After attacking the Speaker, would Poilievre consider parliamentary reform?

While his party has made a out of its battle with the Speaker, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has periodically waxed poetic about the House of Commons — suggesting that its green upholstery is meant to symbolize the fields of the English countryside where commoners met centuries ago before the signing of the Magna Carta.

The actual origin of the House's colour scheme remains unclear.

The official guide to House procedure and practice says that, while the Senate's use of red is explained by that colour's connection to royalty, «the association of the colour green with the Commons is not so easily determined.» A briefing note from the United Kingdom's Parliament states that the origin is «much less easy to explain» — though it does note that in the medieval period, «green was the colour of the pasture and the greenwood, of the village green used by all, in other words the colour of the countryman, the 'common' man.»

Either way, Poilievre's fondness for such a romantic theory suggests at least a certain reverence for the institution.

«To serve here, in the House of Commons, is an honour for every member. Each of us should be proud to be responsible for working on behalf of some 100,000 people,» Poilievre told the House last October.

«At times, however, we forget the order in which power is exercised. We think that the prime minister is at the top, with the House of Commons below, and the people down at the very bottom, but the opposite is true. In a democracy, the people have the power. We serve the people, and the government serves parliamentarians.»

Given his apparent respect for the House — perhaps even his apparent concern for the impartiality of the Speaker — it's fair to ask whether Poilievre would embrace the idea of