SpeechTUESDAY 5 JULY 2016Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Karakia.SPEAKER'S RULINGSOral Questions—Ministerial Responsibility Defunct PortfoliosMr SPEAKER: Three related issues arose in the House last Wednesday in relation to an oral question from the Hon David Parker. The first issue is about whom questions are actually directed to. The next issue concerned how the Government could be questioned about portfolios that no longer exist. The other matter was the extent to which the Government of the day is answerable for the actions of previous Governments. I will deal with the three matters in that order. Questions to Ministers relate to a portfolio that a Minister holds not to an individual person. A question must relate to one portfolio and can only be directed to a Minister about a matter for which he or she is currently responsible and not to a portfolio held previously. The exception is the Prime Minister who is responsible for all activities of the Government. Where a portfolio is defunct there may be a Minister in a related successor portfolio. In that case a question should be directed to that Minister. Ministers have a duty to the House to decide on the appropriate Minister to answer a question and to direct the question to the Minister who holds the portfolio more directly concerned with the subject matter of the question. I refer you to Speakers' rulings 167/1 to 167/5. It is for the Government not the Speaker to determine which Minister has portfolio responsibility for a question—Speakers' ruling 167/4. There will be some instances where there is no clear successor portfolio. The Prime Minister is the head of executive Government and determines the title scope and allocation of all ministerial portfolios—Cabinet Manual page 18. The decision to create or to disestablish a portfolio belongs solely to the Prime Minister. Furthermore the Prime Minister is the principal adviser to the Sovereign and has responsibility to the House for all activities of the Government. It is permissible to ask the Prime Minister a question about any of the public affairs with which the Government is officially connected. Speakers' rulings note that the ministerial responsibility of the Prime Minister in particular is a broad one—Speaker's ruling 173/4. Because the Prime Minister is the only one who can disestablish a ministerial portfolio and because of his or her very wide sphere of ministerial responsibility questions about a portfolio that no longer exists should be addressed to the Prime Minister where there is no successor portfolio. There are some limitations on the Prime Minister's responsibility for defunct portfolios. He or she is not responsible for a previous administration. That point leads to the final matter raised—the extent to which the Government of the day is answerable for the actions of previous Governments. The Government is not considered by the House to be a single continuous entity. The defeat of a Government in an election marks the end of one administration and the commencement of another even though there may be a caretaker period. Ministers in the Government of the day are not responsible for the activities of the previous administration. But in respect of the activities of the previous Government that a Minister has had to address as a member of the current Government it is legitimate for the Minister to comment on them and I refer members to Speaker's ruling 174/1. A Minister is never responsible for the policies or activities of the Opposition and so should not be asked about them or offer a view on them in the answers—Speakers' rulings 174/2 to 174/4. Two points of order were raised last Wednesday related to these matters which I would like to address now. Mr Brownlee took issue with the question referring to roles … previously carried out for the Hon Murray McCully". Having reflected further on the matter I believe that Mr Brownlee was correct to do so. The second part of the question brought in matters for which the Minister is no longer responsible. As I have ruled a question must relate to a portfolio currently held by a Minister. Mr Hipkins then raised a question about whether a Minister may be questioned about something that he or she became aware of when handling a previous portfolio. Having further considered that point I agree with Mr Hipkins that a Minister may be questioned about matters he or she became aware of prior to holding a current portfolio provided the question asked is relevant to a portfolio currently held by the Minister. I thank members for raising these matters which have not been the subject of many previous Speakers' rulings."