Mallard Trevor: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Points of Order — Questions for Oral Answer—Questions to Members[Sitting date: 11 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:10915. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South):I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am assuming we have come to the end of questions to Ministers and I want to raise with you a decision by your office not to accept a question today and to raisethe interpretation of Standing Order 376(1) with regard to the Intelligence and Security Committee and the role of the Prime Minister.The first point I would like to make is that there is not a requirement for the Prime Minister to chair this committee. In fact it is something that the Prime Minister can nominate another person another member of Parliament to do. I would like to point out to you that there is probably a similar position with the Privileges Committee where it is currently chaired by a Minister but does not have to be chaired by a Minister. The important question I think for the House—and it may be something that ends up before the Standing Orders Committee for review—arises where there is a matter that is a matter of process before a select committee or where a Minister is in charge of a bill that is not a Government bill. Of course Ministers cannot be in charge of members’ bills because any bill that is in a Minister’s name in that circumstance is a Government bill but they can be in charge of local and private bills.One of the important things in this House is that there is someone responsible to the House both for the substance of legislation and for the process that is being followed. In this particular case the question was a relatively simple one asking about submissions to the Intelligence and Security Committee on legislation that is currently before it. We were told by the Clerk’s Office that a question could not be lodged but I would like to refer you toHansard of 7 December 2010 and the comments of Mr Speaker Dr The Rt Hon Lockwood Smith on that occasion in relation to a bill before the very same committee that indicated that a question was being ruled out not because it was to the Prime Minister but in fact because the bill had not got to the committee at that point. Of course being a thorough Speaker Dr Smith would have ruled it out on the other basis if that was available to him.The point that I want to leave you with is a request to refer this matter to the Standing Orders Committee so that the House can have someone responsible for this committee for the Privileges Committee for private bills and for local bills where the Minister happens to be someone who is currently in charge of them.Mr SPEAKER: I thank the member. I took some advice on this matter prior to 2 o’clock. Where the Prime Minister chairs a committee a question relating to the business before that committee must be put down as a question to a Minister. The Prime Minister chairs the committee in his capacity as the Prime Minister and answers to the House in that capacity.Standing Order 376 provides for questions to members. It is quite clear that questions may be put to members not being a Minister and in fact also not being the Speaker. There is not a special category for questions to chairpersons. Questions to chairpersons are a subset of questions to Ministers. Where a Minister chairs a committee a question relating to a matter for which the committee has charge must be put down as a question to a Minister. The fact that legislation may provide for Ministers and members to be acting in their capacity as a member does not change Standing Order 376; it merely establishes for the avoidance of doubt that something has to be done as if it were being done for a parliamentary purpose. This does not alter ministerial accountability to the House. [Interruption ] Order! But I accept the point that the member makes. I will certainly have a look at theHansard to which the member has referred me. I do acknowledge that if a matter like this needs to be considered the appropriate place for it to be considered is before the Standing Orders Committee which now has other matters before it following a decision last week.