House of Assembly Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2) 52 2 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Parliamentary Procedure Question Without Notice Reply QUESTION WITHOUT NOTICE REPLY The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER (14:03): Further to that, this morning the member for Bragg raised a point of order on the adequacy of an answer provided by the Attorney-General to a question taken on notice which as Speaker yesterday I authorised the publication of in Hansard pursuant to standing order 103. Answers to questions are published in Hansard pursuant to this standing order if the Speaker is satisfied that the answer addresses the substance of the question and it does not contain debate. On further consideration of the answer provided by the Attorney-General, there is nothing to suggest that the answer contravenes standing orders on the criteria set out above. As to the adequacy of the answer it is not part of the Speaker's role to make such a judgement. A test of adequacy is whether the answer addresses the question by being relevant to it. The house itself, and public opinion, are the judges of the adequacy of a reply by making a political judgement on the matter. For the reasons I have set out above I advise the house that my earlier direction that the answer be published in Hansard will stand. Ms CHAPMAN House of Assembly Bragg Ms CHAPMAN (Bragg) (14:04): A further point of order, Madam Speaker, if I may. Thank you very much for the consideration you have given that. My further point is to ask you, given the substance of the response, which was to find some other source, how you are able to make the assessment that the answer was adequate, and if you did inquire of the other source, namely through the Hon. Rob Lucas, to view the documents to be satisfied that there had been an adequate answer. I would appreciate your response on that. The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Thank you, member for Bragg. I did not consult with the member; however, if you choose to do that I will point out again what I said, that it is not up to me to make that judgement. The public will make that decision. However, I will follow that up and get back to you again.