Opinion 
 Blogs 
 National Comment 
 Opposition reclaims question time's utility 

Opposition reclaims question time's utility

IN RECENT months, attendance at parliamentary question time has been on the wane.

The press gallery's ranks are thin; yawning gaps have opened up where once journalists jostled up closely together like overplanted young carrots.

Why this lack of interest?

Mainly, it's because question time has stopped being an event at which anything is learned.

Ministers use it to read out deadly answers; the Prime Minister uses it to garden his extensive document library and to conduct experimental work on his emerging wall-of-sound technique in the field of oratory.

The Opposition uses it to get on television, either with increasingly preposterous props or with howling, down-the-camera-barrel appeals to middle Australia. Hardly ever, any more, do you see a question time during which the Opposition hunts, traps and parries the Government.

Yesterday was different.

When the Prime Minister entered the chamber at 2pm, he was fresh from delivering a few kind words over the ministerial grave of his first cabinet casualty, Joel Fitzgibbon.

The Opposition didn't bother with the still-warm form of the former defence minister, however; Malcolm Turnbull was hoping for a bigger fish.

The Senate estimates process, which to date this year has been just as moribund as question time, had yielded a promising line of inquiry.

When Turnbull began asking questions about the Prime Minister's supposed advocacy for an Ipswich car dealer who for several years has provided Kevin Rudd with a ute, a new mood of intrigue enveloped question time.

The ute-driver himself feigned boredom; he showily smothered several yawns and attended to his paper stacks, which appeared yesterday encased in individual plastic pockets.

The Opposition got Wayne Swan involved; according to his own officials, he's passed on some concerns on behalf of the car dealer involved. "Go for your life," the Treasurer snarled. "But you're up a dry gully."

The sense of intrigue mounted, until Rudd - on receipt of a note from his staff - found himself in a position to deny having made any interventions on behalf of the dealer.

Quaking with rage, he demanded that Turnbull apologise.

He accused the Liberals of corruption, of throwing children overboard, of beggaring HIH, of everything bar the marketing of alcopops to children or the covert placement of amphetamines in the water supply.

"This is the politics of fear being replaced by the politics of smear," he thundered, trembling forefinger pointed at the Coalition's ranks.

When he sat down, his hands were shaking. "You grub," he hissed at Turnbull, over the dispatch box.

Why Rudd has a ute provided by a businessman is one question. Why he got quite so upset about it is another.

But it's nice to have question time back.

This article first appeared on smh.com

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size
Page:
1

RELATED COVERAGE

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
Can't agree more. Question time is all about grabbing a spot on the news with a quick quip, sledging the opposite side of the room. Turnbull is getting desperate in the dirt digging stakes. Pity politics has turned into a game of buck fighting rather than looking after Australia and it's inhabitants. Dilapidated hospital systems, long suffering nurses and patients is one undeniable example. Elderly suffering in nursing homes, unable to help themselves with one AIN caring for 7 and a half incapacitated residents needing help with all daily living needs. Disgraceful!
Posted by al, 6/06/2009 10:12:52 AM
Quetion time is boring because Jenkins is pro-labour. The probing 'to debate' is not democracy as Opposition has no right of return response. The system is more a Court style. The benefit of a true debate is straight jacketed because the questioner is not allowed to 'context' with a pre-amble so the 'Question' is the direct arrow. Jenkins has been siding to Labour to simply waste the hour with Rudd's diatribe, his 'filling in time' so no worthwhile questions can have enough space to enter. Then Jenkins hammers down interjestions of "Will the question be just answered"- that's all' then Rudd, Swan, Gillard gleefully spend out, far from answering the question and Jenkins is deaf in both ears. There is no judicator of value here. As the Defence minister went for minor offences Jenkins is allowed to sit with major demands, and he just does not listen to any reasoning. If that is the method he uses when 'discussing' issues with his wife then I can't blame her for 'doing her stack'. Jenkins needs to be made accountable for bias, letting underhanded 'low-balls' pass as 'reasonable' dialogue- but in fact he is just plain not worthy to sit. He should leave the chair as it is embarassing to have "We welcome today other nations" and they have to put up with such poor quality judication. That's why Turnbull had to let a low ball at such minor moral 'ute' favours, just to get some response, as Rudd does not answer direct questions and Jenkins allows him "The PM is responding to the question" after sitting him down some 4-6 times in a row over one question. Gambling figures from last quarter of '08 to first quarter '09 will tell where the billions went. And that is a simple question. What if poker machines trippled in revenue? and lotto, and internet gaming, and horse racing. In Hong Kong all profits from gambling go to charity, not back to Govt revenue. There's a question of change. The 'system' is not a decocratic process.
Posted by adaptapensioner.com, 6/06/2009 11:58:03 AM
Re Rudd's outburst : "Methinks he protests too much!"
Posted by anon, 6/06/2009 4:33:32 PM
Wow! Watched our Kev747 get the anger up in Plmt. Where there's smoke there's fire! Noticed the Press didn't laugh at some of his so-called jokes in introducing his new Defence Minister - he didn't like that either!
Posted by Pen, 6/06/2009 6:05:12 PM
I've watched Question Time for a number of years now on ABC TV. I have never come across such a biased Speaker as this current one, Harry Jenkins, ALP. He is a disgrace, doesn't seem to know the correct procedure of being Speaker of the House. His stumbling and bumbling through Question Times beggers belief and he seems to make it up as he goes along - it would be laughable if it wasn't so serious and his attitude so biased. The Speakers position in the House should not be left to the politicians - this position should be elected by the people - with candidates from both parties put on the ballot paper at election time - let the voters choose - and oh yes, we can do it.
Posted by Sheila Tomkins, 9/06/2009 5:33:25 PM
National Comment
Here is the place for you to vent on any national or world news and lifestyle stories on the YourGuide websites. If there is anything you see or hear that you like or don't like, tell us. Don't keep it to yourself!
PM Kevin Rudd has been under fire this week.
PM Kevin Rudd has been under fire this week.
Related Coverage
ARTICLES

Most popular articles




Dungog Chronicle







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...