Dunne Speaks: Question Time Is Anything But – Scoop

Thursday, 9 December 2021, 8:52 amArticle: Peter Dunne

The focus placed on the first couple of Question Timeexchanges between the new leader of the National Party andthe Prime Minister will have seemed excessive to many butthe most seasoned Parliamentary observers.

Mostpeople, especially those outside the Wellington beltway,imagine Question Time is exactly what it sounds asession where the Opposition gets to ask Ministers questionsabout their portfolios to gain information, and whereMinisters respond, leaving Parliament better informed as aresult.

In fact, Question Time is anything but thegenteel exchange of information some imagine it to be, andothers wish it were. Rarely is anyone seeking genuineinformation at Question Time. If that were the true intentthey would be better off accessing the resources of theGeneral Assembly Library, or even the cumbersome processesof the Official Information Act to get what they wereafter.

For Ministers, the art of being successful atQuestion Time is to give away as little information aspossible, unless it presents the Government in a favourablelight, while for the Opposition parties the aim is to tripup or otherwise embarrass a Minister. Little of it hasanything to do with the accuracy or depth of the informationbeing sought or provided.

In that regard, QuestionTime is a ritualistic game, albeit an important one, playedout generally at the start of days Parliamentaryproceedings. Its purpose is about establishing dominance,and which side is on top that day, a little like the openingskirmishes in a rugby test match. And it is not a phenomenonexclusive to the New Zealand Parliament. Although the formof their Question Times differs somewhat from ours, the samedynamics are at play in the House of Commons in London, andthe House of Representatives in Canberra, and many otherWestminster-style Parliaments around the world.

Themistake is often made of assessing Ministerial andOpposition performance on what goes on at Question Time.Some Ministers are quick-witted natural performers whothrive on the rough and tumble of Question Time. Likewise,some Opposition MPs are extremely good at asking awkwardquestions that make even the most experienced Ministerssquirm. But none of this is necessarily an indicator oftheir overall effectiveness. Others may, for example, be farmore effective as policy developers, or in selectcommittees, more interested in solid achievement than thetheatre of Question Time.

While the natural tendencyfor an Opposition is to want to take on and hopefully topplethe Governments best performers, good Oppositions learnover time the futility of that. Far better to ignore theGovernments strong performers by not asking them anyquestions at all, thereby depriving them of the oxygen touse Question Time to score at the Oppositions expense. Itis often more profitable for an Opposition to use QuestionTime to expose and put pressure on the Governmentsweakest Ministerial links, forcing other Ministers to spendmore of their time in Question Time defending theirembattled colleagues, rather than promoting their ownleadership and policy achievements.

When last inOpposition National took some years to realise the futilityof attacking Helen Clark and Sir Michael Cullen when theywere at their most dominant. It was a similar story with thelast Labour Opposition which was fixated on attacking SirJohn Key for far too long. Both eventually dropped thetactic and simply ignored them thereafter, once theyrealised they were losing more from the ongoing attacks thanthey were gaining. Weaker Ministers offered far richerpickings!

All of which brings us back to the currentcontest between Christopher Luxon and Jacinda Ardern. Whileit is clearly too soon to form a definitive view after justa couple of days performance so far, it does seem thatArdern will be more vulnerable on questions that are notCovid19-related where she cannot take the same high groundapproach she has since the outbreak of the pandemic. Luxontherefore should shift his attack away from the Covid19sphere and onto policy areas where Ardern is far morevulnerable like overall Government performance, housingprovision, child poverty and climate change, for example. Ifhe cannot score against her on those areas, he may, overtime, like those before him, need to think about ignoringher altogether to starve her of the Parliamentaryopportunity to score points at his expense.

Whatevercourse the future Question Time exchanges between Ardern andLuxon take, we are unlikely to gain any substantive newinformation on Government or Opposition intentions. After alittle while we will get a sense of who is the more dominantin Parliamentary terms, and the impact that is having on therespective morale of their teams. In time that might alsotranslate into a wider public perception of who is winningand who is losing.

The pressure Question Time imposeson party leaders in Government and in Opposition is muchmore about constantly performing at a high level, than it isabout asking or answering questions. If a party leader isbeing frequently bested at Question Time, it starts to sapthe partys morale, and, in turn, raise questions aboutthe future of the leadership. MPs on both sides will bewatching Arderns and Luxons coming performancesintently in that regard.

Getting on top at QuestionTime is for both Jacinda Ardern and Christopher Luxon animportant pathway to getting on top with the rest of thecountry. It should be no surprise that the questions asked,and answers provided will always run a far distant second tothat quest for dominance.

MY SECOND WEEKLYCOLUMN IS ON NEWSROOM.CO.NZ

Scoop Media

Become a member Get our free pnui

Go here to read the rest:

Dunne Speaks: Question Time Is Anything But - Scoop