The SPEAKER (2:00 PM) —On 11 August the Manager of Opposition Business asked me to reflect on rulings on the content of questions, suggesting that there may have been inconsistency in my rulings. An analysis of the Hansard for both days shows no inconsistency. The rulings were consistent with each other and consistent with longstanding interpretation of the standing orders. The rule applied in all examples cited is:

Therefore, the question on 10 August by the Manager of Opposition Business to the Treasurer about health expenditure was in order. The questions or parts of questions which were ruled out of order did not seek information from a minister which related to the minister’s responsibilities. Examples of such out of order questions or parts of questions include: asking the Deputy Prime Minister for an opinion on his performance without referring to any particular aspect of his responsibilities; asking the Minister for Education, Science and Training to comment on a quotation from a senator; and asking the Deputy Prime Minister if his policy related to the views of a senator.

Furthermore, questions or parts of questions which relate to the minister’s official responsibilities are of course in order. However, it is out of order to ask a minister to comment on a statement made by another person. The only exception to the rule is that the standing orders specifically allow a question to the Prime Minister on whether a minister’s statement in the House represents government policy.