Wong QON in the 45th Parliament?
#1

With the opening of the 45th Parliament and with Penny Wong remaining as leader of the opposition in the Senate, the question going out to punters is - will PW break her own infamous record for asking the most irrelevant (see following Aunty Pru reference)...

(04-25-2016, 06:49 PM)Peetwo Wrote:  
(01-09-2016, 04:34 PM)Peetwo Wrote:   Peetwo

WONG QON -
How many Wongs make a wight? Dodgy

..Well inside the labyrinth that is the APH website, there is a link inside the 'Work of the Senate' webpage called -


Quote:Questions on notice

Search the database for questions placed on notice and answers provided by ministers.
  
And when you go to this link - Questions on Notice Summary 44th Parliament - & click on the PDF link you get a summary of QON for this Parliament up until the end of the 2014-15 financial year.

[Image: Wong-QON1.jpg]
From that it can be seen that Senator Wong has indeed over 1500 QON on record - Senator Wong (ALP) 1771 - with the next highest on record being from Senator Lambie with 121.

Presumably some of this high number can be explained by the fact that Wong is the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate and therefore largely represents the interests of the Opposition. However if you compare that to the previous parliament where Senator Abetz was in the same position, he asked a total of 737 QON for the whole of the 43rd Parliament.

I guess the big number of QON from Wong could be accepted (i.e. in the public interest) if they were mostly questions that challenged the veracity & legitimacy of the Coalition Government - but are they? Another point/question that I'd like to make is that from past experience with QON in Senate Estimates, is the Parliamentary QON system an effective and legitimate way of holding the government to account; or is it just more political posturing & point scoring??

..Wong 269 unanswered QON: Avoiding the 80 odd highly repetitive QON addressed to the Treasurer on the 16 December 2015, let us go to the QON asked of PM Turnbull on the same date:



Quote:Question on notice no. 2848


Senator the Hon. Penny Wong

Minister representing the Prime Minister


Notice given 16 December 2015


Senator the Hon. Penny Wong: asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister on 16 December 2015:

(1) In regard to places allocated to the National Party under the Coalition Agreement signed by the Prime Minister, what quota is allocated in:
(a) the Cabinet; and
(b) the Ministry.
(2) Does the Prime Minister, or the Leader of the National Party, determine which members of the National Party fill the quotas.
(3) Will the Prime Minister provide a copy of the Coalition Agreement.

&..

Question on notice no. 2849


Senator the Hon. Penny Wong

Minister representing the Prime Minister


Notice given 16 December 2015


Senator the Hon. Penny Wong: asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister on 16 December 2015:

Has the Prime Minister considered offering diplomatic posts to any other ex-ministers he removed from the ministry to prevent them staying in the Parliament for the sole purpose of 'getting even'.
 
Other examples from the next 2 QON 'cluster' dates  Dodgy



Quote:Senator the Hon. Penny Wong: asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister on 9 December 2015:

With reference to the Griswold Center for Economic Studies paper by Dr Martin Parkinson published in September 2015 titled 'The Lucky Country: Has it Run out of Luck?', does the Prime Minister agree with the incoming Secretary of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet that 'Australia is not well positioned for either the opportunities or challenges ahead'.





Senator the Hon. Penny Wong: asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister on 9 December 2015:

Did the Prime Minister or his department assist the former Prime Minister, Mr Tony Abbott, with his request to be received by The Queen in London in October 2015; if so, what assistance was provided.





Senator the Hon. Penny Wong: asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister on 4 December 2015:


(1) When and how did the Prime Minister become aware that the Deputy Prime Minister was having discussions with the Member for Groom, Mr Ian Macfarlane, about defecting from the Liberal Party room to the National Party room.
(2) Was the Prime Minister surprised to learn these discussions began just days after the Prime Minister chose not to appoint Mr Macfarlane to his ministry.
UFB- Angry  Verdict: not in the public & citizens of SA interest   Dodgy

WONG QON III - As we are approaching the end of the 44th Parliament (and as a follow up to the Wong QON post above), I decided to do a bit more of a review in light of the Senator Carr/Wong shambolic episode in Parliament - see: Estimates, Senator Carr motion & more Wong QON.

In summary not much has changed, Senator Wong still by far and away leads the pack from Jackie Lambie who has only added some 15 QON since the last official count (i.e. July 2015).

Not sure of Senator Wong's total added since the 1771 for last financial year but I would not be surprised if she comes close to breaking the all time record, whatever that is?? 

In fact if I was Bill Short-one I would have some serious concerns for Senator Wong's mental well being because it would appear that the Senator has a major obsession with PM Malcolm Turnbull and his government.

To help explain the following is a list of 40 written questions that Senator Wong put on notice last week starting the 18 April 2016:
Quote:3254 (44th) 3255 (44th) 3256 (44th) 3257 (44th) 3258 (44th) 3259 (44th) 3260 (44th) 3261 (44th) 3262 (44th) 3263 (44th) 3264 (44th) 3265 (44th) 3266 (44th) 3267 (44th) 3268 (44th) 3269 (44th) 3270 (44th) 3271 (44th)3272 (44th) 3273 (44th) 3274 (44th) 3275 (44th) 3276 (44th) 3277 (44th) 278 (44th) 3279 (44th) 3280 (44th) 3281 (44th) 3282 (44th) 3283 (44th) 3284 (44th) 3285 (44th) 3286 (44th) 3287 (44th) 3288 (44th) 3289 (44th) 3290 (44th) 3291 (44th) 3292 (44th) 3293 (44th) 3294 (44th) 

{P2 comment - I pity the poor Senate Clerks that have to collate all these QON, the many Senate Secretariat staff do a fantastic job in conditions that must truly try their patience at times. Feel free to click on any of the QON links above to sample just how many of these written questions are a total WOFTAM}

Okay so that was just one week; & so far for the month of April Senator Wong has placed on notice 224 written questions - UFB!  Rolleyes

As a comparison Senator Lambie has 1 QON, Senator Xenophon 7 & the Greens leader Senator Di Natale 1 for the month of April. 

...totally politically motivated QON (2300 for 44th parliament) in the 45th parliament???

Well in case punters are trying to work out the odds, the following is an insight to the depth of Senator Wong's maniacal obsession with asking totally irrelevant QON . In the first 3 days of the 45th parliament, one of which was taken up with the opening of parliament, P(SO)W  has already asked 51 QON - UDB... Dodgy : http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Busi...uments/qon

Here is one example of the irrelevancy of these Wong QON. This was put to the office of our very own Dazzling Dazza... Rolleyes

Quote:Question on notice no. 75

Senator the Hon. Penny Wong

Minister representing the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport

Notice given 31 August 2016
This question was asked of multiple Ministries ( Question Nos.74 to 75)


Senator the Hon. Penny Wong: asked the Minister representing the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport on 31 August 2016:

Is the Minister for Regional Development or the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport the senior minister in the Regional Development and Infrastructure portfolio.
 
FDS and we pay these total WOFTAM polly-waffles for this sort of crap, no wonder our country is in such a f#*king mess... Angry


MTF...P2 Cool
Reply
#2

Wong QON rap & statistics for 44th Parliament 

The final figures are out for Senate Chamber QON for the 44th Parliament:

Quote:Questions on Notice Summary 44th Parliament

This summary includes information for the 44th Parliament from 12 November 2013, when notice of the first question was given, till prorogation of the Parliament on 9 May 2016.

First session of the 44th Parliament
Second session of the 44th Parliament

© Commonwealth of Australia 2016
View the report as a single document - (PDF 804KB)

As can be seen from the following summary, Senator Wong by far and away leads the pack with a staggering 78 % of the total QON asked:
[Image: WONG-QON-2.jpg]
For the working 5 days of the week the 2259 WONG QON in the life of the last parliament equates to an average of 3.4 QON per day. So far in the 45th Parliament PW is on track to surpass her own record (& from what I can make out the Parliament's historical record), with 51 totally irrelevant & politicised QON for the first 2 working weeks of the 45th Parliament.
Ironically for PW her record can only be guaranteed to be surpassed if she not only keeps up the present rate of WOFTAM QON but also if the life of the Parliament goes full term. Anything less than full term will seriously jeopardise her tilt at breaking her own record... Big Grin
MTF...P2 Tongue
Reply
#3


Pickering & the Wong QON update
Confused

This AM P7 posted this in QOTM, i.e. Pickering exercising his right to speak his mind... Big Grin

Quote:
(11-21-2016, 06:37 AM)P7_TOM Wrote:  Just for you - P2 - Big smile - HERE -!


THERE’S A FINGER IN LABOR’S DYKE
... so look out for more than a squirt of anti-US guff
[Image: 3_image.jpg?]Larry Pickering
Four-time Walkley Award winning political commentator and Churchill Fellow, has returned to the fray over concern that the integrity of news dissemination is continually being threatened by a partisan media.
BLOG / FACEBOOK


[Image: wong%20lead.jpg]

Wed 16 Nov 2016 09:06:52 am/1560 COMMENTS

Penelope Ying-Yen Wong, Labor’s new shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs, after Tanya Plibersek disclosed that she thought Africa was a country, has returned Labor to the US-hating force of the cold war period. As if Turnbull and Shorten haven’t already done enough damage to the alliance. So naturally, Fairfax has given the hapless Penny a voice.

Thank God no-one reads the SMH and thank God Penny Wong isn’t in government.

President-elect Trump will be supported by a 4,000 strong Administration that will act to allay poor Penny’s fears. With her typical woolly thinking she is suggesting Australia find comfort in the arms of the South East Asian community, you know those nations to our north who are among the most corrupt and unreliable in the world.

It should be explained to Penny that promises on the hustings don’t always translate to actions in government. Lies are part of campaigning, remember, much like Labor’s Mediscare. 

[Image: 34e61b387cb0fe031b7dfcff6d24230d66f20d0b.jpg]

Trump will likely rejig the TPP but will not desert US allies. The TPP is better dumped anyway as he promised, as it entrenches $5 a-week-workers in poorer countries as a natural resource producing cheaper products. Only nations with higher labour rates benefit from tariff-free, free trade agreements. Tariffs produce a level playing field to trade on and there is a reason imported goods are so cheap and inflation so low...someone else has suffered.

[Image: 553a4b5e32a4885f4e0fce3288382ba6f4e6d9be.jpg]

Penny Wong would do better to concentrate on her lucrative Senate Committees and her Q&A stints, or catty sniping at Senator Brandis, than to start pontificating on international affairs about which she knows absolutely zilch.

What ridiculous broad brush strokes she paints and how damaging when she thinks aloud about her shadow portfolio when it includes trade? Just as well Labor is seen as an international joke whenever it steps outside its union controlled base.

Penny Wong’s elevation to shadow DFAT and Leader of the Opposition in the Senate shows the shallowness of Labor’s talent pool and the judgment of Bill Shorten who has a limited life as Opposition leader. The Left’s Plibersek is not happy at being dumped to Women’s Affairs and Albo bides his time as the ALP’s preferred leader.

Australia needs its US alliance now more than ever as China is determined to expand its geographic influence in the area as it winds back on development. The Pacific rim will always hold critical US interest, and that includes us Aussies. 

[Image: 991d64754d57569850561679c1243d6c7951b076.jpg]
Penny Wong is just another in a long line of those still in denial over a Trump win. Get over it, get used to it, get a pretty dress on... or get stuffed and shut the fuck up!
[Excuse the language but it’s hard to stay calm when writing about some people.]
Rolleyes Shy Tongue  Hmm...do I feel another 18C HRC turd (complaint) coming down the pollywaffle sewer... Huh

On that note we must be seriously in need of an AP TAB Wong QON update on the odds for PW beating her outstanding 45th ParlQON record... Wink

Quote:Link - HERE - and go to 'Asked by Senator' drop down box, input PW then Hit search.   

However the news is not good for those punters who have money on PW breaking that record. Apparently the last entry of QON from PW was made on the 22nd of September and the count has since stagnated at 76 QON.

Now remember in order for PW to break her record she has to average at least 3.4 QON a day for the 'full term' life of the 45th Parliament, but at this current rate she is only averaging < 1 QON a day and it is still anything but certain that the Parliament will go full term... Confused   

Verdict: Agree with Pickering's sentiments PW needs to pull her finger out or some of our more serious AP punters stand to lose a shit load of money... Big Grin

While on the Wong QON betting stakes there are some secondary bets on whether PW will ever actually ask 1, 2, 3 or more relevant (to keeping the Government honest) and/or non-partisan QON. After all she is supposed to be a Senator and the State then country come before Party politics.

So as a sampling here is the front page and last 10 of PW's QON:
Quote:148 (45th)

Wong, Penny
Prime Minister
Question
22/09/2016
Yes

152 (45th)
Wong, Penny
Prime Minister
Question
22/09/2016
Yes

153 (45th)
Wong, Penny
Foreign Affairs
Question
22/09/2016
Yes

P2 - Regurgitation of above

155 (45th)
Wong, Penny
Communications
Question
22/09/2016
Yes

115 (45th)
Wong, Penny
Prime Minister
Question
20/09/2016
Yes

117 (45th)
Wong, Penny
Prime Minister
Question
20/09/2016
Yes

119 (45th)
Wong, Penny
Prime Minister
Question
20/09/2016
Yes

123 (45th)
Wong, Penny
Prime Minister
Question
20/09/2016
Yes

124 (45th)
Wong, Penny
Prime Minister
Question
20/09/2016
Yes

126 (45th)
Wong, Penny
Prime Minister
Question
20/09/2016
Yes

 After reading some of these taxpayer funded QON, like:
Quote:Senator the Hon. Penny Wong: asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister on 20 September 2016:

Has the Prime Minister provided his 'express approval' to any Ministers under paragraph 2.4 of the Statement of Ministerial Standards; if so, to which Ministers.



Or;

Senator the Hon. Penny Wong: asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister on 20 September 2016:

Do any ministerial staff maintain direct interests in private or public companies involved in the area of their ministers' portfolio responsibilities; if so, can details be provided.

One gets the impression that PW doesn't actually want an answer - UDB! Dodgy

So do these type of WOFTAM QON ever actually get answered??

Let's have a look at the answered Wong QON from the 45th parliament. Again here is the last 10 Wong QON answered:
Quote:149 (45th), 150 (45th), 151 (45th), 154 (45th), 156 (45th), 157 (45th), 116 (45th), 118 (45th), 120 (45th), 121 (45th).
 
I'll let other punters assess but my take is the AQON in response to the Wong QON, is going through some sort of 'Wong QON filter', which may effect the overall legitimacy of the secondary punts - Hmm..so much for democracy.. Dodgy 

For those anxious punters I will continue to monitor this (if true) disturbing OBS... Undecided


MTF...P2 Tongue
Reply
#4

(11-21-2016, 09:45 AM)Peetwo Wrote:  
Pickering & the Wong QON update
Confused

This AM P7 posted this in QOTM, i.e. Pickering exercising his right to speak his mind... Big Grin

Quote:
(11-21-2016, 06:37 AM)P7_TOM Wrote:  Just for you - P2 - Big smile - HERE -!


THERE’S A FINGER IN LABOR’S DYKE
... so look out for more than a squirt of anti-US guff
[Image: 3_image.jpg?]Larry Pickering
Four-time Walkley Award winning political commentator and Churchill Fellow, has returned to the fray over concern that the integrity of news dissemination is continually being threatened by a partisan media.
BLOG / FACEBOOK


[Image: wong%20lead.jpg]

Wed 16 Nov 2016 09:06:52 am/1560 COMMENTS

Penelope Ying-Yen Wong, Labor’s new shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs, after Tanya Plibersek disclosed that she thought Africa was a country, has returned Labor to the US-hating force of the cold war period. As if Turnbull and Shorten haven’t already done enough damage to the alliance. So naturally, Fairfax has given the hapless Penny a voice.

Thank God no-one reads the SMH and thank God Penny Wong isn’t in government.

President-elect Trump will be supported by a 4,000 strong Administration that will act to allay poor Penny’s fears. With her typical woolly thinking she is suggesting Australia find comfort in the arms of the South East Asian community, you know those nations to our north who are among the most corrupt and unreliable in the world.

It should be explained to Penny that promises on the hustings don’t always translate to actions in government. Lies are part of campaigning, remember, much like Labor’s Mediscare. 

[Image: 34e61b387cb0fe031b7dfcff6d24230d66f20d0b.jpg]

Trump will likely rejig the TPP but will not desert US allies. The TPP is better dumped anyway as he promised, as it entrenches $5 a-week-workers in poorer countries as a natural resource producing cheaper products. Only nations with higher labour rates benefit from tariff-free, free trade agreements. Tariffs produce a level playing field to trade on and there is a reason imported goods are so cheap and inflation so low...someone else has suffered.

[Image: 553a4b5e32a4885f4e0fce3288382ba6f4e6d9be.jpg]

Penny Wong would do better to concentrate on her lucrative Senate Committees and her Q&A stints, or catty sniping at Senator Brandis, than to start pontificating on international affairs about which she knows absolutely zilch.

What ridiculous broad brush strokes she paints and how damaging when she thinks aloud about her shadow portfolio when it includes trade? Just as well Labor is seen as an international joke whenever it steps outside its union controlled base.

Penny Wong’s elevation to shadow DFAT and Leader of the Opposition in the Senate shows the shallowness of Labor’s talent pool and the judgment of Bill Shorten who has a limited life as Opposition leader. The Left’s Plibersek is not happy at being dumped to Women’s Affairs and Albo bides his time as the ALP’s preferred leader.

Australia needs its US alliance now more than ever as China is determined to expand its geographic influence in the area as it winds back on development. The Pacific rim will always hold critical US interest, and that includes us Aussies. 

[Image: 991d64754d57569850561679c1243d6c7951b076.jpg]
Penny Wong is just another in a long line of those still in denial over a Trump win. Get over it, get used to it, get a pretty dress on... or get stuffed and shut the fuck up!
[Excuse the language but it’s hard to stay calm when writing about some people.]
Rolleyes Shy Tongue  Hmm...do I feel another 18C HRC turd (complaint) coming down the pollywaffle sewer... Huh

On that note we must be seriously in need of an AP TAB Wong QON update on the odds for PW beating her outstanding 45th ParlQON record... Wink

Quote:Link - HERE - and go to 'Asked by Senator' drop down box, input PW then Hit search.   

However the news is not good for those punters who have money on PW breaking that record. Apparently the last entry of QON from PW was made on the 22nd of September and the count has since stagnated at 76 QON.

Now remember in order for PW to break her record she has to average at least 3.4 QON a day for the 'full term' life of the 45th Parliament, but at this current rate she is only averaging < 1 QON a day and it is still anything but certain that the Parliament will go full term... Confused   

Verdict: Agree with Pickering's sentiments PW needs to pull her finger out or some of our more serious AP punters stand to lose a shit load of money... Big Grin

While on the Wong QON betting stakes there are some secondary bets on whether PW will ever actually ask 1, 2, 3 or more relevant (to keeping the Government honest) and/or non-partisan QON. After all she is supposed to be a Senator and the State then country come before Party politics.

So as a sampling here is the front page and last 10 of PW's QON:
Quote:148 (45th)

Wong, Penny
Prime Minister
Question
22/09/2016
Yes

152 (45th)
Wong, Penny
Prime Minister
Question
22/09/2016
Yes

153 (45th)
Wong, Penny
Foreign Affairs
Question
22/09/2016
Yes

P2 - Regurgitation of above

155 (45th)
Wong, Penny
Communications
Question
22/09/2016
Yes

115 (45th)
Wong, Penny
Prime Minister
Question
20/09/2016
Yes

117 (45th)
Wong, Penny
Prime Minister
Question
20/09/2016
Yes

119 (45th)
Wong, Penny
Prime Minister
Question
20/09/2016
Yes

123 (45th)
Wong, Penny
Prime Minister
Question
20/09/2016
Yes

124 (45th)
Wong, Penny
Prime Minister
Question
20/09/2016
Yes

126 (45th)
Wong, Penny
Prime Minister
Question
20/09/2016
Yes

 After reading some of these taxpayer funded QON, like:
Quote:Senator the Hon. Penny Wong: asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister on 20 September 2016:

Has the Prime Minister provided his 'express approval' to any Ministers under paragraph 2.4 of the Statement of Ministerial Standards; if so, to which Ministers.



Or;

Senator the Hon. Penny Wong: asked the Minister representing the Prime Minister on 20 September 2016:

Do any ministerial staff maintain direct interests in private or public companies involved in the area of their ministers' portfolio responsibilities; if so, can details be provided.

One gets the impression that PW doesn't actually want an answer - UDB! Dodgy

So do these type of WOFTAM QON ever actually get answered??

Let's have a look at the answered Wong QON from the 45th parliament. Again here is the last 10 Wong QON answered:
Quote:149 (45th), 150 (45th), 151 (45th), 154 (45th), 156 (45th), 157 (45th), 116 (45th), 118 (45th), 120 (45th), 121 (45th).
 
I'll let other punters assess but my take is the AQON in response to the Wong QON, is going through some sort of 'Wong QON filter', which may effect the overall legitimacy of the secondary punts - Hmm..so much for democracy.. Dodgy 

For those anxious punters I will continue to monitor this (if true) disturbing OBS... Undecided

(11-22-2016, 06:43 AM)kharon Wrote:  Well; I wish whoever has a finger in the dyke would remove it – I’ve got some nervous punters here, counting on the endless flow of hot air. All worried about the Wong record for inconsequential, politically motivated, time wasting QoN not being broken, due to the blockage. The tote is still open for bets on the final number; side bets include the date (day and time) of the record being broken; total of time wasted in parliament; and, just for the more adventurous punter– the most useless, time wasting, self aggrandising question.

This last category is not for the feint hearted, the selection of topic is wide, huge, the odds are short, the risks are many, so, choose wisely. See what happens to all those pink balloons, filled with gas?


Top shot P9 - Big Grin


MTF...P2 Tongue
Reply
#5

What is it with these useless taxpayer funded oxygen thieves? Especially the useless female politician side of things (no, not you Beaker Brandis and Bill Short'one), you know; Beehive Bishop, Hansen-Young, Hansen Senior, Wong, Gillard etc...I would rather castrate myself and live in Antarctica on my own than enter cohabitation  with any one of these creatures.

Just sayin.........
Reply
#6

[Image: wong%20lead.jpg]

WOFTAM Wong update -  Dodgy  

Noticed today that while on hols, Shortone has delegated his job to PW and she consequently wasted no time kicking the crap out of Sussan Ley over yet another bollocks pollywaffle entitlement scandal.

This got me thinking about doing a Wong QON update. I wasn't expecting much because I'd checked the list a couple of days after the last sitting of Parliament. Therefore it was with some surprise that I discovered the list had grown to 124 WOFTAM Wong QON. Maybe PW is back on track to break her own infamous record... Confused

So I reviewed the added pages of QON and I noted that PW must have been bored on the 15th of December because that was when all 48 new QON were submitted, a bit like the Friday arvo CASA SCN fax, to the poor bloody Senate Secretariat... Dodgy

Then I discovered that of the 48 QON, 28 are the same QON asked 28 times of individual ministers:
Quote:Question on notice no. 279

Senator the Hon. Penny Wong

Minister representing the Minister for Foreign Affairs


Notice given 15 December 2016
 

This question was asked of multiple Ministries (Question Nos.276 to 303)  



Senator the Hon. Penny Wong: asked the Minister representing the Minister for Foreign Affairs on 15 December 2016:

Has the Minister's office prepared talking points under the title 'Abbott-Turnbull war'; if so:

(a) when were the talking points first prepared;

(b) on how many occasions have the talking points been updated;

© to whom have the talking points been provided; and

(d) by whom have the talking points been used.

And we pay these pollywaffle scum for this kind of BS, UDB!  Angry

Can somone please drain the Lake Burley Griffin swamp - FDS God help us... Dodgy


MTF...P2  Cool
Reply
#7

Wong QON Update 20/02/17 - Wong wecord on QON/AQON??

Last week in the Parliament PW got up a motion for George Brandis to produce :

Quote:Leader of the Government in the Senate
Quote:That the Senate—
(a) notes the failure of the Leader of the Government in the Senate (Senator Brandis) to:
(i) provide answers to questions on notice nos 67, 69, 70, 126, 127, 129, 138, 152, 158, 163, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 242, 272, 274, 275, 276, 277, 278, 279, 280, 281, 282, 283, 284, 285, 286, 287, 288, 289, 290, 291, 292, 293, 294, 295, 296, 297, 298, 299, 300, 301, 302, 303, 304, 306, 309, 310, 312, 313 and 324 within 30 days of the asking of those questions, and that answers to these questions are still outstanding,
(ii) provide answers to questions on notice from legislation committees following the 2016-17 supplementary Budget estimates hearings by the date set by the committees for the provision of answers, and
(iii) provide a response to the order for the production of documents agreed to by the Senate on 30 November 2016 relating to the Bell Group liquidation;
(b) calls on the Leader of the Government in the Senate to provide the answers to outstanding questions on notice and respond to the order for the production of documents to the Senate by 9.30 am on 16 February 2017;
© requires the Leader of the Government in the Senate to attend the Senate at 9.30 am on 16 February 2017 so that, prior to government business being called on, any senator may ask for an explanation for the failure to provide answers and responses in accordance with the timelines established by the Senate; and
(d) resolves that:
(i) in the event that the Leader of the Government in the Senate provides an explanation, any senator may, at the conclusion of the explanation, move without notice—That the Senate take note of the explanation, or
(ii) in the event that the Leader of the Government in the Senate does not provide an explanation, any senator may, without notice, move a motion with regard to the Leader of the Government in the Senate's failure to provide an explanation, and
(iii) any motion to take note under paragraphs (d) (i) or (ii) have precedence over all other government business until determined.
 
IMO very much pot/kettle/black and another typical Wong WOFTAM taxpayer funded exercise in political posturing and muck-raking... Dodgy

I also seem to recall that PW tried a similar motion/attack in the dying days of the 44th Parliament. Here is a reminder how that turned out:



However this time the motion got up and I was interested in how Brandis would respond  two days later... Huh

Hansard quote 16/02/17:
Quote:Senator BRANDIS  (Queensland—Attorney-General, Vice-President of the Executive Council and Leader of the Government in the Senate) (09:31): In accordance with the resolution of the Senate, I provide information in relation to responses to three categories of questions taken on notice, or, in the third case, documents ordered to be produced. The notice lists in paragraph (a) 57 questions on notice. I can advise the Senate that, of the 57 questions taken on notice by me, either in my own capacity as the Attorney or as minister representing the Prime Minister and the foreign minister, 45 of the questions asked of me in my capacity as the minister representing the Prime Minister have been tabled, three questions asked of me in my capacity as the minister representing the foreign minister have been tabled and nine questions are awaiting a response.

In relation to the answers referred to in paragraph (b), 139 questions were taken on notice by me at the supplementary budget estimates, including the spillover day in December. Two of those questions have been withdrawn. Of the 137 relevant questions, answers to 103 have been tabled; 34 are awaiting response. In relation to the documents referred to in paragraph © of the resolution, all of those documents have been produced.  

I will make a couple of observations about the compliance with these orders. My officers have checked the statistics very carefully. Both I personally and ministers in this government generally have a much better record for timely compliance with the time limit for responding to questions taken on notice than was the case for ministers under the previous Labor government. It is, I think, understood as a matter of common sense that on occasions, particularly with long and complex questions which involve departments assembling a large body of material, not always will the time limits be able to be met. But of course a best endeavours attempt to meet the times limited should be made and it is made.  

The other observation I would make to you, Mr President, is that, in particular in relation to questions taken on notice at estimates hearings, there is an expectation and a custom that those answers should be provided in a sufficiently timely manner in advance of the ensuing estimates hearing, so that senators pursuing matters of interest to them in estimates will have plenty of opportunity to consider those answers before the ensuing estimates hearing. In this case, the vast majority of the questions taken on notice at the supplementary estimates, including the spillover date, have been tabled a fortnight before the next estimates round.

There is absolutely no comparison whatsoever between this government's and my compliance with that obligation and the default of compliance which we well remember during the time of the previous Labor government. Mr President, as you know, during the time of the previous Labor government, I was the shadow Attorney-General, and the Attorney-General's portfolio was represented in this place by Senator Ludwig. It was the most common thing in the world for the answers to questions taken on notice at previous estimates rounds to be tabled in bulk the night before that estimates round or on the morning or not at all. It was the most commonplace thing in the world for that to be done. It was the standard procedure.

I was not the shadow minister for the finance portfolio, but I have taken out the statistics of Senator Wong's compliance with her obligations when she was the finance minister. Since Senator Wong tabled this motion and I anticipate she will be the Labor Party spokesman on the matter, this was Senator Wong's record: of the 975 questions that Senator Wong took on notice in the relevant period, 772, or 79 per cent, were late; 221, or 23 per cent, were late by over two months; 179, or 18 per cent, were actually answered after the ensuing estimates round had begun; and 16, or two per cent, were never answered or were answered after the ensuing estimates round was over.

I anticipate that Senator Wong, having made such a song and dance about this matter with the resolution that she has tabled, is going to say that there has been default of compliance by me, to which the answer is twofold. Firstly, there has been substantial compliance and, secondly, the extent and sufficiency of compliance has been vastly better than was Senator Wong's when she was the respondent to questions asked in estimates rounds.

P2 comment- Shades of the Heff frustrations May 2013:



"...this was Senator Wong's record: of the 975 questions that Senator Wong took on notice in the relevant period, 772, or 79 per cent, were late; 221, or 23 per cent, were late by over two months; 179, or 18 per cent, were actually answered after the ensuing estimates round had begun; and 16, or two per cent, were never answered or were answered after the ensuing estimates round was over..."

Well, well, well, so here we have one of the strongest proponents of the Parliamentary QON system, who currently holds the Australian Parliamentary record for asking the most QON in a single Parliamentary term, yet in Government PW disrespects that same democratic parliamentary system - why am I not surprised... Angry

Finally here is the latest Wong QON update and it looks like I have definitely done my dough on PW breaking her previous record... Undecided  - Currently 130 questions by Wong of a total of 363 QON.

http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Busi...uments/qon (Put Wong in the Senator box and click search)


MTF...P2 Cool
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)