A few weeks ago, before Trevor Mallard finally hung up his black Speaker’s robe and packed up his wood-panelled office, he sat down with The House to chat through 38 years in politics.
This is the second of two articles from that interview, each with related audio (see the link below).
In the first piece we focused on history. This article is more about the tactics and rules of Parliament, and its changes.
Listen
Photo: VNP / Phil Smith
A grey old place gets some colour
When Trevor Mallard entered Parliament in 1984 there had only been 20 female MPs – ever, and only a few at a time. The place was reigning men, but not in a good way. Helen Clark has described the boys club it was.
It was also overwhelmingly white. There were usually just four Māori MPs (for the four Māori seats), and there had never been a Pasifika or Asian MP. And of course no-one was openly gay, or anything else rainbow.
Parliament now is about as different as it could be demographically. 50.4 percent female, with many Māori, Pasifika and Asian Kiwis, and with a solid rainbow caucus as well. A lot of that change is a result of MMP, but culture change inside the institution has also enabled difference.
“We are meant to be a House of Representatives," says Trevor Mallard. "To represent community you've actually got to look like those communities. And I just think the quality of discussions has improved so much. …having a variety of backgrounds, has meant that a lot of the discussions are much better informed. People bring different things to the discussion from their experience.”
One of his proudest achievements has been improving the lot of MPs with families.
“I don't know many males of my generation who were MPs who would categorise themselves as being good parents. …just because you were much more absent. And this place was not welcoming for the kids.”
Now Parliament has its own daycare centre. And, Mallard points out, “three family rooms through the complex, a lot more flexibility for carers around the place, much better movement for partners and kids. Symbolic stuff like kids being able to come into the House and to feed.”
And now both male and female MPs get “a significant period of parental leave, if they need it, if they want it, at the beginning. That stuff has really shifted in the last five years. And I think that's important and I think it's now irreversible.”
Trevor Mallard makes that "irreversible" comment with a big grin.
How it was. Pictures from the 1984 election campaign, Robert Muldoon’s National versus David Lange’s Labour. Photo: Alexander Turnbull Library
Learning the Rules
Every new MP has to make a concerted effort to learn Parliament’s many rules, and keep learning them because they never stand still. Mallard says he followed advice from Norm Kirk.
“And that was to leave your Standing Orders or Speakers’ Rulings [books] open on your desk during prayers, and look down and read them. …He obviously wasn’t overly religious.”
That 'page a day' method was a good start. Within a few years as an MP Mallard was a Labour Party Whip and had the task of arguing points of order with the Speaker. To help in this, he had the benefit of a very unlikely coach.
“Early in my time, we didn't really have security here. We had Messengers and they were all retired public servants... There was one guy in particular (whose name was Trevor), who used to often do the night shift at the Speaker’s door. And he had brilliant knowledge of Standing Orders and Speakers Rulings. In those days there were a lot more points of order than there are now and a lot more discussions.
"I would be in the Government Whip’s seat, supposedly addressing the Speaker, and Trevor [beyond the Speaker and in my line of sight] would be either sort of quietly nodding, or if I was going off on the wrong track, his head would shake…He was giving me guidance. And we occasionally talked about it afterwards and he would point out specific areas where I could have gone.”
Trevor Mallard credits Trevor the Messenger with having one of the finest parliamentary minds of the era – certainly much more knowledgeable than the then Speakers.
“This guy would have been, you know, sitting up there with the top half dozen Members as to his knowledge of the rules, and he was quite prepared to share them in a very partisan way.”
The Clerk of the House of Representatives, David Wilson, stands at The Table in front of the Speaker at the beginning of a sitting day. Photo: ©VNP / Phil Smith
A Speaker's cheat sheet
There are a lot of rules to keep on top of and those who contest them regularly (Speakers, Whips, Leaders of the House) have to be particularly adept at the crucial topics where battle is done.
Again, Trevor Mallard notes he has not had to manage this on this own. As Speaker he had advice from the Clerk of the House and his team – Parliament's secretariat.
The clerks are like Parliament's calm, encyclopaedic brain. They are independent and serve all-comers, but Speakers get briefings on what might arise and there is always a clerk on duty in the chamber just in case.
The Clerk "David Wilson has been …very good at identifying about the 30 most common [rules and rulings]. I can now probably reveal that I had a cheat sheet at the front, where I could often go to a specific [rule] quite quickly because I didn't need to find my way through the book.”
Mallard says that has meant he has needed less “clerk’s direct advice” than he might otherwise. (So, fewer pauses in proceedings to allow the Speaker to seek guidance on the rules from the clerk on duty in the chamber.)
Speakers also have the advantage of talking through each day’s Order Paper and Questions with the Clerk before the House sits.
“We talk through what might be coming up in the House that day. So we look at the questions, we look at what might be in or out[side the rules] from those questions. I think pretty carefully about how stuff which would otherwise be out might be ‘brought in’. Well placed supplementary questions can stretch primary questions.”
Later in the interview when the topic is duelling with points of order in the House, I ask whether it’s like cricket where “the umpire can't just decide to give someone out before anyone's appealed?”
He agrees that for important Points of Order that is correct. “Probably a fair criticism of me was that I would intervene earlier at Question Time than my predecessors would; because I could tell …that question or answer couldn't be brought into order.”
Was this because he had spent that time pre-thinking the possible avenues a question might take?
“Yes. In retrospect, it might have been a little better for a few people to go off the track and to have proper points of order and have things a bit better explained. Both... from a government and opposition point of view.”
That would make for a longer Question Time though, he argues. His Question Times have averaged just under an hour. While in some eras they have gone on "for an hour and a half on occasions. And without any value being added.”
In his office, Trevor Mallard briefs members of the Press Gallery on plans for a new building at Parliament. Photo: VNP / Phil Smith
Brave changes for select committees
Parliament has just begun its triennial process of reviewing and changing its rules. This happens towards the end of each Parliament and agreed changes come into effect for the next one. Making changes pre-election means no-one is sure who will benefit from the new rules.
There have been many changes to Standing Orders during his tenure, but I wanted to know what he would still like to see changed. Among them, changes to Select Committees were “really important, and we've got to change.”
In short Trevor Mallard thinks that:
- Committees should be small,
- The government shouldn’t necessarily chair them,
- The government shouldn’t necessarily have a majority on them.
He would determine their make-up by each party's proportion of non-executive MPs. Just like Question Time question allocations.
“If you're a member of a five member committee there's no way to hide. You've got to read your papers, you've got to be on top of the issues. Everyone who makes a submission can tell whether you're across it or not. Now we have committees, sometimes 13 members, and some of them say nothing for the entire time or, …one inane question rather than being actively involved in things.”
Actually, smaller sized committees is a change that was already agreed by all parties two Parliaments ago, but after the 2017 election, when National unexpectedly found themselves in Opposition, they demanded it be changed back to larger sizes (so more of their large opposition caucus could have committee roles). Committee sizes and membership fluctuate but current committees range from 5 members to 11.
The biggest are either subject committees that are more crucial or more popular. Large committees are inevitable when all the parties want representation on them, but the governing party still wants to retain a majority.
Trevor Mallard gives evidence to a Select Committee. Photo: RNZ / Dom Thomas
Trevor Mallard also wants more committees chaired by Opposition MPs. As an example of good chairmanship (but not as an opposition MP), he praises former National MP Alan Peachey. He chaired the Education Committee while National’s Anne Tolley was minister and was adept at finding useful suggestions within submissions, whether they opposed or agreed with legislation.
Currently, of the 14 relevant committees four are chaired by non-Labour MPs: one Green and three Nats. Of them only the Regulations Review Committee is traditionally chaired by an Opposition MP (currently that chair is Judith Collins).
During the 2017-20 Parliament the governing coalition trialled having more opposition MPs chairing committees without government majorities. It often went badly. This parliament Labour have stayed with a few opposition MPs as chairs, but ensured government majorities. Possibly though they opted for less crucial committees, while National has provided more senior MPs as chairs.
I ask Trevor Mallard whether his plan would make committees into quagmires for legislation, where the opposition can filibuster and play silly-buggers.
“Well, if they did, then the system would fall apart. So part of this would be buying into being responsible legislators.”
He also points out that committees can be given deadlines. But he believes MPs can be trusted to make legislation the best it can be, even if they are vehemently opposed to it – what he calls “the Cullen approach.”
“In the end, if the minister decides that the changes that have been made in the select committee are not going to work, then they have the committee stage to change it back. It just makes it transparent.”
Trevor Mallard agrees that it can fail.
“If everyone acted the way that one or two recent former members did at select committees then this system would fall apart and would get reversed quite quickly. But it does provide the opportunity for Parliament to work much better.
"And I think the vast majority of people, when they're given some responsibility, can act professionally and in the interest of the country. Most of the bad behaviour comes from frustrated people whose views don't really matter at all. Because they're sitting in a minority on a committee and are never going to make any difference.”
In his last week of office, Trevor Mallard in procession towards the chamber for the afternoon sitting of Parliament. Photo: VNP / Phil Smith
The Skills of Question Time
We talked quite a bit about tactics and strategy. He played bridge at school to improve his.
I was keen that Trevor Mallard discuss his longer game approach. Patience is not an approach much associated with him, but he has enjoyed the long game to some effect and almost without notice. He prefers to discuss tactics inside the House.
“I think in politics there’s a lot of both tactics and strategy. And I think people have got to differentiate between the two. And both are important. I actually learned a lot of tactics from Richard Prebble, and his use of whiteboards where choices were written.
“[You write out] we can go one of these three ways. And if we go this way, then the Opposition might go this way, this way, or this way. And then after that, we could go this way, or this way. Just looking at all the alternatives, and working out which approach is most likely to get us to the best end game.”
Talk of decision trees takes the discussion to Helen Clark's preparation for Question Time.
“If she had a question, as Leader of the Opposition, she'd spend an hour preparing it. …[and create] almost like a spider's web of different approaches that she could take, depending on the approach that the government would take. And these would go across three, four or five supplementary questions.”
He says she gave the “impression of being very nimble” and she was, but she was “also exceptionally well prepared".
This is why, he says, “she made mincemeat of [Jenny Shipley] in the House. Because of that preparation. She did something similar as Prime Minister."
He notes the current Prime Minister is similar, coming to the House with “more detail and ...yellow sticky to get to the stuff that she wanted. But it's the degree of preparation.”
He thinks that Leaders of the Opposition since Helen Clark (from all parties) have not been as nimble and able to change course or respond to opportunities during Question Time.
John Key “was probably the best of the others, because he had …the [Forex] traders' ability to spin very quickly to an emerging opportunity in the House.”
Preparation and nimbleness are key according to Mallard.
"If you're not nimble, if you can't change your approach; if you haven't thought through the response that might be coming, and as a result of one response discard that line and go in another direction, then you're not going to make progress, in my opinion.
“It's not good enough to have a whole series of discrete questions. You've got to …build, you’ve got to have flow. You've got to grab the atmosphere of the House to be successful.”
Trevor Mallard has now resigned as an MP and awaits his imminent posting as New Zealand's Ambassador to Ireland. Just in time for a northern winter.
The fuller interview:
The earlier article (and audio) from this exit interview can be found here.
And the full interview can be heard at the link below:
Trevor Mallard: Exit Interview
Trevor Mallard leaves the Speaker's chair for the final time, led by the Serjeant at Arms, Steve Streefkerk. Photo: VNP / Phil Smith