Week 7: Sitting Weeks
As you may or may not know, politicians don’t actually live in Canberra. They spend most of their time in their electorate, living amongst the people who vote for or against them. However, for usually 18-20 weeks per year, MP's and Senators are in Canberra. During these weeks, known as sitting weeks, the Government does the bulk of its work, such as passing laws, debating matters and yelling past each other in Question Time. This week, I’ll be introducing you to sitting weeks!
Sitting weeks are important. During sitting weeks, significant developments in Australian politics can take place. These developments are generally the product of three activities: the passing and debating of legislation, the conducting of Senate and House Committee work, such as reviewing legislation and conducting inquiries, and Question Time. By now, you're an expert on debating and passing legislation. So today, I'll cover the importance of committee hearings/inquiries and Question Time. (Note: Question Time also occurs in the Senate, with a similar range of procedures).
Inquiries are processes of information gathering generally presided over by a combination of elected officials from across the political spectrum. For example, the Senate hosts several Committees presiding over various topics. Individual Senators can raise a vote to conduct an inquiry on a potential issue or topic. A recent example has been the Senate Inquiry into Media Diversity. This inquiry was approved following its raising in the Senate by the Greens' Sarah Hanson-Young, after the tabling of Kevin Rudd's high-profile petition to conduct a Royal Commission into Rupert Murdoch's News Corp.
A Sitting Week feature you're probably already familiar with (even if you don’t know) is Question Time. Question Time is intended as an opportunity for government ministers to take questions without notice – and respond to them immediately. It usually lasts just over an hour, with questions alternating between opposition shadow ministers and government backbenchers. Opposition questions aim to expose government shortcomings, while questions posed by government backbenchers to ministers are called “Dorothy Dixer’s”, these are planned questions asked by backbenchers to allow the Minister to talk themselves up.
While sometimes offering up catchy moments for the 6.00pm news, critics argue Question Time has become a largely useless, theatrical exercise. Both the Opposition and the Government are guilty, with both playing politics and trying to score points, rather than using the time to respond to queries from the electorate. Former PM Paul Keating is universally known as the GOAT of Question Time; a brief search on Youtube will explain why.
Question Time is presided over by the Speaker of the House. The Speaker is vested with powers and administers rules (known as standing orders) facilitate a smooth debate. These powers include the ability to determine whether an answer is relevant to the question, adjudicating whether a parliamentarian is behaving appropriately, or whether they should be removed. The Speaker is elected from among the 151 Members of the House and is usually a person of considerable parliamentary experience.
Despite the Speaker's presence, there is no shortage of tools available to Ministers wishing to avoid scrutiny. Firstly, Ministers can straight up waffle. With answers limited to three minutes, Minister's often allocate a sizeable proportion of their response to simply stating facts, speaking in generalities, and aiming to turn the focus on the Opposition. A second tool used more recently, most often by Minister for Defence Peter Dutton, is the use of standing orders to move a motion that the Member who is speaking 'be no longer heard'. The Member must stop talking, and the matter is voted on in the House. As the party in government, with a majority of the seats, such motions are almost always approved.
Improving Question Time is a topic that most political nerds will have discussed at some point. Some suggestions are ever-present, such as limiting the use of Dorothy Dixer's and locking in an increased amount of Opposition questions. Another concern is simply the level of vitriol in Question Time, which is quite a turn-off for the average punter. Ultimately, Question Time is not an accurate look into how Parliament operates. It is an opportunity for grandstanding, with most other aspects of parliamentary procedure proceeding far more cordially.
Question Time is a fierce process propelled by partisan politics. Next week, we'll look at the essence of partisan politics, political parties. We'll look at some of Australia's biggest parties, how they were formed, what sets them apart and much more. See you then!
