| Related Orders, Precedents and Rulings |
|---|
| Standing Order 141 of 1994 (Repealed) | 141. The procedure for lodging Questions on Notice is as follows: (1) Questions for the next sitting day shall be handed to one of the Clerks at the Table before the commencement of formal business. (2) Members shall be permitted to lodge all questions remaining unanswered as at the prorogation of the previous session of the same Parliament without affecting any limit. (3) The number of questions able to be lodged accumulative over one sitting week are: (a) Members - three questions per sitting day
(b) The Leader of the Opposition - four questions per sitting day
(4) Ministers shall lodge answers to Questions on Notice within 35 calendar days after the question is first published and the answers shall be published. (5) If an answer to a Question on Notice is not received within 35 calendar days the Speaker, at the next sitting day after the expiry date, shall forthwith inform the House and the Minister shall immediately explain to the House the reason for non-compliance. (6) If the Minister, after explanation in the House, has not submitted an answer within 3 sitting days the Speaker shall again inform the House and the Minister shall again be called to explain with such procedure continuing until a written answer is submitted. |
| 2002 Precedent | 1. The Speaker drew the attention of the House to a number of questions on notice which had not been answered within 35 calendar days and called upon the responsible Minister to explain the non-compliance with Standing Orders. VP 23/10/02, 513 |
| 2001 Precedent | 1. The Speaker drew the attention of the House to two Questions on Notice not answered within 35 calendar days and called on the responsible Minister to explain the non-compliance with Standing Orders. The Minister stated that the answers that were prepared did not provide satisfactory information sought by the Members who asked the questions. The matters would be before the House as soon as possible. PD 4/4/01, 13182
VP 4/4/01, 1151 |
| 2000 Precedent | 1. The Speaker drew attention of the House to Question on Notice No 664 not answered within 35 calendar days and called on the responsible Minister to explain the non-compliance with Standing Orders. The Minister informed the House that the answer had been lodged that day, and apologised for the delay. VP 20/06/00, 599
PD 20/06/00, 7127 |
| 1999 Precedent | 1. Standing and Sessional Orders were suspended on 25 November, that day being a continuation of the sitting commenced on 18 November 1999, to allow further Questions on Notice to be lodged for inclusion in the Questions and Answers Paper. VP 18/11/99, 296 |
| 1996 Cons. Ruling | SPEAKER MURRAY: It has been brought to my attention that some confusion has arisen over the requirements for the answering of questions upon notice and the operation of Standing Order 141. On Thursday, 19 September 1996, the Minister for Education and Training was asked a question upon notice by the honourable member for Ku-ring-gai, Mr O'Doherty, which appears as question No. 801. The question was first published under the heading "19 September 1996" in the Questions and Answers paper of Tuesday, 24 September 1996, the next sitting day. Standing Order 141 provides that a question upon notice must be answered within 35 calendar days after the question is first published and if such answer is not received the Minister concerned shall be called upon to explain to the House the reason for non-compliance. The answer to Mr O'Doherty's question was due 35 calendar days after 19 September, that is, on Thursday, 24 October. The Minister's answer was received today, 29 October. I am informed that the non-answering by the Minister of question No. 801 by the due date arises from the fact that the summary table which appeared at the beginning of the proof question paper for 24 September showed the due date for the answer as 29 October. This error was, however, corrected in the next Questions and Answers paper and in the corrected version of the paper of 24 September. I remind members always to double-check the due date of answers to questions upon notice from a Questions and Answers paper not showing the word "proof". It would also be wise to independently check when a question was asked and to keep a running countdown as to when the 35 calendar days will expire. In this instance I am satisfied that the non-answering by the due date of question No. 801 by the Minister for Education and Training was unintentional and, as the answer has been received today, I do not intend to call the Minister in explanation. PD 29/10/96, 5421 |
| 1996 Precedent | 1. Leader of the House said that the unanswered questions from the previous session need not be answered due to the prorogation of the House but invited members to resubmit the questions as answers had been prepared. PD 16/4/96, 62 2. Minister not called to explain as the late answering of a question on notice resulted from an error in the due date on the proof questions paper. Members reminded to check corrected papers rather than proofs for due dates. VP 29/10/96, 519, PD 29/10/96, 5421 3. The Speaker drew the attention of the House to proceedings earlier in the evening when leave was granted for the Member for Gosford to move a motion to withdraw Question on Notice No. 960. The Speaker stated that he had noted from the Question Paper that Question No. 960 stood in the name of the Member for Davidson and not the Member for Gosford. The Speaker ruled that it was not competent for one Member to withdraw a question asked by another especially without the Chair having an indication from that Member that they wanted the question withdrawn. He directed that the Member for Davidson seek personally to withdraw the question if that was his desire and that the appropriate time would be the placing or disposal of business. VP 20/11/96, 640 |
| 1995 Cons. Ruling | SPEAKER MURRAY : Pursuant to Standing Order 141 I have to inform the House that answers to the following questions on notice were received after the time prescribed by the standing orders: No. 1, standing in the name of the Premier, due 27 June; No. 13, standing in the name of the Minister for Public Works and Services, due 6 July; No. 30, standing in the name of the Deputy Premier, due 6 July; No. 31, standing in the name of the Premier, due 6 July; No. 49, standing in the name of the Minister for Consumer Affairs, due 11 July; No. 50, standing in the name of the Deputy Premier, due 11 July; No. 54, standing in the name of the Minister for Agriculture, due 11 July; No. 59, standing in the name of the Minister for Education and Training, due 12 July; No. 60, standing in the name of the Ministerfor Education and Training, due 12 July; No. 68, standing in the name of the Minister for Public Works and Services, due 12 July; No. 72, standing in the name of the Minister for Consumer Affairs, due 12 July; No. 73, standing in the name of the Minister for Consumer Affairs, due 12 July; No. 74, standing in the name of the Minister for Consumer Affairs, due 12 July; No. 77, standing in the name of the Minister for the Environment, due 13 July; No. 79, standing in the name of the Minister for Consumer Affairs, due 13 July; No. 82, standing in the name of the Minister for Consumer Affairs, due 13 July; No. 85, standing in the name of the Minister for Consumer Affairs, due 13 July; No. 86, standing in the name of the Minister for Consumer Affairs, due 13 July; and No. 92, standing in the name of the Minister for Consumer Affairs, due 13 July. Whilst highlighting these late answers, I will not be calling Ministers to explain the reasons for the late answers as all the answers have now been lodged. This is in accord with the practice developed in the previous Parliament, when Ministers who were called to explain late answers invariably advised the House that the answers had already been lodged. Such a statement has always be |
| 1995 Precedent | 1. Speaker made statement that on this occasion he would not call ministers to explain reasons for answers not being received within prescribed time but received during adjournment. VP 19/9/95, 203; PD 19/9/95, 1061 2. Speaker drew attention to question not answered within 35 calendar days and called on responsible Minister to explain. VP 6/12/95, 483 |
| 1994 Precedent | 1. The Speaker made a statement reminding members of the requirement that notices of questions must be handed to the Clerk at theTable before the commencement of formal business. VP 15/11/94, 478 |