<!--The Official Report of Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) of the Legislative Council and the House of Assembly of the Parliament of South Australia are covered by parliamentary privilege. Republication by others is not afforded the same protection and may result in exposure to legal liability if the material is defamatory. You may copy and make use of excerpts of proceedings where (1) you attribute the Parliament as the source, (2) you assume the risk of liability if the manner of your use is defamatory, (3) you do not use the material for the purpose of advertising, satire or ridicule, or to misrepresent members of Parliament, and (4) your use of the extracts is fair, accurate and not misleading. Copyright in the Official Report of Parliamentary Debates is held by the Attorney-General of South Australia.-->
<hansard id="" tocId="" xml:lang="EN-AU" schemaVersion="1.0" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xml="http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2007/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="hansard_1_0.xsd">
  <name>Legislative Council</name>
  <date date="2014-09-18" />
  <sessionName>Fifty-Third Parliament, First Session (53-1)</sessionName>
  <parliamentNum>53</parliamentNum>
  <sessionNum>1</sessionNum>
  <parliamentName>Parliament of South Australia</parliamentName>
  <house>Legislative Council</house>
  <venue></venue>
  <reviewStage>published</reviewStage>
  <startPage num="917" />
  <endPage num="945" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Question Time</name>
    <subject>
      <name>Standing Orders</name>
      <text id="2014091818da78eb17fc46eeb0000132">
        <heading>Standing Orders</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="4364" kind="question">
        <name>The Hon. K.L. VINCENT</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <questions>
          <question date="2014-09-18">
            <name>Standing Orders</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2014-09-18T14:53:30" />
        <text id="2014091818da78eb17fc46eeb0000133">
          <timeStamp time="2014-09-18T14:53:30" />
          <by role="member" id="4364">The Hon. K.L. VINCENT (14:53):</by>  I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking questions of you, Mr President, regarding standing orders of the Legislative Council.</text>
        <text id="2014091818da78eb17fc46eeb0000134">Leave granted.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="4364" kind="question" continued="true">
        <name>The Hon. K.L. VINCENT</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <text id="2014091818da78eb17fc46eeb0000135">
          <by role="member" id="4364">The Hon. K.L. VINCENT:</by>  In the 52<sup>nd</sup> Parliament, which ran from 2010 until 2013, as an example I asked 97 questions (of up to 10 questions per question) without notice and received only 37 answers, many of which were not answered in a substantial fashion. I know that this is only one example of the frustration that many of the members, particularly on the crossbench, feel when it comes to inadequate government response to questions.</text>
        <text id="2014091818da78eb17fc46eeb0000136">We are now in the 53<sup>rd</sup> Parliament, and many of the questions without notice I have asked in past months still remain unanswered many months after my having asked them. My question to you, Mr President, is: would you consider amendment of standing orders to place an expectation on the government to answer questions asked in a timely fashion?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="3125" kind="answer">
        <name>The President</name>
        <house>Legislative Council</house>
        <startTime time="2014-09-18T14:54:38" />
        <text id="2014091818da78eb17fc46eeb0000137">
          <timeStamp time="2014-09-18T14:54:38" />
          <by role="member" id="3125">The PRESIDENT (14:54):</by>  Standing Order No. 111 states that:</text>
        <text id="2014091818da78eb17fc46eeb0000138">
          <inserted>A Minister of the Crown may, on the ground of public interest, decline to answer a Question; and may, for the same reason, give a reply to a Question which, when called on, is not asked.</inserted>
        </text>
        <text continued="true" id="2014091818da78eb17fc46eeb0000139">This has always been interpreted as allowing a minister of the Crown to answer a question however the minister wishes, but providing that the minister is not debating the answer. The issue of whether a question has been answered can be a subjective one and it would be very difficult for a chair to rule on such a point of order. So, really, it is not up to me to change the standing orders in relation to this matter.</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>