In an audacious piece of showmanship, shadow leader of the House Simon Bridges, a former Crown prosecutor, faced down Labour in what ended up as a successful attempt to have select committee membership returned to National's satisfaction.
Mr Hipkins and his team thought they did not have the numbers to ensure Trevor Mallard was elected Speaker. The fact they did have enough votes can be put aside for a while because National decided to flex its not inconsiderable muscle very early in the piece.
National Party leader Bill English rather unwisely threatened the Labour-New Zealand First Government and support party, the Greens, with slowing legislation through the important select committee. As the largest party in Parliament, but not the actual government, National is smarting. Mr English showed his hand too early, leaving Labour deciding to reduce the number of select committees and shut out some of National's MPs.
By using a large bluff, National got the agreement from the Government to lift the number of select committee places to 108, from the proposed 96. National will have control of several of those committees either through holding the chair or having a voting majority on the committee.
National's actions have been called petulant and even unsporting. But are they? Mr Hipkins and Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern learnt a valuable lesson in running the business of the House after Labour being out of power for nine years. Both Mr Hipkins and Ms Ardern tried to explain away the situation by saying they did not want a vote for Mr Mallard, instead seeking a consensus on Mr Mallard becoming Speaker. Their spin on the debacle was simply not believable.
From here on, the ambitious 100-day plan for the Government will sometimes need legislation passed under urgency to progress, something Labour was very critical in the past about how National acted.
In the Speech from the Throne, Ms Ardern indicated she wants fast action on health, education, housing and the environment - repeatedly bringing those areas back as a reference to her own values.
Undoubtedly, there was a mood for change at the election, despite National securing about one million votes and remaining the largest party in Parliament. There remains a lingering thought of National having to change direction if it had in fact secured NZ First support to form a government. NZ First leader Winston Peters is seeking revenge now for the leaking of his pension details, an unnecessary sideshow for Ms Ardern and Labour.
National would be wise to hold its fire on issues it only mildly disagrees with as being the party saying ''no'' all the time is not what voters want or need to see. Mr English has wisely agreed with the increase in paid parental leave, despite vetoing it previously.
Mr Mallard is going to face his own set of problems in trying to keep order in Parliament. National supported his appointment because of his pledge to make Parliament work better and being more family friendly. National's support is only skin deep and will change as the term progresses.
After being one of the more boisterous MPs, Mr Mallard will now have to rule over what will become a fractious debating chamber.
He will need to show he is not the Government's man. Being his own man and ruling efficiently, effectively and impartially are important for the Speaker and Mr Mallard has the skills to do all three.
Let us hope he is given the chance to preside over a progressive, not petulant, term of Parliament.
Related Stories
Comments
New Zealand has often been criticised for lacking the check and balances that exist in some other democracies. A bit concerning that people are now critical of the checks and balances we do have that can act as a small buffer against a Government ramming through legislation.