Page 4575 - Week 15 - Wednesday, 20 November 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Then it goes on to talk about the Parliamentary Privileges Act, Mr Speaker. This matter of public importance says that many questions remain unanswered. That is a subjective view, I think. It says that "time is being used for Ministerial or Party Political statements; that, instead of answering the question, derogatory remarks contravening Standing Orders are sometimes made; and that Ministers should comply with the intention of question time". All of these, Mr Speaker, are matters which impinge upon your area of authority. The standing and temporary orders, Mr Speaker, are very clear on this subject. Standing order 118, under the heading "Answers to questions without notice", states:
The answer to a question without notice
(a) shall be concise and confined to the subject matter of the question; and
(b) shall not debate the subject to which the question refers
and the Speaker may direct a Member to terminate an answer if of the opinion that these provisions are being contravened or that the Member has had a sufficient opportunity to answer the question.
At all times, Mr Speaker, where you have issued instructions in relation to the answering of questions, your instructions have been adhered to. Mr Speaker, what Mr Stevenson is saying here is that your rulings were inadequate. Indeed, Mr Speaker, your rulings have set the standard in this Assembly. Your rulings have, in fact, ensured that, in accordance with the interpretation which has been accepted by this house, answers to questions without notice are concise, confined to the subject matter of the question and do not debate the subject to which the question refers. If they were otherwise, Mr Speaker, you would have taken the member, or members, to task to ensure that this practice did not continue.
Mr Speaker, if you have been unable to maintain order in this house and if there is any criticism that ought to be levelled at you, it ought to be levelled as a substantive motion; it ought not to be levelled by way of a matter of public importance. I ask you, Mr Speaker, to rule that this matter of public importance is out of order.
MR SPEAKER: Mr Berry, I think you have done an about-turn on the intent of the words written. I read this, and I allowed it to be printed, based on the fact that, yes, these things do happen and, yes, I do take appropriate action. Therefore, I think your interpretation - - -
Mr Berry: It is a reflection on your decisions.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .