OTTAWA — Political frustration boiled over in the Canadian capital on Thursday as hundreds of protesters gathered outside Parliament Hill to denounce Prime Minister Mark Carney’s low attendance in Question Period, one of the central accountability mechanisms in Canadian democracy.

Critics say Mr. Carney has appeared for only about 26 percent of sessions since taking office, raising questions about transparency and his willingness to face scrutiny.

Pattern of Absence

Opposition members have repeatedly highlighted the prime minister’s limited presence in the House of Commons during Question Period. The latest absence marked the 91st time Mr. Carney has skipped the daily forum where lawmakers directly challenge the government.

Conservatives argue the pattern reflects a broader reluctance to answer for the government’s handling of the economy, housing and immigration.

Lantsman’s Challenge

The controversy intensified after Conservative Deputy Leader Melissa Lantsman pressed the government on immigration screening, visa policies and their connection to housing shortages. Ms. Lantsman demanded clearer answers on how federal policies are addressing pressures in major cities where newcomers often settle.

Liberal ministers responded with prepared talking points on economic immigration targets and integration efforts, but opposition members accused them of offering scripted replies instead of substantive engagement.

Protests Grow

The protests in Ottawa drew a diverse crowd, including frustrated residents, small business owners and critics of the government’s economic direction. Demonstrators held signs calling for greater accountability and chanted slogans demanding the prime minister “show up and answer.”

Organizers said the demonstration reflected widespread public fatigue with perceived evasiveness on key issues affecting everyday Canadians.

Government Perspective

Supporters of Mr. Carney argue that the prime minister is focused on high-level national responsibilities, including trade negotiations, international summits and long-term economic strategy. They say Question Period, while important, is only one part of governing and that the prime minister’s time is better spent on substantive policy work.

Liberal officials maintain that cabinet ministers are fully capable of representing the government’s position in the House.

Opposition Criticism

Conservatives have seized on the attendance issue as evidence of a leadership style that avoids direct accountability. They argue that when economic challenges such as recession risks, job losses and housing affordability dominate public concern, the prime minister should be present to respond.

The low attendance rate has become a recurring talking point in recent weeks.

Broader Trust Concerns

Political analysts say the episode touches on deeper questions about public trust in institutions. When elected leaders appear to sidestep regular forums for scrutiny, it can fuel perceptions of detachment from ordinary citizens’ struggles.

The combination of economic pressures and perceived evasiveness has created fertile ground for opposition attacks.

Immigration and Housing Link

Ms. Lantsman’s questioning highlighted the intersection of immigration policy and housing shortages. Rapid population growth in certain cities has strained rental markets and infrastructure, contributing to affordability challenges that many Canadians cite as their top concern.

The government has defended its immigration targets as necessary for economic growth and demographic balance, while promising new housing initiatives.

Political Ramifications

The protests and parliamentary absences come at a sensitive time for the Carney government. With economic uncertainty persisting and regional tensions high, the optics of limited parliamentary engagement risk amplifying criticism that the prime minister is more comfortable in boardrooms and international forums than in direct dialogue with elected representatives.

Defenders Push Back

Some political observers note that prime ministers have historically varied in their Question Period attendance. They argue that focusing solely on attendance numbers overlooks the volume of other governmental work, including cabinet meetings, stakeholder consultations and international diplomacy.

Public Sentiment

Polls suggest many Canadians are frustrated with the cost of living and want clearer leadership on economic issues. The visibility of protests in Ottawa has amplified those frustrations in the national conversation.

Ongoing Debate

Whether Mr. Carney increases his participation in Question Period or continues prioritizing other duties will likely remain a point of contention. Opposition parties have vowed to keep pressure on the issue, using both parliamentary tools and public events to highlight the absences.

Defining Test

The current controversy reflects larger questions about leadership style in a polarized political environment. Canadians are watching to see whether the prime minister will adapt to demands for greater visibility and direct accountability or maintain his current approach.

For now, the protests in Ottawa serve as a visible reminder that skipping Question Period carries political costs that extend beyond the chamber walls.