Wilson Margaret: Speaker’s Rulings — Party and Member Support—Ministerial Responsibility 
Wilson Margaret: Speaker’s Rulings — Party and Member Support—Ministerial Responsibility 
[Volume:635;Page:6283] 
Madam SPEAKER 
: The Hon Tony Ryall raised a point of order on Wednesday 25 October seeking a considered ruling on the issue of ministerial responsibility for matters connected with the administration of party and member support funded through Vote Parliamentary Service. Mr Ryall’s point of order drew attention to the lack of a clear accountability framework for the appropriations made in respect of each party for party and member support. Resolving this is not a matter of order in the House. It is a matter for the Parliamentary Service Commission and may ultimately require legislative change. However I accept that it may be relevant to whether questions comply with Standing Order 369. 
The appropriations for party and member support are contained in Vote Parliamentary Service. The Speaker is the responsible Minister. But these appropriations may be expended by both members and Ministers. When Ministers and their staff utilise these appropriations they are doing so not in their capacity as Ministers but in their capacity as members of their parliamentary party. Therefore Ministers cannot be held responsible for these appropriations or the activities they fund. Responsibility lies with the Speaker as the responsible Minister. 
Mr Ryall is correct. Ministers’ staff are funded from Vote Ministerial Services. Ministers may be questioned about the activities of their staff as they relate to their ministerial responsibilities. The Prime Minister is the responsible Minister for Vote Ministerial Services. The Prime Minister may therefore be questioned about the appropriations in Vote Ministerial Services and services provided under the vote. 
However the Prime Minister is not responsible as Prime Minister for the administration of member and party support funding provided for the party leader’s office nor is she answerable to the House for the services staff in her office may provide in this capacity. While the legal and employment structures may not make this distinction particularly clear the Prime Minister is not answerable for actions taken in a non-ministerial capacity. The Prime Minister’s position is no different from that of other leaders of parties. They are not accountable to the House as party leaders or for the actions of their staff in administering party and member support appropriations. It is the Speaker who must account. 
What I propose to do is to allow questions to the Prime Minister and Ministers about their offices on the basis that generally these are fully funded by Vote Ministerial Services. But questions for oral answer that explicitly address Vote Parliamentary Service appropriations or their administration will not be allowed. These can be put down as questions for written answer to the Speaker. 
Members need to understand that I may not always be in a position to make an informed judgment about this distinction. Therefore I do not propose to take the initiative in ruling out supplementary questions where ministerial responsibility is not clearly disclosed. As Speaker Burke ruled in 1987 “it is incumbent on the Minister to challenge the validity” of such questions—Speaker’s ruling 141/3. 
Finally I remind members that they cannot demand a particular answer. The answer is the Minister’s responsibility. Provided that the Minister addresses the question it is not the role of the Speaker to judge the adequacy of the reply. Members cannot appeal to the Speaker every time they get a reply with which they are not satisfied—Speaker’s ruling 154/5. 
I am aware members that that is a long ruling but the issue is a somewhat complex one. Copies of it are available from the Bills Office for those of you who wish to look at it further.