Points of Order — Question Time—Authenticity

I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I seek your advice in relation to Speaker’s ruling 147/4, which is in your name. I wonder whether in your final weeks you would be prepared to consider an element of it.

The Speaker’s ruling states: “The rules are not the same for questions and replies. Statements of fact in questions must be authenticated. There is no such rule for answers.” One can well understand why that ruling is there, because the Speaker cannot possibly be responsible for the accuracy of answers. The dilemma though is that with the Speaker’s ruling standing the way it does, it implies that the accuracy of questions may be more important than the accuracy of answers. I know that you would say there is a process under the Standing Orders for a privilege case to be taken, should a member wilfully mislead this House. But that is a very serious process to embark upon.

I believe that today an interesting example arose. In response to question No. 3 today the Minister involved kept referring to a survey, claiming it vindicated as correct an answer he had given to this House. The questions in the survey had been tabled and were in the possession of the House. Members tried to point out to the House that what the Minister was saying was factually incorrect, according to the survey he was quoting from. My concern is simply that this brings Parliament into disrepute, when clearly the House has in its possession a document from which the Minister was quoting, and the information the Minister continues to repeat—and I think it was repeated on two or three occasions—is absolutely inconsistent with the document in the possession of the House. I am sure you would look at it, if a privilege case was taken, and say that this is probably not of sufficient moment to warrant a privilege case. However, in my view it does damage the integrity of this Parliament, where Parliament has in its possession certain information that has been tabled and that information is clearly being totally misquoted by a Minister. Balancing that requirement for accuracy in questions with the greater responsibility for accuracy in answers would, I believe, be something worthy of your experienced consideration before you leave this Parliament.

I think that if the member looks carefully at the ruling he will see that the question has to be authenticated. That, of course, does not make it accurate. Often the authentication may be a newspaper story, and I am sure from his vast experience in Government in the past the member will understand that on occasion what is said in newspapers about a Government is not necessarily correct, but it is sufficient to authenticate the question. It does not prove it is true.

💬 Mr SPEAKER: I thank the member for raising what is a good point of order, and a serious one. I just say to him that the Speaker also relaxes the rules on authentication for supplementary questions, if he looks at Speaker’s ruling 142/8. The Speaker’s ruling the member referred to is a consequence of the way the Standing Orders are drafted, as he admits. This is a matter for the Standing Orders Committee to consider if the member wishes to raise it there. I would encourage him to do so as I think he has raised an interesting point.

Question Time—Information in Minister’s Possession