COMMENT
If you've seen or heard Parliament this year, you will have noticed something missing. What has disappeared is any rhetorical struggle between our two major political leaders.
Not much has actually changed. Parliament still has a question time that lets Opposition politicians surprise, undercut and embarrass the Government's ministers.
These ministers, including Prime Minister Helen Clark, regularly show up and expect to be in the firing line. And the press gallery waits to record the whole spectacle.
Yet something is still missing, and that something is Dr Don Brash.
Parliament's rules provide about an hour each normal sitting day for MPs to ask questions of ministers.
There are 12 primary questions each day, which ministers hear about four hours in advance, along with about 60 surprise supplementary questions, of which ministers get no advance warning.
This is the most interesting and spontaneous part of Parliament's day - indeed, almost every picture you see on television of politicians in Parliament is from question time.
Many have wondered why Helen Clark has not been subjected to a barrage of parliamentary questions this year from her opposite number.
Dr Brash, it seemed, had everything on his side - a rallying cry over racial issues that resonated with voters, the promise of more barn-burning speeches to come, and a Government threatening to haemorrhage over the foreshore and seabed issue.
Yet in the most public face of our democracy, he was conspicuously absent.
In March, Parliament held 10 question times. During that month, and at the height of his post-Orewa prominence, Dr Brash contributed less to question time than Winston Peters, Peter Dunne, Rodney Hide or Jeanette Fitzsimmons.
He spoke less than his deputy, Gerry Brownlee, his predecessor, Bill English, or the person many pick as his successor, Simon Power.
March was a tumultuous time for the Government, but Dr Brash asked the Prime Minister only two primary questions and five supplementary questions. In total, she answered 75.
Further, since the Budget speech in May, Dr Brash has been responsible for only four of the 156 primary questions to be asked and a mere 14 of about 780 supplementary questions.
Nobody could accuse him of hogging the limelight, though some would wonder why he hasn't.
Dr Brash's "where's Waldo" act is certainly not typical of other Opposition leaders in New Zealand - remember the commanding performances of Jim Bolger, David Lange and Mike Moore - or overseas.
Opposition leaders Mark Latham, of Australia, and Michael Howard, in Britain, are very active in embarrassing their respective Prime Ministers during question time.
In Britain, barely a Prime Minister's question time goes by without Mr Howard uncovering the gaps in Tony Blair's knowledge of his own policies. And in Australia, Prime Minister John Howard recently described Mr Latham's question-time performances as "dishonest, devious and slimy" - a good indicator that Mr Latham is making headway.
Those opposition politicians appear to understand the importance of question time in a way Dr Brash does not.
The strangest thing about Dr Brash's silence is that question time is an institution deliberately designed to work in his favour. It is the only occasion where he can force the Prime Minister to discuss issues she would rather ignore, the only time he can box her into a corner.
At all other times, the Government controls Parliament's agenda and can generally avoid the Opposition's areas of priority or strength.
In addition, the Prime Minister is forced to share a stage with the Opposition during question time, something she doesn't have to do outside the House.
Dr Brash complained earlier this year that Helen Clark refused to debate race issues with him, but it is he who has consistently refused to debate them in the House.
Parliament, its question hour in particular, is supposed to be the main forum for political debate, but Dr Brash apparently has better things to do.
The explanation he gives for his absence is that he is too busy travelling the country selling his message.
This reeks of a cop-out. One of the Opposition's main functions is to hold the Government to account; Dr Brash is the Opposition leader and has to be seen to lead that effort. Does he really expect people to believe that he needs to sip cups of tea at Rotary clubs seven days a week to sell his message?
If Dr Brash takes his job as Opposition leader at all seriously, he must be in Wellington some of the time Parliament sits, but it appears he's not in the House itself much. Clearly there is a deeper strategy involved.
Most likely, National's strategists have decided that Helen Clark's huge advantages in terms of parliamentary experience and debating prowess outweigh the first-mover edge that question time's rules convey on Dr Brash. It is better not being seen at all, they reason, than being seen to be beaten.
This strategy is fraught with danger for National. During next year's election campaign, Dr Brash will have to face the Prime Minister in a series of televised leaders' debates that have important similarities to question time.
If he does not become a better parliamentary performer before these debates, it is likely he will lose them, and lose them badly. And, even worse, a huge TV audience will be there to watch him fall.
We all saw at the last election what one good performance did for Peter Dunne; United Future shot from 1 per cent to 8 per cent in the polls after his first leaders' debate. If that is the impact of one good debate performance, National insiders must be shuddering at the thought of what three bad performances could do to their electoral fortunes.
Dr Brash can reduce (though not eliminate) the risk of looking bad in next year's leaders' debates. Practice makes perfect, and he has a ready-made practice ground waiting for him in Wellington most Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays.
He may have to swallow some pride and take some hits from the Prime Minister, but that is the price of taking responsibility for his party's fortunes, especially in the rough and tumble world of New Zealand's increasingly presidential election campaigns.
If Don Brash doesn't get used to the cut and thrust of Parliament's question hour now, he runs a significant risk of consigning his party to three more years in opposition during the next election campaign.
* Rob Salmond is a visiting research fellow in political science at Victoria University. His PhD dissertation examines question times in 18 OECD countries.
AdvertisementAdvertise with NZME.
Latest from New Zealand
Ōtaki industrial fire rages as crews work to extinguish flames
It is not yet clear how the fire started.