Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 8 Hansard (26 August) . . Page.. 2497 ..

MR SPEAKER: Standing order 117(a) states that questions shall be brief and relate to a single issue.

Mr Wood: How about an answer? Can we have a bit of consistency between question and answer?

MS CARNELL: Mr Speaker, I have asked for this ruling because it is becoming more normal for those opposite to ask a question with parts A, B, C, D, E and F. I suggest that such questions are out of order.

Mr Berry: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. A question on a single issue can have separate parts. The Chief Minister is being - - -

MR SPEAKER: I would agree with you there. Nevertheless - - -

MS CARNELL: Mr Speaker, they have to be brief and on a single issue.

MR SPEAKER: Yes, they shall be brief and relate to a single issue. You cannot expect a Minister to answer a detailed question. Yesterday Mr Smyth was asked a detailed question in relation to housing, as I recall, and he was obliged - and I could well understand it - to take the question on notice.

MS CARNELL: Mr Speaker, I have asked for a ruling because the standing orders are in place for a reason. Question time is supposed to be about brief questions that are on one topic. With regard to the issue of a confidentiality agreement in the Lend Lease tender document, I have never seen the Lend Lease tender document, nor should I have seen it. In a tender process, it would be totally inappropriate for a Minister to see tender documents, particularly in this case, where the tender document we are talking about was a losing tender document. Mr Speaker, again I make the point that those opposite simply have no idea about government or business. They obviously believe that Ministers should be involved in tender processes, which would be absolutely out of order - - -

Mr Berry: Mr Speaker, I take a point of order. Is this a point of order or an answer?

MR SPEAKER: No, she is giving - - -

Mr Wood: How about a ruling on the point of order? Are we still on the point of order?

MR SPEAKER: It is a response.

MS CARNELL: Mr Speaker, it shows again that those opposite have no idea of business, no idea of tender processes and no idea of government. I would assume that if I had seen tender documents, particularly losing tender documents, those opposite would be on their feet in two minutes saying, "Shock, horror! Minister intervenes,

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .