Madam SPEAKERYesterday Gerry Brownlee raised a point of order concerning the lodging of question for oral answer No. 8. The question as originally directed by the member to the Minister of State Services addressed remarks made by another Minister, the Minister for the Environment, relating to matters relevant to the State Services Commission investigation of the engagement of Clare Curran by the Ministry for the Environment. The Clerk’s Office, having been so advised by the Cabinet Office, informed Mr Brownlee that ministerial responsibility for this investigation now resided with the Minister of Justice and that the question should, therefore, be addressed to the Minister of Justice.
A member cannot insist on a particular Minister dealing with a question. The matters addressed in the question as originally lodged were not ones where only one Minister could be expected to have personal knowledge of the subject. Standing Order 369(a) allows questions to be put to a Minister relating to public affairs with which the Minister is officially connected. Speaker’s Ruling 138/1 makes it clear that it is not a matter for the Speaker or the House to determine which Minister has responsibility for the public affairs to which a question relates. The arrangement of administrative responsibility within Cabinet is an internal arrangement. The Government determines which Minister is responsible.
Ministerial responsibility is not being avoided. A decision has been taken that it should reside with another Minister. Questions must be addressed to the Minister who is responsible. In this instance, that is now the Minister of Justice. However, there should be clarity about ministerial responsibility. Although the Government may make changes of this nature, it does make the situation more complex for members lodging questions. Ideally, such changes should be rare, arising only from real and significant conflicts of interest. Where they do occur, it would be helpful to members if the Government were to ensure members are officially informed.
GERRY BROWNLEE (National—Ilam) Link to this
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. That is a long ruling. It draws on the experience of the House, and we, of course, accept that you have given a ruling in this way. The issue of ministerial delegations, though, immediately comes to mind. It is now some weeks since Cabinet was reshuffled, yet there is still no formal list of the delegations for the various Ministers who sit outside Cabinet, and it is not clear exactly where the delegations do lie in Cabinet. Madam Speaker, has your office received any such information? If not, when would you expect the House to be able to understand the way in which the Government is constructing its ministry?
Hon MURRAY McCULLY (National—East Coast Bays) Link to this
I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I ask you to perhaps give some thought to a matter that is close to the matter you have just ruled upon. It is accepted, of course, that Ministers have a right to transfer, to redirect, a question to another Minister. But I think, as I look at page 137 of Speakers’ Rulings, that it is clear that the purpose for that redirection is to ensure that the most appropriate Minister can answer that question. It is also apparent in Speakers’ ruling 138/3 that the Speaker has the discretion to refuse to allow the redirection of a question to another Minister where the Speaker considers this to be an abuse—in other words, where the purpose is one that is different from ensuring that the most appropriate Minister answers the question. I would like, at some stage, some indication that Ministers who avoid answering a question through a redirection would be brought to heel by yourself using that precedent.