Questions Not Answered

Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30541, 9 September 1964, Page 3

Questions Not Answered

(Parliamentary Reporter) WELLINGTON, September 8.

An objection to the refusal of the Post-master-General (Mr Scott) to give written answers to the written questions of several members on telephone charges was made in Parliament today by Mr N. E. Kirk (Opp., Lyttelton).

Mr Kirk had asked the total amount of the increase to private subscribers on the Lyttelton exchange, and to Lyttelton business subscribers, the gross annual value of the increase in telephone rentals to be paid in Lyttelton, and the total annual value of the increases, added to,that of 1961. Mr Scott’s reply was that the information was in the nature of a return, and that the collection of such information involved much extra work, which he felt was not justified.

A total of 14 similar questions by Opposition members relating to different areas was answered by Mr Scott in similar fashion. Five of these questions, relating to Lyttelton, Tai Tapu, Rangiora, Belfast and Kaiapoi, were asked by Mr Kirk. “If we are getting to the position where a member of Parliament is being denied the right to obtain information from a department, who else is likely to be able to get it?” Mr Douglas asked. Mr Douglas submitted that because a department did not consider the matter important enough was no reason for withholding information. The department was not in a position to determine whether or not it was important. Dr. A. M. Finlay (Opp., Waitakere) said a Minister had the right to withhold an answer only if the public interest was imperilled. The only reason which had been given was that it was inconvenient.

The Speaker said he would take time to consider his answer. He thought it would take a day or two, but he would endeavour to produce

an answer “which will satisfy the legal acumen of members of the House.” Mr Kirk said that the written answer he had received had also differed from the answer printed in the order paper, in that Mr Scott had apparently added the words “which I feel is not justified” to the order paper version. He asked the Speaker (Sir Ronald Algie) to rule that, if a question fulfilled the conditions laid down, it must be answered.

The Minister of Labour (Mr Shand) submitted that if a Minister decided the answering of a question would put the country to needless expense in the matter of time worked by departmental members, then he should have the discretion to refrain from answering. Unless questions were confined to matters of importance, he thought, the time of the House was being wasted. Mr N. V. Douglas (Opp., Auckland Central) said the rights of members were being seriously tampered with. There was no requirement, when a member asked a question, that he should reveal his reasons for so doing.