Chapter 19 - Relations with the executive government
Supplementary questions
Following a minister’s reply, the questioner or any other senator may,
in the discretion of the chair, be called to ask a supplementary question in
order to elucidate the reply. Usually there is only one supplementary question
by the questioner, but the number and the questioner is in the discretion of
the chair.
Supplementary questions must relate to or arise from the answer. It is
not in order to ask a supplementary question to another minister. A
supplementary question must be directed to the minister initially answering the
question and when a minister has asked that a question be put on notice a
supplementary question may not be asked. (SD, 9/10/1973, p. 1060;
13/12/1973, p. 2778; 6/3/1974, p. 51; 22/5/1979, p. 1895; 22/8/1979,
p. 101; 6/5/1982, p. 1913.)
Supplementary questions were introduced in the Senate on the initiative
of the chair. In 1973 President Cormack decided that, within reasonable limits, he would allow
supplementary questions to elucidate an answer already given.
In 1980 the Standing Orders Committee considered the question of
whether senators ought to be allowed to ask supplementary questions in relation
to answers which are given by ministers after the termination of question
time. It was recommended that, if senators wish to ask further questions
in relation to these deferred answers, they should do so either by asking leave
to do so, when the answer is given, or by asking their questions in the normal
way at question time on a subsequent day. The Standing Orders Committee’s
report was noted by the Senate (26/2/1981, J.109).
On 14 April 1986 President McClelland made a statement concerning the use of supplementary
questions. After noting that supplementary questions began in 1973, the
President stated:
Since that time successive Presidents
have consistently ruled that supplementary questions are appropriate only for
the purposes of elucidating information arising from the original question and
answer. They are not appropriate for the purpose of introducing additional or
new material or proposing a new question, even though such a question might be
related to the subject matter of the original question.
It is my impression that recently
attempts have been made to extend the scope of supplementary questions by the
use of what I would call double‑barrelled questions; the second, the
supplementary question, being held back for asking, virtually irrespective of
the answer to the original. I do not believe that is a proper use of the
supplementary question procedure which I remind senators is completely within
the control of the chair. (SD, p. 1633)
Previous page | Contents | Next page
Website feedback: web.senate@aph.gov.au
Last reviewed 2 February 2010 by the Senate Web Administrator
© Commonwealth of Australia
Parliament of Australia Web Site Privacy Statement
Images courtesy of AUSPIC
|
