Page 2096 - Week 06 - Thursday, 26 June 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
On the subject of Mr Dawes’s so-called mislead, it was not a case of being bullied, not a case of a deliberate mislead; it was a simple matter of a person misunderstanding the question and trying to clarify—with others at the time, and exploring that later—realising that he had answered it incorrectly. If there was any bullying going on, it was by some members of the committee in their treatment of some of the officials.
As the chair, I ensured that I allowed opposition members to ask the majority of the questions and use, I am sure, the highest percentage of their time for available questions, and any reading of the Hansard will demonstrate that. In fact, opposition members asked nearly three-quarters of the questions, with 1,110 of these being asked by members of the opposition being on the committee.
Mrs Burke: We did a good job then, didn’t we?
MS PORTER: I am sure that they can thank the chair for allowing all those questions. However, there were nearly 300 by opposition members not on the committee. Add that to the 1,110. Crossbenchers, visiting members, asked nearly 250 questions. Government members, again, asked nearly 250 questions. So you can see from that that they certainly had plenty of chances to ask questions.
I draw members’ attention to recommendations in relation to the committee processes and the matter of questions on notice taken by the estimates committee. Members will note that the report says 2,134 questions on notice were lodged. Further, the report notes the database shows there were 342 questions submitted. I have actually got an update on that by the committee office which says 467. Each of these questions contained many component parts, over 2,000 in fact. I will now read from the report:
In comparison to the Estimates process, the following general rule applies to questions placed on notice through the notice paper:
• questions are required to be brief and relate to a single issue;
• questions may not contain (i) statements of fact or names of persons unless they are strictly necessary to render the question intelligible and facts can be authenticated, (ii) arguments, inferences, imputations …
Et cetera, et cetera. So we have a very different system when it comes to asking questions. You can read more fully about that in our report. When it comes to the estimates procedure, as compared to what happens in this place during question time and questions on notice that are taken in this place, the report states:
Ministers have 30 days in which to provide a response to questions placed on notice.
The Committee noted that in the Australian Senate, estimates proceedings are set out in Standing Order 26. In relation to questions on notice, the Standing Orders allow for written questions relating to the estimates may be supplied to the secretaries of the committees, who distribute them to the relevant departments and members of the committees. Answers shall be supplied to and circulated by, the secretaries.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .