Bartlett's Blog

Andrew Bartlett has been active in politics for over 20 years, including as a Queensland Senator from 1997-2008. This blog started in 2004 and reflects his own views, independent of any political party or organisation.

Questioning Question Time (again)

There have been many comments made about how badly Question Time in the Australian Parliament looks in comparison to the Question Time in the UK House of Commons recently shown on local television. This piece by Katherine Murphy in The Age is a good example. Its opening paragraphs state that “there is no more grinding and time-wasting ritual in federal politics” than the “pathetic”, “banal and pointless spectacle” of Question Time – a perfectly valid assessment in my view.

It is nothing new to bemoan the abysmal nature of Question Time in Australia, but I still find it mildly ironic to see so many in the media deride it so stridently, when they play such a key role in encouraging it to be the way it is – although to be fair Katherine Murphy acknowledges that political reporters have to “share culpability”. The only part of the Parlimaentary sitting day where the media turn up in numbers to watch proceedings is Question Time. If they truly believed it is as big a waste of time as they say it is – (and as I believe it is) – why on earth do they keep showing up? Not only that, the media tend to assess the capability of various Ministers and shadow ministers at least in part on how well they ‘perform’ during Question Time – and ‘performance’ is rarely measured on the basis of whether someone answers a question or not. Mind you, one could say the same about the general public, as Question Time is also the period when the public galleries tend to be full. I often wonder if it is a bit like a car crash, where people know they shouldn’t gawk and that it will be an ugly sight, but can’t stop themselves looking anyway.

David Marr gave one of the best descriptions I’ve read of the farcical sound and fury which is Question Time in the House of Representatives:

It’s a bit like an RSPCA pound: never free of the spectre of being put down, the dogs bark and howl to attract attention.

I wrote about this specific issue on this blog over 3 years ago, prompted by some scathing comments by the outgoing Senate President, Senator Alan Ferguson. He made some noble efforts to improve the process, but I think it’s fair to say he didn’t succeed. Indeed, his final speech to the Senate just last month acknowledged as much, when he described Question Time as “a total waste of time” and “if it were up to me, I would abolish question time as it is currently structured.”

So if experienced MPs objectively recognise Question Time is a waste of time, and the media believe it is a waste of time (or worse), how is it that it continues to be such a train wreck and a discredit to parliament and democracy? Perhaps it’s the same reason that people like Barnaby Joyce gets far more media coverage than other Coalition spokespeople whose comments are far more coherent and far more likely to be based on some semblence of facts. Political coverage is more about entertainment and conflict than it is about facts and issues, and in general this is probably because most people tend to find that more interesting.

It is easy to just blame the media or politicians, but in part we get the democracy we deserve. I expect that if the politicians all behaved politely and respectfully towards each other, while the media just wrote fact-drenched dissertations, the level of interest in what was happening in politics would drop even further (as would the ratings or sales of those media outlets).

Still, the British Parliament manages it much better than we do. And while the worst of the British media is certainly more salascious and biased than Australia’s, they also have some quality press which do a reasonable job at providing rational, reality based perspectives. Is it our political, media or societal cultures, or is it the structures which the Parliament and the media operate within? Or perhaps things have just evolved over time until things have ended up in this turgid, intellectually bereft and fetid swamp that passes for parliamentary and political ‘debate’, and we’re now so firmly stuck in the muck no one knows how to get out of it.

It obviously needs a culture shift, but that can only happen through very strong leadership. I think it’s very clear we’re not likely to get such leadership from the leaders of the two larger parties at the moment – and I doubt a major shift could be driven at this level unless it was genuinely bi-partisan. In the context of Question Time, the best I can come up with at present is an agreement between the parties that (a) they have a genuinely free vote for Speaker of the House of Representatives (and President of the Senate), which will hopefully encourage people vote for the person they think would genuinely be best in the role, and (b) once a person is in the role, they can only be removed by a two-thirds vote. With amendments to Standing Orders to give the Speaker some greater power to requires answers to be relevant to the question, and to sit people down or suspend those who breaching thse standing orders, it might create enough of a shock to the system to get a change in culture. But given the aggression and sloganeering of Question Time basically mirrors the nature of political ‘debate’ between the parties outside the Parliament, it is difficult to see how one would change without the other.

Still, if it somehow did all change for the better, I bet it would quickly be followed by laments about how boring and tame Question Time had become compared to the ‘good old days’.


4 Comments, Comment or Ping

  1. Ann

    Hi Andrew,

    The problem with QT in Australia is that Speaker Harry Jenkins is so weak at ensuring the Pm and her Ministers actually answer the question, rather than answering what they want to say. He just says “The PM / Minister is aware of their obligation to be directly relevant to the question”. But he does not enforce it. If he does catch them again, they sist down and say they have finished. Its terrible in this Parliament

  2. Ken

    Political self interest navel gazing again.

    QT lost any relevance to accountability the day the people stopped observing the Chancellor of the Exchequer actually counting and allocating the money back in the 14th Century.

  3. red crab

    i think qt is great only one small gripe why do the mps on the govts side get to ask questions of there own party. are they just wasting time so the opposition cant get there questions . i think that only opposition members should ask questions that’s there job

  4. Lorikeet

    The 80 year old man who told me recently that he once ran for the seat of Macarthur for the ALP, and who has been President of the Institute of Politic Science, said he was quite disgusted with the behaviour of modern politicians who do not come close to the description of “Statesman”.

    Instead of trying to reach a consensus through mature debate, they just want to make a mockery of one another’s ideas and put on a good show for television viewers.

    Harry regularly kicks someone out of the House of Representatives, or makes someone withdraw a nasty comment, but it would be nice if he made everyone answer the questions they have been asked, and without a long preamble. Maybe then there would be time for more questions to be asked, and a lesser need for supplementary questions, which are sometimes a repetition of the original question posed in various different ways, in the hope of an actual answer.

    Red Crab:

    The questions asked by Labor politicians of their own Ministers are pre-arranged, undoubtedly rehearsed, and worded in such a way as to make the government sound as if they are doing a wonderful job. This is known as “blowing your own trumpet”.

    I consider it a television advertising pitch being delivered to the electorate. There are sometimes boos and hisses coming from the opposition and, no doubt, plenty of living rooms across Australia.

Reply to “Questioning Question Time (again)”

Mini Posts

  • Rhetoric vs reality

    I’ve had a break from writing for a variety of reasons, but the reckless approach the new Queensland government is taking to their spending decisions – and the straightout nonsensicality of some of their claims – roused me enough to pen a piece for New Matilda. Time will tell whether the Newman government will start trying to ensure their statements have some connection with reality – I suggest the way they respond next year to the findings of the inquiry into child safety which they’ve established will be a significant test.

  • End of LP the end of a blogging era

    Back in October, I wrote here about the decline or re-defining of blogs, at least in the Australian political arena.  The relatively few posts I’ve done on this blog since then shows how much less useful I find it to do my own blog than I used to, and as I mentioned back then, a big reason why I don’t read many of the blogs I used to is because the valuable links to many interesting stories, ideas and pieces of information can be found more easily through Twitter or Facebook, sometimes with comment threads which are also at least as good.

    The recent announcement by the Larvatus Prodeo blog that they are ceasing to operate is quite a significant one. (more…)

  • A final comment on Labor’s leadership laments

    Fundamentally, I don’t greatly care about the outcome of Labor’s leadership travails. As my previous post indicates, the bigger issue is that the ALP is being fundamentally damaged by the toxicity of this brawl, and the fact that the brawl is happening in this way is a sign of some much greater problems within Labor. Whatever the immediate outcome, I think those problems are likely to continue.  The outcome of the leadership contest (including the size of what will surely be a Gillard victory) will shape how those problems play out, but they will still be there.

    Not surprisingly, I see this as presenting an opportunity for the Greens to build some support, but more importantly it presets extra responsibility and obligation for the Greens to be a stronger counter to what is a seriously reactionary Coalition.

    But seeing we’re all pundits now, and despite having little inside knowledge, my prediction is that there will be no ‘third candidate’ in tomorrow’s leadership ballot.  Julia Gillard will win comfortably. The instability will not disappear. It’s quite possible there will be another leadership ballot before the election but Kevin Rudd will not become leader then either. No matter how good Kevin Rudd looks in the polls, that polling lead would disappear very quickly if he was back in the PM’s job.

  • The Ups & Downs of Ups & Downs – interview with Greg Atkinson

    I’ve mentioned before my liking for the 80s Brisbane band Ups and Downs. I got a chance to interview their lead singer Greg Atkinson on 4ZzZ FM a few weeks ago. They’ve released a compilation CD of 20 of their best tunes and played a gig in Brisbane earlier this month to promote and celebrate it.

    It was a fairly long interview, but I found it very interesting to hear the views of someone who has been active in the independent sphere of the music industry for so long about what has changed and what is the same.

    You can listen to the interview at this link.

  • Speeches to refugee rally + SIEV-X exhibition

    A local activist helpfully recorded speeches given by myself and by Julian Burnside at a refugee rights rally held in Brisbane last Saturday.  You can listen to them here and here. The rally was held to mark the tenth anniversary of the sinking of the SIEV-X.  353 refugees drowned when that refugee boat sank on the way to Australia on 19 October 2001.  There is a beautiful exhibition at The Studio on the ground level at the State Library of Qld this week, commemorating that anniversary. It finishes this weekend – I strongly recommend you try to get along for a look if you have a chance. The Library also has a screening of the documentary Hope on Friday October 28 – this film tell the story of Amal Basry, one of the few survivors of that tragedy.