Joel Fitzgibbon (Hunter, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Agriculture) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Agriculture. Why hasn't the minister returned to the House to correct the following drought related statement he made during question time on Monday:

… you actually get the money until the department decides that you are not allowed to get the money. So you keep on getting the money until such time as, on the application being assessed, they decide you are not eligible for it. But it is not the case that you apply for the money and then you have to wait for your application to be approved … You actually get the money straight away.

(Time expired)

Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order.

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Before the Leader of the House puts his point of view, at the moment you could describe the question as incomplete, because the member's time elapsed before he had completed—

Opposition members interjecting—

There will be silence! The time ran out before the member had completed asking his question. However, whether or not the question makes any sense without it having being completed is the question at issue.

Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Madam Speaker, I think you have summarised it well. The point is that there was no discrepancy pointed out that needs to be corrected. There was simply an assertion made, and therefore there was no question, and the call should go to the member behind me.

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. The question was at the start, where the minister was asked why he has not returned to the House to correct the statement, and then the statement was given. There is no standing order that says the question has to be at the end. You can say, 'Why haven't you returned to correct this?'—

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member will resume his seat. The question did begin precisely as you said. He did ask why the minister did not return to the House. He then went on to give a statement as to why he believed he should—

Opposition members interjecting—

There will be silence on my left! In his question, he went on to give the reason, including a quote, which was lengthy. However, he did not complete the question within the time frame.

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the quote was difficult to decipher, but there is no argument that says at what point the quotation had to conclude. The question was asked: 'Why has the minister not returned to the House to correct this statement?' The statement was then read. Whether or not—

Mr Pyne interjecting—

Madam Speaker?

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I can hear you adequately.

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I do not see how there can be a ruling that there is not a question, when we asked, 'Why has the minister not returned to the House to correct this statement?' and we read the statement. How is that not a question?

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I have said, the difficulty is that the question was not completed within the time allocated under the standing orders. Although the question 'Why has the minister not returned to the chamber?' was asked, the reason why you were purporting that he should have was not completed within the time.

Joel Fitzgibbon (Hunter, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Agriculture) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. First of all, the minister should know what he said on Monday, surely.

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am sorry; this is not a point of order.

Joel Fitzgibbon (Hunter, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Agriculture) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Madam Speaker, even if you accept that the whole of the last sentence of the quote was not complete before I ran out of time, how does that in any way change the question and the meaning of the quote? Go back simply to the allegation that the money is automatically paid. That point was made in the quote. It is wrong, and the minister should be required to address that issue.

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If the member for Hunter had not bothered to get up on that point of order, he actually might have got away with it, but I think that sinks it.

Joel Fitzgibbon (Hunter, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Agriculture) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Are you now saying—

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member will resume his seat! The basis of the ruling is simply that you did not complete the answer within the required time.

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. There is no requirement under standing orders, if someone intends to ask three or four questions and they only get through some of them, that therefore the entire question is ruled out. There is nothing within the standing orders—to the point of order—that says we have to determine whether or not someone would have liked to add other words. The one thing is: was a question asked? A question was asked. I reckon it will be challenging for him to answer, but we would love to hear the answer. It might be as good as Monday's!

Mrs Bronwyn Bishop (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The lesson from this is that people should abide by the standing orders and ask their question within the time allowed. I call the member for Hindmarsh.