Justin Trudeau takes more questions, but doesn't have a lot to say

Ever gracious and good-natured, interim Conservative LeaderRona Ambrose welcomed the prime minister "back to this place called Parliament."

The Tory MPsaround her chuckled.

You are perhaps meant to believe that while everyone else was absent this summer, the Conservatives have been showing up to the House of Commons every afternoon for the last 2months, just waiting for the others to get back.

• Justin Trudeau marks the end of spring by not being too interesting
• Post-elbow, the Liberals stop applauding and try compromising
• An unruly Parliament shows signs of nuanced life

"I know that the economy hasn't necessarily been his top priority lately, so let me just update him," Ambrose continued.

"While he was away our economy has completely stalled. Unemployment has gone up. A hundred and ten thousand energy workers have lost their jobs."

The leader of the Opposition wondered aloud if the prime minister might specify thetime at which he was planning to conclude thathe was doing everything all wrong. ("When will this prime minister realize that his plan is failing Canadians?")

The prime minister, oddly enough, seemed to see things somewhat differently.

"I thank the honourable member for her question," he said, gracious and good-natured."The fact is, like all parliamentarians, we were busy all summer..."

There were a couple of shouts from the Conservative sidethat suggested the prime minister had had his "shirt off."

"... meeting with Canadians, talking about their concerns, talking about the opportunities to grow the economy in meaningful ways."

So in recounting today's events, let'sallow from theoutset thatforums such as these are not to be confused with regular human interaction.

But the questions are not always purely rhetorical. And it might be nice if more of the responses were less platitudinous.

27questions for Trudeau

On this day, the prime minister took 27questions. Eighteenqueries were raised by reporters at a news conference around noon. Another nine were raised an hour later by the opposition leaders.

Some of those were even of the sort that could have received direct answers.

NDP Leader Tom Mulcair, for instance, wondered if the House of Commons might have a vote once the government decides on apeacekeeping mission.

Granted, as is his wont, Mulcair stated the query in an accusatory fashion, suggesting the prime minister was contradicting some previous position. And in the context of question period, a prime minister has but 35 seconds to explain.

But either from the floor of the House of Commons or the stage of the National Press Theatre, where he was presented with the same question by amember of the press, hemight have explained his position on when the House of Commons should be asked to vote on military deployments.

Some amount of clarity might have been provided. The national discourse might have been enriched. Instead, Trudeau expressed merely an interest in a robust debate.

Same too for a question from Mulcair on the matter of this country's commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

"The Liberals have adopted the Conservative targets," the NDP leader lamented."How to explain this betrayal?"

Betrayal is a strong word and, again, time is short. But still, an explanation might be attempted.

Is there any particular reason the Trudeau government has chosen to stick with the current commitment for 2030?How does the government intend to square the 2030 target with the goal of limiting global warming to no more than two degrees?

For now, the prime minister committed only to a plan to achieve that existing target.

Similarly, Trudeau'svisit with the press gallery on Wednesday afternoon provided an opportunity to directly address a tribunal ruling that the federal government's funding of education for First Nations children was insufficient.

Twice, a reporter from The Canadian Press asked him quite directly about the issue and, twice, Trudeaukept simply to a general commitment to do more.

Talking more, but not saying much

Either as an exercise in controlling the story or a means for avoidingtrouble, the prime minister seems to have decided to limit the noteworthy sentiments he is ever heard uttering. While he perhaps talks more than his predecessor, it's not clear he says much more.

And though perhaps not an entirely novel approach to public relations (and there were, if you listened closely and applied your magic decoder ring, some interesting words expressed this afternoon),his reticence is perhaps getting to be conspicuous.

Of course, he is still a politician who must attempt to succeed at politics. Possibly the current state of society and public debate makes message discipline something of a necessary evil.

But a prime minister who wants to do politics somehow better might take some of these opportunities to try elevating the discussion.

In deciding to stop applauding each other this spring, the Liberals made some progress at making the proceedings of question period slightly less ridiculous. The next frontier might be the actual words that are exchanged.

Trudeau might at least, for now, have a word with his new House leader.

Pressed repeatedly for the second day to account for how the government covered the moving expenses of its senior staff, Bardish Chaggerfound herself not only enthusing about the diversity of the individuals now employed around Parliament Hill, but also, for some reason, the middle class.

"I am taking this opportunity," she said after recounting the history of relocation rules, "to also share with Canadians that they voted for growth of the middle class, a stronger economy, and a government that works for Canadians."

The Conservatives howled with laughter.

So even in addition to saying something more, the government might also try staying on topic.