Skip to main content

Submission of questions to be answered

This content has been automatically generated from the original PDF and some formatting may have been lost. Let us know if you find any major problems.

Text in this format is not official and should not be relied upon to extract citations or propose amendments. Please see the PDF for the official version of the document.

WQ.117/2022

WRITTEN QUESTION TO

THE CHAIR OF THE PRIVILEGES AND PROCEDURES COMMITTEE BY DEPUTY S.M. WICKENDEN OF ST. HELIER

QUESTION SUBMITTED ON MONDAY 4th APRIL 2022 ANSWER TO BE TABLED ON MONDAY 11th APRIL 2022

Question

Further to provisions of Standing Orders 10, Contents of question, and 11, Submission of question to be answered in writing, and the answer to Oral Question 9/2019 will the Chair advise -

  1. whether the Greffier refers 100% of all questions submitted by Members to the Bailiff , and if not, why not;
  2. whether the Bailiff personally carries out an assessment on 100% of all written questions submitted by Members, to form an opinion on whether they contravene Standing Orders, and if not, why not;
  3. if the Bailiff does not personally assess all written questions for compliance with Standing Orders, who undertakes such assessment and where is the delegation of this responsibility recorded; and
  4. whether, based on the answers to the above questions, she considers it necessary or not to amend Standing Orders or working practices, so that they are consistent with each other?

Answer

The majority of written (and oral) questions do not engage Standing Order 10 (Contents of question) or can be easily amended to bring them into compliance with that Standing Order. It is a longstanding convention that most questions are approved for publication on the Order Paper by the Greffier, with only certain questions being referred to the Bailiff . These include any question which the Greffier thinks might contravene Standing Orders, questions to the Attorney General, and all urgent oral questions. This is a pragmatic use of time, especially given the tight timescale for the tabling and answering of questions.

Any Member may challenge the orderliness of a written or oral question, in which case the matter is referred to the Bailiff , who makes a ruling.

In relation to the specific questions posed by Deputy Wickenden the answers are:

  1. no, for the reasons set out above,
  2. no, for the reasons set out above,
  3. the Greffier. The delegation of responsibilities in this area is a matter decided between the Bailiff and the Greffier and it is a long-standing practice which is not formally recorded.
  4. Although there is a slight divergence between the system for approving questions set out in Standing Orders and what happens in practice, the Committee has received no feedback to suggest that this inconsistency causes any problems in practice. It will be up to the new Privileges and Procedures Committee to decide whether to bring forward a change in Standing Orders in the new Assembly.