Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Hansard source

Before we go to questions, yesterday I ruled on a point of order regarding the use of the term 'dishonestly' in an answer to a question. In that context it referred to another senator. I ruled that the term 'dishonest' had not previously been considered unparliamentary but that I would look into the matter and report back. First, the term 'dishonest' is not unparliamentary and, therefore, may be used. However, the context of all language needs to be considered, particularly with respect to standing order 193(3), which prohibits, amongst other things, imputations of improper motives and personal reflections upon other senators.

The relevant precedent on this terminology is mixed and unclear. On occasions senators have been asked to withdraw it and on other occasions they have not, so to provide guidance to the chamber I will apply the following principles, consistent with the use of other contentious terms. If the word 'dishonest' is used collectively—for example, about a political party—it will not generally be out of order. If it is used specifically with respect to a senator, imputing that the person is dishonest, it will be out of order. It may be used to observe behaviour—for example, 'It is dishonest to claim'—but it should not be attributed in a personal sense—for example, 'Senator XYZ is being dishonest.' I accept this will lead to some grey areas, but in almost all circumstances it can be used appropriately in an observational sense rather than a personal one. Given I have reviewed my ruling on this matter, I'm going to ask Senator Colbeck to withdraw the imputation yesterday.