Questioning Question Time

We don’t see the hard work, the sincerity and the common ground many [MPS] share. Instead we see name-calling and point-scoring.

Many demanding, technical and timeconsuming things happen in Parliament, but for the majority of the public, the gladiatorial theatre of Question Time is Parliament’s shop window.

It was during Question Time that former prime minister John Key roared at former Labour leader Andrew Little to ‘‘get some guts’’ as he defended a deployment of troops to Iraq. It was during Question Time that former Labour leader David Shearer brandished two dead fish to make an arcane point about snapper quotas.

Both moments were more theatrical than informative. When Key shouted at Little, he would have hoped that viewers were impressed by an air of courage and conviction. A theorist might call it ‘‘performative’’.

In short, the behaviour of MPS during Question Time – the stunts, the acting, the jeers, the insults – reinforces the public’s worst stereotypes of politicians. We don’t see the hard work, the sincerity and the common ground many share. We see name-calling and point-scoring. We see MPS storming out to attract attention, like a teenager who has lost an argument.

When National’s deputy leader, Paula Bennett, walked out of Question Time on Wednesday – and was kicked out yesterday – it was in frustration with Speaker Trevor Mallard’s new rules. Mallard has enforced a regime in which he deducts the supplementary questions MPS can ask if he does not like their behaviour.

The Opposition sees his rules as arbitrary. But Labour was equally disenchanted with David Carter’s performance as Speaker when National was last in government. It is swings and roundabouts, although both sides seem to have been content with Lockwood Smith’s performance.

Bennett’s well-publicised walk-out was followed by a letter from National’s Shadow Leader of the House, Gerry Brownlee, to the Speaker, expressing concerns over unclear and inconsistent rules. To take a broader view, though, it might be fair to say that some of National’s longer-serving MPS are simply having trouble adjusting to the reduced status of Opposition.

A sense of pettiness was reinforced by the fact that much of the letter was not about Mallard’s rules but a claim that an unidentified National MP called the prime minister a ‘‘stupid little girl’’ during Question Time more than a week earlier. Brownlee accused Mallard of peddling a story that has gone global, although it is unclear whether such a thing was said.

These kinds of insults are thrown around almost daily from all sides during Question Time but National has become sensitive to criticism that it is attacking a popular prime minister on gender grounds. To be a sexist dinosaur is not a good look.

The point of Question Time is for the Opposition to hold the Government to account by asking specific questions of the prime minister and other ministers. The Government has several hours to prepare, which explains why the sessions appear so ritualised and why the Opposition wants supplementary questions that might surprise.

But is this outdated theatrical exercise the best way to question politicians? Many MPS agree it needs to be overhauled and Sir Geoffrey Palmer has said it should be abolished entirely, perhaps to be replaced by written questions.

That would eliminate the grandstanding we saw this week.