Sussan Ley (Farrer, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Women) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for the Environment and Water. I refer to the minister's answers in question time yesterday relating to allegations broadcast on The Project. When did the minister first become aware of these allegations?

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! I want to hear from the Leader of the House.

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We're back to where we were yesterday. It's the same point of order that I took yesterday. Whether a statement has been made outside the House or inside the House, the rules in Practice are the same when it refers to something before somebody became a minister. It is that the question has to be about the statement. It can't simply be a reference to the statement and then a question about something else. Exactly the problem that arose yesterday arises with this question, only it's about a statement inside the House rather than outside. The Practice treats the two identically when it refers to something where the event itself occurred prior to the person becoming a minister.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm going to ask the Deputy Leader of the Opposition to rephrase the question to make sure it is within standing orders. These questions are problematic. I'm just going to ask her to make sure that she's either referring directly to a comment or quote within the statement so that it can be relevant. To simply refer to the statement and ask something else is not within the standing orders. So I'd just ask her to rephrase the question to make sure it is relevant.

Sussan Ley (Farrer, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Women) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, may I address your ruling. To your ruling: yesterday, the question was eventually ruled in order. There is a longstanding convention that questions can be asked about answers that were given in question time the day before or at any other previous time. This question refers to public statements that the minister has made and answers that she gave yesterday relating to those public statements, and at the heart of the question are her answers from yesterday. I ask that you rule the question in order.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm just going to ask that you read the question again.

Sussan Ley (Farrer, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Women) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for the Environment and Water. I refer to the minister's answers in question time yesterday relating to allegations broadcast on The Project. When did the minister first become aware of these allegations?

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The minister for the environment will cease interjecting. I'll hear again from the Leader of the House.

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thanks, Mr Speaker. I simply want to quote the same section of Practice that the Deputy Leader of the Opposition herself quoted yesterday. It's the same sentence, on page 555:

… where Ministers have made statements either inside or outside the House about matters that may concern their actions before becoming a Member and/or a Minister, questions have been permitted on those statements.

This question is not on the statement.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'll hear from the manager.

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Government Services and the Digital Economy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, in the previous parliament a very similar situation arose where a question was asked of a minister in relation to what the minister had said previously. That was the subject of some deliberation, and the then Manager of Opposition Business had this to say:

Ministers have a responsibility to the House when they provide that information, and for us to be able to test —

that information. That is precisely what the Deputy Leader of the Opposition is doing in the question that she has asked. The proposition that the then Manager of Opposition Business put was upheld, and it should be upheld today as well.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The difficulty I have, as I explained to the House yesterday, is that, whilst a minister may give a remark or statement to the House, she can be questioned about those words. You can't add extra things on to that statement about information you may wish to have or undertake, because the minister was not responsible at the time. She's responsible for her words and actions since she's been a minister but also in the House. I'll give the Deputy Opposition Leader one more time to rephrase the question, not to add another question into a statement that she answered yesterday. It's got to be about the statement. It is very narrow about what she can ask.

Sussan Ley (Farrer, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Women) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for the Environment and Water. I refer to the minister's answers in question time yesterday where she said:

I 100 per cent stand by what I said on Monday, and I 100 per cent stand by I have done at every stage—

with respect to allegations aired on The Project. When did the minister first become aware of these allegations?

Honourable members interjecting—

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm ruling the question out of order.

Honourable members interjecting—

Order! I'm moving to the next question. The end part of the question is out of order. You can ask about the statement, but that is a clear—

Order! The member for Groom will excuse himself from the House under 94(a).

The member for Groom then left the chamber.