KEY POINTS:
A mood of some apprehension and not a little foreboding hung heavily over Parliament yesterday as MPs struggled to comprehend the potential enormity of Monday's arrests of political activists allegedly involved in covert military-style training camps.
Obliterating everything else on the political agenda was the spectre of home-grown
terrorism potentially come to life.
MPs collectively resembled the hospital patient waiting to be told whether the diagnosis was good or bad. Only in this case, MPs know they may have to wait some time for the diagnosis, which is bound to be unfavourable one way or the other.
Either the police have the evidence that certain individuals allegedly participating in military-style training camps posed a credible terrorist threat. Or the police have gone completely over the top, the evidence will be found wanting and the head of Police Commissioner Howard Broad will consequently be on a platter.
Both outcomes - the advent of domestic terrorism or the evaporation of police credibility - are obviously unpalatable. That and the feeling that events are, for once, not in MPs' control, pervaded what turned out to be only a brief exchange regarding Monday's police operations during ministers' question-time.
The limbo was summed up by Acting Prime Minister Michael Cullen who suggested MPs wait and see what evidence the police produced of alleged terrorist activity rather than rushing to judgment.
This plea doubled as a restatement of Labour's efforts to appear strictly neutral. The police have gone out on a limb, one which the Government, in constantly stressing the independence of police operations, is sensibly choosing not to share until the necessary evidence becomes public.
However, Dr Cullen's advice to other parties not to rush to judgment was unnecessary. The issue is so big, so sensitive and so serious that with the exception of the Maori Party, no other party can afford to take a stance only to find subsequent events prove it to have been the wrong one.
In the most tricky position of all are the Greens who must tread a delicate path between defending the rights of political radicals to engage in vigorous, non-violent protest and not condoning behaviour which offends the party's middle-class backing.
Not surprisingly, the questioning of Dr Cullen was dominated by the Maori Party, which has nothing to lose in criticising the police, and the Greens, who could not afford to be silent about events given their activist-based membership.
As it was, Maori Party MP Te Ururoa Flavell struggled to phrase one question within Parliament's rules covering matters before the courts. That restriction plus the relative lack of hard information about what those arrested were allegedly planning meant there was little on which to base penetrating questions.
Add Dr Cullen playing a very straight defensive bat rather than have his usual flashes of humour rattling merrily on the boundary fence and the biggest story of the year was dealt with in little over 10 minutes.
Even so, the House sat through the questioning in uncanny silence. No-one was interjecting. No one cracked tired jokes. Instead, there was a feeling a line had been crossed or might be about to be crossed. No one was really sure - only that this was most definitely no joking matter.
