Question Time
Question Time in a parliament occurs when members of the parliament ask questions of Government Ministers (including the Prime Minister) which they are obliged to answer. It usually occurs daily while parliament is sitting, though it can be cancelled in exceptional circumstances. Question Time originated in the Westminster system of the United Kingdom, but occurs in several other countries as well.
In practice, the questions asked in Question Time are usually pre-arranged by the organisers of each party; although the questions are usually without notice. Questions from government backbenchers (termed "patsies" in the United Kingdom and "Dorothy Dixers" in Australia) are either intended to allow the Minister to discuss the virtues of government policy, or to attack the opposition. A typical format of such a government backbencher's question might be "Could the Minister discuss the benefits of the government's initiative on <issue>, and is the Minister aware of any alternative policies in this area?"
Ministers may attempt to avoid opposition questions, but lying or intentionally providing misleading answers to Parliament is not permitted by the standing orders. The resulting political outcry could, and often does, result in that Minister being relieved of their position, and possibly suspended from the House. Skilled Ministers will often attempt to turn around the opposition's questions, rather than answering the question asked using them to further attack the opposition. However the oration must be rather precise, as the opposition member can raise the issue to the Speaker as to the wavering relevance of the response.
United Kingdom
In the United Kingdom, Question time lasts for an hour each day from Monday to Thursday (2:30 to 3:30 on Mondays and Tuesdays, 11:30 to 12:30 on Wednesdays, and 10:30 to 12:30 on Thursdays). Each Government department has its place in a rota which repeats every fortnight. The exception to this sequence are the Business Questions (Questions to the Leader of House of Commons), in which questions are submitted about Parliamentary procedure, as well as any issue that MPs might want to raise to the government. Also, Questions to the Prime Minister takes place each Wednesday from 12 noon to 12:30.
In addition to government departments, there are also questions regarding the Church, House of Commons reform and Law Rulings.
Additionally, each Member of Parliament is entitled to file a limited number of written questions. Usually a Private Member directs a question to a Secretary of State, but it usually answered by a Minister of State or Parliamentary Under Secretary of State. Written Questions are submitted to the Clerks of the Table Office, either on paper or electronically, and are recorded in The Official Report (Hansard) so as to be widely available and accessible.
In the House of Lords an Hour is put aside each afternoon at the start of the days proceedings for 'Lords Questions'. A peer submits a query in advance, which then appears on the Order Paper for the day's proceedings. The Lord shall say: "My Lords, I beg to move the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper". The Minister responsible then answers the query. Afterwards, for around ten minutes any Lord can ask the Minister questions on the theme of the original put down on the order paper. (For instance, if the question regards immigration, Lords can ask the Minister any question related to immigration during the allowed period).
Australia
Question Time is an institution in the Commonwealth Parliament and in all State Parliaments. Questions to government ministers normally alternate between government members and the opposition, with the opposition going first. Questions of ministers are normally asked by their counterparts shadow ministers in the opposition, but are always asked by backbenchers in the government side. In the House of Representatives, the first question is usually asked by the Leader of the Opposition, usually of the Prime Minister. The Leader is sometimes given indulgence by the Speaker to ask the majority of questions. Similar arrangements apply in the Senate.
The House of Representatives' Standing Orders allow the Prime Minister to terminate Question Time by moving that "further questions be placed on the Notice Paper". It is possible for the Prime Minister to prematurely terminate Question Time, although this is almost unheard of due to the criticism it would generate. During the Keating Government, the Prime Minister attempted to limit the number of questions asked in a way the Liberal Opposition disapproved of. To protest the change, the Opposition made random quorum calls through the afternoon for every question they felt they had been denied that day .
In federal Parliament, Question time is generally scheduled from 2-3 pm on every sitting day. Apart from divisions, it is the only time where the chamber is likely to be filled.
Tactically, it is considered an important defining characteristic for an Opposition Leader to be able ask a pertinent question of the Prime Minister or Premier, or to single out perceived weak performers in the Ministry.
Interjections from both government and opposition members in the House of Representatives and the Senate are common, and broadly speaking are an accepted practice, although the Speaker of the House of Representative or the President of the Senate will intervene to chastise if interjections become too frequent, if they contain inappropriate content, or if the interjector is disrupting debate. Given that Question Time is the only time of day when all members of Parliament are in their respective chambers, the appearance of Question Time can be rowdy and boisterous compared to the normally sedate activity during the rest of the day.
There is no time limit for answers in the House of Representatives, but a time limit applies in the Senate. However, a Senator may ask two supplementary questions, related to their initial question, if the answer they were seeking was not forthcoming. A senator may also 'take note' of a minister's answer after question time.
It is very common for points of order to be raised during Question Time on the issue of relevance, as a Minister answering questions will normally attempt to redirect the answer to an attack on their opponents. However, as long as the Minister is talking on the general subject of the matter raised in the question, it is usually considered relevant to the question, even if it does not address the specific issue raised in the question at all.
State Parliaments adopt similar practices to the federal Parliament, but there are variations in practice. The Victorian Parliament, for example allows for a set number of "questions without notice" to be asked of Ministers, proportionally from each Party represented in the House, and traditionally starting with the Opposition. So, for example, in the current Parliament, the Liberal Party has one question, then Labor (the governing party), then the Nationals (a minority party) and on occasion a question from the independent Member for East Gippsland, Craig Ingram.
Hong Kong
The questions in the Legislative Council are aimed at seeking information on government actions on specific problems or incidents and on government policies, for the purpose of monitoring the effectiveness of the government.
Questions may be asked at any council meeting except the first meeting of a session, a meeting at which the President (the speaker) of the council is elected, or the Chief Executive delivers the annual policy address to the Council.
No more than 20 questions, excluding urgent questions that may be permitted by the President, may be asked at any one meeting. Replies to questions may be given by designated public officers, usually secretaries, orally or in written form. For questions seeking oral replies, supplementary questions may be put by any member when called upon by the president of the council for the purpose of elucidating that answer. Where there is no debate on a motion with no legislative effect at a meeting, no more than ten questions requiring oral replies may be asked; otherwise, no more than six questions may require an oral reply.
The Chief Executive, who is the head of the region and head of government, attends Question and Answer Session of the council which are held several times in a legislative year.
Japan
The Diet of Japan held its first question time(党首討論, tōshu tōron) on November 10, 1999; the first question asked to Prime Minister Keizo Obuchi was "Prime Minister, what did you have for breakfast this morning?". Japan's question time was closely modeled after that of the UK, and many Diet members travelled to the House of Commons to study the British application of the concept.
Question time is 45 minutes long and questions are limited to the leaders of parliamentary caucuses (which must consist of at least ten members of either house). Although it is generally held every week while the Diet is in session, it may be cancelled with the agreement of the opposition: this often happens during the budgeting period and at other times when the Prime Minister must sit in the Diet.
United States
The United States, which has a presidential system of government, does not have a Question Time for the President.
Article II, Section 3 of the United States Constitution states: [The President] "shall from time to time give to Congress information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient." The exact contours of this clause have never been worked out.
In 2008, Senator John McCain (Republican Party nominee for President of the United States in the 2008 presidential election) stated his intention, if elected, to created a Presidential equivalent of the British conditional convention of Prime Minister's Questions. In a policy speech on May 15, 2008, which outlined a number of ideas, McCain said, "I will ask Congress to grant me the privilege of coming before both houses to take questions, and address criticism, much the same as the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom appears regularly before the House of Commons."
George F. Will of the The Washington Post criticized the proposal in an Op-Ed piece, saying that a Presidential Question Time would endanger separation of powers as the President of the United States, unlike the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, is not a member of the legislature. Will ended the piece by saying, "Congress should remind a President McCain that the 16 blocks separating the Capitol from the White House nicely express the nation's constitutional geography." However, critics of Will's review, such as constitutional lawyer Steven Spadijer point out that Question Time would be a check and balance in and of itself. Spadijer notes that the State of the Union is not expressly mentioned in the Constitution, but rather a convention developed via Article II, Section 3, quoted above. He goes on to note that Question Time itself would develop into a convention from the ambiguity that is Article II, Section 3:
| “ | If one is to take Will's logic to its ultimate conclusion - that the executive should be isolated from the legislature - why don't we cancel the State of the Union Address altogether, which is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution? Congressional consent when judges are appointed? The power for Congress, not the President, to make declarations of war? The power of the President to convene joint sittings of Congress? The reason is clear: the doctrine of separation of powers and Question Time are not mutually exclusive forces. The executive and the legislature are already intertwined under the American Constitution. Why? Because the legislature and executive keep a tab on one another, as the American founding fathers intended. That is precisely what Question time does - it keeps a tab on decision making process of various branches of government and prevents too much power being concentrated in one body (as sinister motives can be ridiculed and exposed). Question Time would, as the name suggests, questions the views and beliefs of the actors involved. True, the British PM is part of the House of Commons (and the US President is not part of the Congress) but the Prime Minister, like the US President, is also part of the executive branch of government. British Question Time mostly questions the PM for his executive actions and legislative proposals (again, recall the President submits legislation to the Congress and is Head of the Executive). For once it might make Congress take interest in secret executive decisions. Imagine Bush taking Congressional Questions regarding availability of intelligence relating to the Iraq or Nixon taking questions relating to Watergate? It allows Congress remind the people the US President is human and not above the law. It does what democracy should do - it reminds people President's make mistakes but they should be accountable and answerable for those mistakes. This does not denigrate the President. In fact, in some instances, Question Time allows the President to employ his strong oratory skills, to also critique the legislature in person. It would also allow the President to reason, to compromise and to argue with Congress in order to pass necessary reforms more efficiently. If he wanted to, the President can already convene joint sittings the Congress for delaying legislation. However, Question Time would simply make this more of a weekly ritual.
Yet there is another reason why Question Time is better suited under the US system of government rather than the UK system of fusion of powers. As noted above, the US President performs the executive function under the US Constitution, along with his Secretaries. Unlike the UK system, however, Members of Congress can speak out against their own party's policy without being dropped from Cabinet. Therefore, Question Time advances the "geography" of the US Constitution as it is a check and balance in and of itself, whether the executive is clarifying his or her qualms with the legislature, or the legislature asking the executive to clarify his or her decisions or parts of their own parties policies they disagree with. Thus, there is dialogue and accountability between the two branches of government: a very welcomed reform indeed. | ” |
New Zealand
Oral questions
Questions asked to Ministers must be concise and related to the area of the Minister's responsibility. Questions require that all facts be authenticated. Before a question is asked it is checked that it meets the requirements of the House's Standing orders, before being transmitted to the relevant ministers.
In New Zealand oral questions are asked at 2pm on each sitting day. Twelve principal oral questions are asked, with supplementary questions also given, but that must relate to the initial subject matter. The opportunity to ask questions is equally shared amongst the members of the house, excluding ministers. Urgent Questions while possible are uncommon.
The Question is addressed to the portfolio of the Minister receiving the question, and the questioner must ask the question as written. Once a question is asked, supplementary questions can be asked.
SKY News New Zealand broadcasts this session from 2pm to the conclusion of questioning. Also, New Zealand's free-to-air digital television channel, Freeview, provides live coverage of the debating chamber when it is in session on Parliament TV.
Written questions
There is no limit to the written questions that any MP can ask and can be submitted each working day before 10.30am. Submission and publication of the question is an electronic process with no hard copy record. Ministers have 6 days to respond to a question.
Translation of "Question Time"
German: Fragestunde, Italian: Question time, Hebrew: שאילתה, Japanese: 党首討論.
|
