by Laura Tingle

The term "wingman" traditionally referred to the pilot who flew beside, but slightly behind, the formation leader going into dangerous combat, watching his back, increasing his firepower and tactical flexibility.

If there is a lesson from the first week's sitting of the new parliament, it is that Malcolm Turnbull is sorely lacking a wingman.

Whether it was the tactical debacle in the parliament late on Thursday, or the spectacular indulgence of his colleagues in insisting on amendments to section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act, the striking sense of the first week of the 45th Parliament was about the lack of collective purpose in the Coalition which leaves an embattled Prime Minister – whose own first strength is not politics – so vulnerable.

The irony in this is substantial: having lost the support of his colleagues in 2009 partly because of a failure to consult, Turnbull promised a return to proper, consultative cabinet government when he became Prime Minister last year.

He wasn't just talking about better, more functional processes of administration but that decisions would be collectively taken by the cabinet rather than in the prime minister's office.

But in the wake of the July 2 election, the lack of any esprit de corps – let alone discipline – among his colleagues, starting with the cabinet itself, has been regularly on display.

A spectacular example of this was the sight of senior cabinet ministers publicly putting their positions on the question of whether Australia should back Kevin Rudd's nomination as secretary general of the United Nations, notably Treasurer Scott Morrison.

The positions of other ministers in the debate – particularly Peter Dutton and Mathias Cormann – were widely and authoritatively canvassed (though Cormann refused to publicly discuss it).

Reflecting on the inner workings of the government, a very senior source observed recently of the Prime Minister and the treasurer that the problem wasn't their relationship, but that they just didn't have one. At all.

Now fast forward to this week and the return of the parliament. There is no parliamentary "wing man" for the Prime Minister, no sharp and savvy political attack dog who the Opposition dreads getting to their feet.

In the Senate, the entire Coalition backbench backed a push by Cory Bernardi to revive the debate about race hate laws, even as a government seen not to have too firm a grip either on the parliament or an agenda was trying to put the industrial relations legislation which was the cause of the Double dissolution, and the budget, at the top of the agenda.

Labor spent the week – as you naturally would – making the government's life a misery by suspending standing orders and trying to run its own issues in the chamber.

The practical effect of this for ministers and the working of government is significant. It makes it impossible to schedule meetings, or stick to a schedule, as they must constantly leave their offices to go into the parliament.

All those voters, lobbyists, public servants or other colleagues who have been trying to see them are left sitting waiting, or turfed out after just five or 10 minutes.

But neither all the breathless reporting since July 2 about the practical perils of a small majority, nor the disruption in the first couple of days of sittings this week, was enough to alert Coalition MPs to what might still come before they could all go home for the week.

The Prime Minister called what happened on Thursday afternoon – when the government lost three votes in the House of Representatives – an "oldie but a goodie" .

But it was notable that the people who got most badly caught out by Labor's tactics of calling on a division at the parliamentary death-knock were long serving MPs – and cabinet ministers to boot – who were in parliament during Labor's minority government and should have known better.

In the minority government of 2010 to 2013, Anthony Albanese was perhaps as important a figure as Julia Gillard. Despite being aghast at the toppling of Kevin Rudd, he faithfully and skilfully ran the parliament to avoid just the sort of theatre we saw on Thursday night generating images of parliamentary chaos which would have further damaged a struggling government. And to do this he had to wrangle not just his own backbench but a cross bench.

Christopher Pyne might have once been the obvious contender to fill the role of "wingman" for the PM but after Thursday, his leader's confidence in him must not be that great.

A Coalition backbencher said on Friday that, while there had been general warnings that things would be tight with the government's vastly reduced post-July 2 majority, no-one had ever really spelt out what this meant in practice.

So old habits of thinking everything was over once the adjournment debate started meant people took this is a signal they could head for the airport (including Labor MP Pat Conroy).

The ensuing bedlam as the Coalition desperately called its MPs back from the airport, from road trips and walks around the block – was dismissed on Friday by ministers, including cabinet minister Michael Keenan, who was already on a plane – as a "stunt".

Pyne – who has ultimate responsibility for running the House of Representatives for the government – admitted it was "a stuff up and those people who weren't there, obviously they learned a valuable lesson, in fact everyone learned a valuable lesson but there's no point in pointing the finger at individuals."

By Friday afternoon, he was relaxed enough – and apparently had a clear enough schedule as you do when you are a senior cabinet minister– that he could go on his regular personal television show on Sky television.

But it was no laughing matter.

There were the images of a government losing votes in the House for starters. Labor came within a vote of getting its push for a banking Royal Commission put on the House agenda.

The only person who seemed genuinely and understandably aggrieved was the Prime Minister.

It is lonely at the top.