Anybody who tuned in to Question Time this week in the hope of seeing a noticeable improvement in the behaviour of MPs would have been sorely disappointed. While the major parties have switched seats and there is a new speaker, the chamber is still the bear pit it always has been.
While some MPs, including Stuart Robert, are quick to defend what they call "vigorous debate" as part of a so-called contest of ideas and putting ministers under pressure "as long as it is respectful", they miss a key point.
Advertisement
That is that what some MPs say to each other, and the way in which it is said, would not be considered respectful if it was said on a building site, in a class room, in a bank or any other workplace in the country.
Why is it that our parliament, which should arguably be setting the standard for the broader community, is one of the few places where employees are not only able, but even encouraged, to needle, denigrate and insult each other on a regular basis?
If two senior staff members in a public service or corporate office had spoken to each other in front of other team members in the way Peter Dutton and Anthony Albanese did on Wednesday they would have been sent to the naughty corner.
The significance of the intensity of the questioning of the Prime Minister over what appeared to be spurious links to allegedly criminal elements in CFMEU, and the way in which he responded, should not be underestimated. The first conclusion to be drawn is that Peter Dutton, who prides himself on an uncompromising "tough guy" self-image, is determined to start as he means to go on.
Relentless and pugnacious attack dog politics worked for Tony Abbott. It would appear that Dutton believes the same "take the fight to the government" approach is going to work for him. But, unlike Scott Morrison who had the rare ability to wield a stiletto with a smile on his face, finesse is not in his nature.
That may actually serve his aim of knocking the PM off balance and destabilising the government well given, at this early juncture, Mr Albanese has demonstrated what some are unkindly calling a glass jaw.
He is much more comfortable responding to what appears to be an inordinate number of Dorothy Dixers from his own backbench than to dodging the inevitable verbal bombs being flung over the parapet from the opposition benches. Even when answering a relatively innocuous question on indigenous affairs on Thursday Mr Albanese's cadence sped up, his tone became more shrill, and the finger pointing was quite marked. This is a tendency that will need to be curbed. It is the fish that bites that dies.
The more he reacts to being goaded, the more goading he is going to get. While he may be reluctant to take instruction from Scott Morrison, a review of the former PM's facility to shrug off often vicious personal attacks with no more than an irritating smirk could pay dividends. An insult is like a cup of hemlock; it only harms you if you drink it.
It would also be advisable for the government to tone down some of the hubris that occasionally leaked out this week; it's worth remembering the ALP's primary vote went down on May 21 and they have a thin majority. If the Albanese government is to be successful it will need to rely on the kindness of strangers, especially in the Senate.
It's not enough to just keep blaming the LNP for all the woes of the word. The Morrison government was beset by calamity after calamity and there is no evidence a Shorten Labor government would have done any better during the last three years.
Labor has already stepped back on higher real wages and lower energy prices in the immediate future. Now it is in government it will be judged on deeds, not words.
