Parker David: Oral Questions — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeParker David: Oral Questions — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 16 February 2016. Volume:711;Page:8983. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Speakers’ Rulings on page 170 make it clear and I am quoting from Speaker’s ruling 170/2 that “The primary condition of asking a question of a Minister is that the Minister has ministerial responsibility for the subject matter of the question. If there is no ministerial responsibility there can be no question.” Then making the same point is Speaker’s ruling 170/6 on the same page: “The Minister of Justice [in that case] has no responsibility for the actions of Ministers outside her own portfolio responsibilities. She cannot be asked to confirm something for which she is not responsible.”This question is in respect of New Zealand Trade and Enterprise conduct for which Minister Joyce has responsibility and the Minister of Foreign Affairs has none. When the Clerk’s Office asked at the request of the Minister that this be transferred we made that point but the transfer went ahead anyway. I ask you Mr Speaker: is there now a new ruling that overrules Speakers’ rulings 170/2 and 170/6 which I have referred to? Because if there is that has very very significant implications that the Opposition would very much enjoy.Mr SPEAKER: I looked very carefully at this matter because I thought the member might well raise it. The first point I would like to make is that within the Standing Orders there are no particular rulings around transfers. I then refer to a number of other pages of rulings that have been given by various Speakers to the House. The member may want to start with page 167 particularly Speakers’ ruling 167/4: “It is not for the Speaker … to determine which Minister has responsibility for a question.” or further Speaker’s ruling 168/1(1): “The Government has the right to transfer a question” etc.What I then did is I went back and looked at the number of times this issue has been raised in the House over the last 6 months approximately. This particular Saudi sheep issue has been the subject of 14 questions to Ministers seven of which have been answered by the Prime Minister six of which have been answered by the Minister of Foreign Affairs and one of which has been answered by the Minister of Trade. In determining whether I would not allow a transfer I need to consider whether the only reason a Government is seeking to transfer a question is an attempt to dodge giving an answer to the question. I think when you look at where the questions have gone in the past to be answered and the very fact that the Cabinet paper that was tabled in the House was indeed tabled by the Minister of Foreign Affairs I cannot conclude that in transferring it to the Minister of Foreign Affairs this Government is attempting in any way to thereby dodge the question that has been asked. The question that has been asked is one that is similar to the other 14 questions that have been asked so I am quite comfortable with the transfer to the Minister of Foreign Affairs occurring.I do want to conclude by saying that there is a ruling Speaker’s ruling 168/1(2) that says that once the question is transferred the Minister to whom the question is transferred must be in a position to answer supplementary questions. So if the question is to continue—if the member wishes to leave the question on the Order Paper and ask it—I will be watching very carefully any supplementary questions that flow.