Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Opposition Business (House)) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question's to the Minister for Human Services and refers to his previous answer. Is the minister willing to repeat the answer he gave the parliament outside the parliament, without the benefit of parliamentary privilege? And is he willing to provide that statement as sworn evidence to any relevant inquiry?

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Leader of the House, on a point of order?

Christopher Pyne (Sturt, Liberal Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is not going to any of the responsibilities of the Minister for Human Services. It is simply a fishing expedition question. The first question asked by the member for Gorton rightly referred to previous statements that the minister had made, and the minister answered that question. This question is simply a fishing expedition. Questions of this nature have been ruled out before by Speakers, and I'm not sure how the minister can answer a question that's not about his responsibilities, either when he was the Minister for Justice or now as the Minister for Human Services.

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'll give the Manager of Opposition Business an opportunity to address the point of order.

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Opposition Business (House)) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I first of all refer to previous rulings that we are allowed to inquire into answers that have just been given. I went to nothing further than the specific words that have just been given and asked whether the minister is willing to restate them in other forums and in particular whether the minister is willing to provide them as sworn evidence.

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I listened to the first question very closely, and I think that did have the attachment necessary, because it referred to those previous answers. Again, I have a difficulty with this question, because it's referring to the previous answer and asking him whether he'll do certain things that aren't within his responsibility, and I just don't think the connection's there. So I'm going to rule that out of order, and we'll go to the next question.