royce Koop, Heather Bastedo and Kelly Blidook undertake to document the significant variability in the constituency-based representational styles and practices of Canadian MPs. Insofar as the observed differences represent more than the idiosyncratic agency of MPs, the authors seek to relate them to three general considerations: the personal goals and backgrounds of the MPs themselves, characteristics of their constituency contexts and what they refer to as the MPs’ “experiential learning.” These factors, according to their “representational connections framework” (RCF), help to explain the different orientations of MPs to four types of connections with their constituents: policy, service, symbolism and partisanship. While all MPs attempt to connect symbolically with their constituents, and while elements of all four connections may figure in the activities of MPs, some appear to specialize in one or another of the three alternatives.
The RCF was inspired by the pioneering work of Richard Fenno (particularly his Home Style: House Members in Their Districts (1978) and refined in light of the extensive field work of the team of authors. Employing a qualitative methodology akin to Fenno's “soak and poke” approach, these three authors accompanied and observed eleven MPs for varying lengths of time as they went about their representational activities in their ridings and in Ottawa (averaging three days in their respective constituencies and two days in Ottawa). This fieldwork was followed by one-on-one interviews with each of the MPs that helped clarify and confirm the field observations.
The bulk of the book provides descriptions of the authors time spent with the MPs that are organized around the dimensions identified in the RCF. Three MPs—a Conservative from Alberta (Leon Benoit), an NDP member from Nova Scotia (Meghan Leslie), and a Conservative cabinet minister from Ontario (Tony Clement) —receive the most extensive treatment (each with her/his own chapter). Three shorter case studies (Niki Ashton, NDP from northern Manitoba); Scott Simms (Liberal, rural Newfoundland); and Ted Hsu (Liberal, Kingston and the Islands) extend the scope of the RCF's application and further establish the diversity of representational styles. Finally, still shorter vignettes of five additional MPs enable the authors to explore additional themes related to the diversity and influences on representational styles. These cases are sufficiently differentiated and representative so as to give the reader confidence in the generalizability of the findings. The result is a rich and nuanced portrait of the diversity of representational styles adopted by MPs and a persuasive account of the origins of these styles in the MPs’ personal and setting characteristics.
The application of the participant-observer methodology enables the authors to make a significant contribution to the existing empirical literature on the practice of parliamentary representation in Canada, much of which is based on survey responses from a larger number of MPs. Focusing on cases rather than on variables, the authors are able to describe the coherence and integrity of the various representational styles adopted by MPs and link these back to the more general determinants drawn from their personal backgrounds, aspirations, and/or experiences, and from their constituency contexts.
Constant references throughout the book to the RCF facilitates comparisons—finding similarities and differences—in the representational styles of the MPs. Occasionally, the various types of observed connections between MPs and their constituents are difficult to associate uniquely with one of these four categories. More generally, while all MPs seek “symbolic” connections with their constituents (with varying levels of comfort and success), several individuals appear to prioritize one of the other three connections.
Given the strict party discipline to which MPs are subjected, relatively little attention is given to the challenges MPs face when dealing with locally unpopular party policies (though Benoit's open criticisms of the Harper government's reluctance to tackle the issue of abortion and CBC funding does come up). In general, government MPs feel the need to defend their party's record in office whereas opposition MPs are relatively freer to pursue their own priorities. Aside from this, most MPs seem to assume (as Mike Wallace of Burlington does) that the plurality of support that resulted in their election is evidence that their party's policy positions don't require zealous defense or advocacy in their districts. So perhaps the assumed tension between party and local policy preferences is less an issue than we have been inclined to believe. In addition, in light of the existing literature on home styles, one perhaps unusual aspect of the analysis is the decision to treat changes in representational style over time as evidence of adaptation resulting from experiential learning. Adopting this position, the authors seem to implicitly question the argument of others that seniority and long tenures provide MPs with a reliable base of local support that gives them the confidence to pursue more Ottawa-centred partisan or policy projects.
Taken as a whole, this is a highly readable book that provides ample evidence and argumentation that MPs are self-consciously engaged in representational styles and strategies that are coherent and responsive to the demands and expectations of their diverse constituencies. This is a good news story and I highly recommend it.
