I went on a training course today for my new job. The training course was on the mechanics of government, specifically on how it relates to the work I do, and to give me a picture of how my work fits into the system.
I learnt a heck of a lot, including what to do if I was asked to report to a select committee.
I guess there was one area in particular for which I had an 'Aha!" moment, and that was the role of the opposition.
My confusion came from the understanding that all politicians want what is best for the country (or at least for their constituency), and that while there are some areas for which different parties and individuals have different opinions for what is 'best' for the country, there are others areas for which it does not matter which party was in power, they would do basically the same thing (for example the response to a natural disaster).
However, the opposition opposes everything the current government does, whether or not they personally agree with it. Before I could not understand why this is, I wondered if it was just to look like they were different from the current government. Then an explanation that came today made me see what is really going on.
What I learnt was that this 'opposing' by the opposition is only during one small (but widely televised) part of the government workings. And this part was the part held within the debating chambers, that is, this was the part of the government for debates.
Debating is something I did a bit of in highschool. With debating you were assigned a statement (or moot) and a position. Sometimes you had a choice on what position you took, but often you just had to accept the position given to you. If you are affirming the moot, you have to present an argument that the statement is correct, and you have to do your best to uphold that position against any attacks from opposing arguments. Those negating have to find any holes in the arguments of the affirming, and to bring up any arguments they can to prove the statement as incorrect. For a debater to back down and admit that their position is wrong, is to admit defeat and lose the debate. Debating is not about being right, it is about presenting your assigned position on the moot.
So, back to parliament. The current government is suggesting new legislation. This bill will impact on the people of New Zealand, and it is therefore the responsibility of those in parliament to get this legislation right.
As I said earlier, all politicians (should) want what is best for their constituents. Therefor, in order to make sure the legislation is the best it can be, there is a need of someone to try to pick holes in it. And this is what the opposition does. There opposing the legislation is not about their own political preferences, it is about them making sure the current government is being held accountable for the legislation they are passing.
As I said earlier, this is only a small part of the process. Today I also learnt a lot about the Select Committee Process. Members of both the government and the opposition are part of this process, but in this part they do not have debates. Instead the read submissions and listen to expert advise and work together to put together a piece of legislation which will best address the problem at hand. This part is much more cooperative, much more boring, and much less televised.
The fact is the government needs an opposition, and we as members of the public should be very glad we have them.
As for me and my new job, I am in the area of providing the information for the government to see how well past initiatives have worked, and to help them make the best decisions on future policies. I might sometimes have one hour to get information to the minister the she needs before question time, but otherwise I can leave the debating to the politicians.
