Robert McClelland (Barton, Australian Labor Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, in examining your conduct, as the motion seeks to do, it is appropriate also to examine the context of the debate that has occurred over the past two days on this issue. It is also appropriate to examine the conduct of all parties in this chamber. Indeed, one would ask: what more did you need to do to keep the show on the road, as it were, and to keep the situation flowing, where the opposition was entitled to ask the executive to be accountable for its decisions in accordance with the provisions of the standing order? You went out of your way to facilitate the Deputy Leader of the Opposition rephrasing her question—a course of action which I might infer from her body language she was well intending to do until she was pulled to order.

Why was she pulled to order? Because the opposition’s actions in this respect have more to do with political tactics than the substance of the issues. The purpose and intent of question time is to hold members of the executive accountable for their actions and not for their opinions. It is a very, very important exercise. It is where the process of democracy literally hits the road. Members of parliament from both sides of the House have the opportunity to represent their constituents and ask members of the executive about why they are doing something with respect to public policy, and that is underlined, I might suggest, by standing order 98, which says:

A Minister can only—

and I will emphasise that word ‘only’—

be questioned on the following matters, for which he or she is responsible or officially connected ...

The first paragraph—

See this speech in context