❓ Hon Robin Chapple questions the Minister for State Development regarding the appropriateness of previous answers to QoNs 323 and 325, citing Standing Order 138(c). The Minister's response deflects the issue back to the Member.
AnsweredQoN 564Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
With regard to Standing Order 138(c), ‘Replies shall be concise, relevant, and free from argument or controversial matter’ and question on notice Nos 323 and 325 of November 27 2002 -
(1) Does the Minister consider his answer to the above two questions to breach Standing Order 138(c)?
(2) If no to (1), why not?
(3) If yes to (1), will the Minister now answer all of the questions posed to him?
(1) Does the Minister consider his answer to the above two questions to breach Standing Order 138(c)?
(2) If no to (1), why not?
(3) If yes to (1), will the Minister now answer all of the questions posed to him?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
6 May 2003
Responded by
Parliamentary Secretary representing the Minister for State Development
Response time
47 days
(1-3). If the Member believes that the answer is in breach of standing orders, the Minister is sure the Member would take the appropriate action provided to him under the standing orders.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.