Speaker’s Rulings — Parliamentary Questions—Answers

Members, as I suggested last week, I want to set out my approach to the answering of parliamentary questions. It’s well established that Ministers are expected to answer questions unless they consider it not in the public interest to do so: Speaker’s ruling 199/3. The public interest test is a high one and should be used sparingly: Speaker’s ruling 200/1. Ministers are accountable to the House for the public office they hold and should, therefore, endeavour to give informative replies: Speakers’ ruling 200/6. That is the cornerstone of responsible Government.

Ministers are responsible for their answers. It’s not for the Speaker to judge the quality or accuracy; the House and the public do that: Speaker’s ruling 207/3. The Speaker’s role is to uphold the Standing Orders, which require that an answer that seeks to address the question must be given if it can be given consistently with the public interest: Standing Order 396. Ministers must make a reasonable attempt to provide an informative answer on the matter they’ve been asked about. This is particularly true for primary questions, since Ministers have time to prepare their answers.

Question time is a political exchange. Members will not always be satisfied with the answers they receive: Speaker’s ruling 207/2. They should use supplementary questions to probe unsatisfactory answers. Only in cases where an answer is manifestly inadequate will the Speaker intervene, usually by allowing further supplementary questions: Speaker’s ruling 207/6. While there is a strong expectation from the House and the public that Ministers will answer questions, the Speaker cannot force a Minister to give an answer to a question: Speakers’ ruling 199/4. It is for members and the voting public to judge a refusal to answer.