We few: the level 3 Parliament 

The MPs are back in the capital participating in the public blood sports of politics and parliamentary oversight.

But not all is back to normal. Parliament is quite a different beast. This is a pared back, non-contact, takeaway-only politics. 

I am the most offending soul alive

The invective is there, but something is lacking. 

The jeers and interjections of Question Time are there, boisterous as ever, but somehow hollow and without the usual ambience. 

Parliament’s usual Question Time ambience setting is ‘deafening’. This week it has been set more at ‘restive’. Mostly this is a result of a much smaller choir.

We few, we happy few

That most obvious change comes from there being so few MPs in the chamber. About 30 of the 120 are present, though a few are taking turns turning up. The lower attendance allows the MPs to spread their wings a bit and get some physical distance. Two of the three main rows of MPs are a third occupied. 

I pray thee, wish not one ‘man’ more

The other MPs are still participating in their Select Committees which are operating via video conferencing. And they are presumably following Parliament from home. Chris Hipkins showed he definitely was on Tuesday when on Wednesday he responded to a question. 

“I listened to the answer given on my behalf yesterday and I don’t believe that’s an accurate reflection of what the Associate Minister said on my behalf.” 

Some of the ministers are taking turns being available in the House so as not to crowd each other.

Yearly on the vigil

There being so few MPs available to debate, the rules were changed for the Annual Review Debate - a final look back at government spending and performance for the budget period that ended nearly a year before (budgets have both long leads and long tails). 

The debate follows months of select committee reviews into individual portfolios. That may all seem remote and irrelevant at this juncture but oversight is one of Parliament’s core functions. 

It’s also a critical precursor to the new budget, which is due to be outlined on May 14th.

The fewer ‘men’, the greater share of honour

The Annual Review debate is run as the committee stage of the bill that outlines the final spend. Usually in committee stages MPs get to speak four times each on each section/topic. But a new rule is being trialed for this debate allowing MPs unlimited speeches. 

This makes up for fewer MPs, but also hopes to encourage shorter speeches and more back-and-forward with the minister. That plan may take some bedding in. 

We band of ‘brothers’

Usually for a committee stage the minister in charge, the chairperson and a clerk would all sit as a band of brothers shoulder to shoulder at The Table. 

The minister is there to answer MPs questions, field suggestions and defend complaints. But not this year.

This time the chairperson sat in the Speaker’s chair, the Clerk was alone at the Table and the various ministers were in their own seats (all the ministers have a stake in the Annual Review, but take turns in the ‘hot seat’). 

Be in their flowing cups freshly remembered

MPs are having to bring their own water into the chamber. The Chamber staff who would usually haul water and carry messages are absent.

So are the Hansard reporters who are still creating transcripts but staying clear of the chamber. The Speaker’s assistant is also missing, though the Sergeant at Arms is still at his post.

And a new addition are the bottles of disinfectant dotted around the chamber so that MPs can clean their seats when they leave.  In the video at the top of this story you can see Green Party co-leader James Shaw busily swabbing his seat.

This day shall gentle his condition

There are may small changes but one thing is always likely. The MPs may be at arm’s length but there’s still friction between them. 

As question time came to an end there was a fracas between the Speaker and Gerry Brownlee over the availability of the disinfectant bottles which broadened into whether MPs were keeping an appropriate distance. 

While two of his own party’s MPs conferred at a moderate distance from each other nearby Mr Brownlee complained that the ‘second most senior’ MP in the chamber had stopped to talk with people as he departed. I expect he was referring to the Deputy Prime Minister. 

The Speaker corrected him, noting that the second most senior MP had not left yet. Which is correct, that MP is the Speaker.

The only reason I mention it here is as an excuse to mention that the seniority of MPs is formally ranked in a list called the Order of Precedence.

It goes like this: 

• Queen,
• Governor General,
• Prime Minister,
• Speaker of the House of Representatives, 
• Chief Justice,
• Dean of the Diplomatic Corps,
• Deputy Prime Minister,
• Other Ministers (by cabinet rank),
• Former Governors-General,
• Ambassadors and High Commissioners (etc),
• The Leader of the Opposition,
• Other party leaders (that aren’t Ministers),
• Members of Parliament,

...and so on

There are quite a few caveats and exceptions. Mostly this kind of list is useful for who seats nearest who at a state function. 

Oh, and the current Dean of the Diplomatic Corps is His Excellency Leasi Papali'i Tommy Scanlan, the High Commissioner for Samoa. The diplomatic corps are ranked by who has been around the longest, so big countries can be ranked dead last.

Fun facts.

Oh, and in case you wondered what feats he did that day... or something like that. St Crispins Day.