As the election nears, Question Time transforms into a forum for party political messaging. It's not the ideal format for messaging and it doesn't always go well.
As the election nears Question Time increasingly sheds its traditional oversight function and tries wearing another cloak - a platform for election talking points.
ACT leader David Seymour had this week's first question, and in the afterglow of his party conference he took the chance to follow up on a key talking point from that gathering: claims of a choking thicket of bureaucracy, red tape, and regulation.
His plan was to 'question' the Prime Minister about examples of bureaucracy. It went brilliantly, so long as you ignored the answers.
National Party MPs Erica Stanford and Gerry Brownlee listen to David Seymour in the debating chamber.
Claim-and-comment Time
Question Time is built for discovery. It works best with an intent of unearthing the unknown and cornering the equivocating.
A core purpose of Parliament (exemplified in Question Time) is to provide oversight and keep a check on government. That's the theory.
The practice is different, especially in an election year. It becomes less checking on the government and more campaigning to be the government, with Question Time as an opportunity to showcase political messaging with claims or propositions only masquerading as questions.
The current Speaker has been quite relaxed in his refereeing questions (for which there are numerous rules), and that may have amplified this election year tendency.
Recently Question Time has become less an inquisition and more a showcasing of claims with requests for comment.
It doesn't always play out well for the questioner - unless you are ignoring the answers. Yes, that is possible - sometimes questions are clipped for social media without the answer much included.
Here are two examples from Tuesday's first exchange of the week.
The imperfect example
One trap is not finding the ideal example. This exchange is between ACT Leader David Seymour and Labour Leader and Prime Minister Chris Hipkins.
DS: "Is he aware that early childhood education (ECE) providers need to comply with 303 different regulations before they can open their door in the morning, including keeping records for three months of all food they've served and the time they served it to whom, and is he aware of any situations where keeping these records has justified the cost of doing so?"…