One afternoon earlier this month, Charlie Angus stood up in the House of Commons to lament.

“Mr. Speaker, I always say what a great honor it is to stand up in a House like this, chosen by the citizens of Timmins—James Bay,” declared the NDP MP. “But I must say that I am less and less proud every time I am asked to stand up, because I do not know how to tell young Canadians to believe in democracy when they watch this dismal spectacle day after day gong.”

Angus, who is not seeking re-electionrecently got into the habit of compare debates in Parliament At American absurdist game show from the 70s and 80s.

Complaining about the state of the House of Commons is a tradition in Canada. But it might be hard to find anyone right now who is willing to disagree with Angus. That the House is “dysfunctional” might be the one thing all parties agree on, even if they disagree on who is responsible.

It is now too late to get things back on track for 2024. But will Parliament be more functional in 2025?

Why the House of Commons is blocked

Angus spoke just days after the Conservatives and New Democrats negotiated accusations of drunkenness And intimidation in the House. But the main cause of the dysfunction this fall was the Systematic obstruction of conservativeswhich has now paralyzed the House for two and a half months.

Conservatives argue that their actions are justified and based on high principles. Parliament ordered the government to produce documents relating to a fund for troubled green technologies; the government has so far refused to fully comply. The Conservatives say they are obstructing the government’s legislative agenda in the spirit of parliamentary accountability.

“The right to order the production of documents is fundamental to the proper functioning of Parliament,” said Conservative MP Michael Chong. said in a speech last month.

But the argument for the filibuster is complicated by two facts. First, the Conservatives are filibustering own motion, which proposed that the dispute be referred to a House committee for further review.

Second, the order passed by Parliament required the documents to be given not to MPs, but to the RCMP – a potentially problematic requirement that even the national police appear to find troublesome.

Steven Chaplin, former legal advisor to the law clerk of the House of Commons, writing that the order constituted an “abuse” of Parliament’s power without “any constitutional basis”. Rob Walsh, a former lawyer, said that handing over documents to the RCMP constitutes “an abuse of the powers of the House.”

Although obstruction is a traditional and legitimate tool for opposition parties in a parliamentary system, the Conservatives’ efforts are notable for the length of their action and the extent of their disruption. Except for a brief opening to pass the government’s temporary GST relief, the House has not been able to consider any government bill since late September. Any examination of legislative proposals from MPs has also been blocked.

The Trudeau government’s inability to end the filibuster can be attributed to several factors.

The Liberals do not have a majority in the House and would need support from another party to invoke closure. THE The New Democrats abandoned their confidence and supply agreement with the Liberals. in early September and are apparently in no hurry to help the government now. (A limited agreement with the Bloc Québécois briefly seemed possible in October, but the government and the Bloc could not agree on an increase in benefits for the elderly.)

In a pinch, a ruling party can call an election (or at least threaten to call one) to break an impasse. But the liberals are clearly involved no position to choose this route at the moment.

Liberals could console themselves by saying that the Conservatives’ systematic obstruction has not, for the most part, prevented them from governing. Thanks to the supply and confidence deal, much of their current program had been implemented before the Tory obstructionist began. And the House managed to approve the last round of financial credits this week, ensuring that the government will not run out of money.

Can anyone get this Parliament back on track?

But the obstruction has not been completely painless for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his government. THE online harm legislationfirst filed in February, has not moved forward. THE Nature Liability Actwhich was filed in June. THE First Nations Clean Water Actfiled last December, couldn’t leave the house. The changes made to the capital gains taxannounced in the spring budget, have not been formally adopted into law.

The government will also need to remove obstacles in the House if it hopes to move forward with amendments to the Election Act to make voting easieror a Long-Term Care Safety Act (which has not yet been filed).

Time is an increasingly precious commodity for this government. If the next federal election takes place in October, this House of Commons may only have 14 weeks of session left.

As the election approaches, the fight for every inch of territory on Parliament Hill will only become more intense – and perhaps more ridiculous. It is therefore easy to imagine the gong spectacle being renewed for 2025, perhaps culminating in the premature collapse of Parliament.

The Conservatives are clearly eager for an election and just as eager to argue that everything in Canada is “broken” so that it serves their purposes if parliamentary proceedings fail.

But prolonged dysfunction risks seriously undermining the value (or little) that the public places on Parliament. The fact that the current impasse has not sparked wider concerns already reflects poorly on Parliament’s status as an important public institution.

As Angus argued earlier this month, this could also be a particularly bad time for Parliament to collapse.

“We are going through a crisis of democracy in the world,” he said.

At some point, the Liberals and New Democrats may also have to decide whether they want to make more constructive use of what could be the final weeks before a Conservative government takes power.

Much of the responsibility for this lies with liberals, both practically and politically. And the New Democrats always have every interest in differentiating themselves from an unpopular government.

But the two parties still share some of the same goals. And if the Conservatives win a majority next fall, it may be some time before the Liberals or New Democrats have the power to advance those goals.

The confidence and supply agreement grew out of the “freedom march” protests that rocked downtown Ottawa in 2022. This agreement allowed the House to function and showed that two progressive parties could move certain things forward.

If the House wants to be anything other than a gong show in 2025, the Liberals and New Democrats may need to figure out together how to make things work again.