 |
Chapter 19 - Relations with the executive government
Questions on notice
Questions at question time are supposed to be without notice. The Standing Orders
Committee, in a 1980 report (PP 50/1980), reviewed the long‑established
practice of senators giving ministers informal advice prior to question time of
the subject on which they proposed to ask questions, so that ministers might
obtain information on those subjects. The committee considered that this was an
acceptable practice, particularly in a chamber where ministers represent
several ministries in addition to their own, and that it leads to a more
satisfactory question time. The committee noted, however, that there was a
distinction between this practice of giving informal advice of the subject of a
question to be asked and the giving of written notice of the precise terms of a
question calling for a detailed answer as provided for in the standing order
dealing with questions on notice.
A question may be submitted on notice by a senator signing and
delivering it to the Clerk, fairly written, printed, or typed. Notice may be
given by one senator on behalf of another (SO 74(1)). The Clerk is
required to place notices of questions on the Notice Paper in the order in
which they are received (SO 74(2)).
Each question on notice is allocated a number and the text of the
question is published in the Notice Paper. All questions which remain
unanswered appear in the full Internet version of the Notice Paper and those
that have remained unanswered for 30 or more days are noted.
A reply to a question on notice is given by delivering it to the Clerk,
and a copy is supplied to the senator who asked the question. The question and
reply is printed in Hansard (SO 74(3)). A senator
who has received a copy of a reply pursuant to this standing order may, by
leave, immediately after questions without notice, ask the question and have
the reply read in the Senate (SO 74(4)), but this
procedure is seldom used. The
publication of the reply is authorised on its provision to the senator (SO 74(3)).
A senator who asks
a question on notice and does not receive an answer within 30 days may seek an
explanation and take certain other actions (SO 74(5)).
This provision, first adopted on 28 September 1988 (J.952), on the
motion of Senator Macklin, provides:
If a minister does not
answer a question on notice asked by a senator within 30 days of the asking of
that question, and does not, within that period, provide to the senator who
asked the question an explanation satisfactory to that senator of why an answer
has not yet been provided:
-
at the
conclusion of question time on any day after that period, the senator may ask
the relevant minister for such an explanation; and
-
the senator
may, at the conclusion of the explanation, move without notice ‘That the Senate
take note of the explanation’; or
-
in the
event that the minister does not provide an explanation, the senator may,
without notice, move a motion with regard to the minister’s failure to provide
either an answer or an explanation.
If an explanation of the failure to answer questions within 30 days is
not forthcoming when requested at the end of question time, the motion which is
moved may be for any purpose, but is often a motion for an order for the
answers and explanations to be tabled by a specified date. The procedure was
first used by Senator Macklin on 23 November 1988 and has been frequently used since. The government has
complied with orders made under this procedure to table answers by a specified
date (23/11/1988, J.1144; 28/11/1990, J.485; 21/2/1991, J.785; 14/3/1991, J.875; 17/4/1991, J.951; 16/6/1992, J.2443; 11/5/1995, J.3289; 12/8/1999, J.1489-90). On one occasion (25/5/1989, J.1712) a
minister was censured for the delay in answering.
A statement by a minister that an answer is being prepared, or that a
question is under consideration, is not regarded as an explanation of failure
to answer the question (rulings and statement by President Reid, SD, 28/5/1998, pp 3377-8).
The practice of ministers leaving the chamber immediately at the end of
question time has meant that on several occasions the relevant minister has not
been present to give an explanation, despite prior warning being given by the
senator who asked the overdue question on notice. Despite requests from the
President (see SD, 21/2/1991, p. 1034) the practice continued and on 17 April 1991 the Senate passed
a motion expressing its “continuing concern at the lack of courtesy by
Ministers in failing to attend the Chamber and to provide adequate reasons for
failure to answer questions” (17/4/1991, J.951-2).
If in response to a senator having asked for an explanation of failure
to answer a question, an answer is immediately produced by a minister, it is
not open to a senator to move the motions otherwise authorised by the order. The
rationale of the order is to encourage ministers to answer questions, and once
a question is answered the procedure in the order no longer operates in
relation to the question. (SD, 2/12/1992, pp 4044-8; 8/12/1992,
pp 4391-4; 2/12/1992, J.3190; 8/12/1992, J.3252; ruling of President Calvert, SD,
16/10/2003, p. 16629)
On 16 June 1992, a senator took the unusual step of
tabling by leave answers to questions on notice of which he had received
copies, and then by leave moving a motion to take note of the answers and debating
them (SD, 16/6/1992, pp 3661-2, 3664-6).
Under standing order 74(5), the procedure applies also to questions on notice
lodged during estimates hearings. (See Chapter 16, Committees, under Estimates
committees.)
When final answers to questions on notice have not been given before
the Senate adjourns, government departments and agencies furnish replies in the
usual manner to the Department of the Senate which forwards them to the
senators concerned. On the resumption of the next sittings, the replies are
incorporated in Hansard.
One of the
consequences of a prorogation of the Parliament is that all
business on the Notice Paper lapses on the day before the next sitting. Thus,
questions submitted before the prorogation and not answered before the next
sitting need to be resubmitted in order to appear on the Notice Paper in the
next session. The Department of the Senate writes to senators whose questions
had not been answered, inquiring whether they wish to renew the questions when
the Senate resumes. Ministerial departments are advised to answer questions
outstanding at prorogation. If the Senate were to meet after a prorogation (see
below) a Notice Paper would be issued containing the business before the Senate
at the prorogation.
Questions on notice
submitted after the prorogation and for which answers have not been received
before the Senate sits again appear on the first Notice Paper of the new
session with the annotation that notice was given on the first sitting day. For
such questions the 30 days, within which ministers must provide an answer or
explain why none has been given, is deemed to begin with the first day of the
new session.
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
|
 |
