Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Hansard source

On 29 October, a point of order was raised in regard to the content of a ministerial statement, and I wanted to just make some further comment. I obviously spoke to that point of order at the time, but I wanted to make some further detailed comment on ministerial statements to assist all honourable members. There's a long history of ministerial statements being made. However, in relatively recent times they have occurred less frequently. In the 42nd Parliament there were 126 ministerial statements, for instance, compared to 23 in the 45th and so far 12 in this parliament.

The standing orders are largely silent on ministerial statements. Standing order 34 sets out the order of business, including the period during which they can be made, and standing order 63A, which was adopted in March 2015, specifies:

When the House has granted a Minister leave to make a ministerial statement, the House shall be deemed to have granted leave for the Leader of the Opposition, or Member representing, to speak in response to the statement for an equal amount of time.

House of Representatives Practice, page 501, defines ministerial statements as:

… statements to the House by Ministers announcing or reporting on domestic and foreign policies and other actions or decisions of the Government.

This is an important point to make, as ministerial statements exist to provide ministers with the opportunity to make announcements on policy which they are expressly prevented from being asked about in question time under standing order 98(d)(ii).

As House of Representatives Practice sets out:

The House has always required Ministers to seek leave to make ministerial statements.

This is a practice that dates back to a ruling in the very first parliament in 1902. It's also practice that an advance copy of the proposed ministerial statement is given to the opposition at least two hours prior to the ministerial statement being made. This allows the opposition time to consider whether to support the granting of leave as well as time to prepare a considered response. Indeed, leave has been denied where this courtesy has not been extended. In addition, House of Representatives Practice, page 502, cites an example from 2010 where leave was not granted for a minister to make a ministerial statement. At the time, the shadow minister stated his view, having been provided with an advance copy, that the proposed statement contained political abuse. A suspension of standing orders was then required to enable the minister to make a statement.

I'll conclude by saying ministerial statements are an important opportunity for ministers to inform the House and the Australian people about matters of significance in their portfolio areas. There will always be differences in perspective, of course, but I expect these opportunities to be treated by respect by all who take them up and to be used specifically for the purpose for which they're intended. There are ample opportunities in other political debates during the parliamentary day when ministers can engage in political debate about the opposition. I just wanted to make that statement for clarity for the House.

See this speech in context