Question Time

[Barnes]

Members may pose questions to ministers in this thread under the relevant Standing Orders:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Time for questions without notice.  Are there any questions?

[PJ]

What is this government's position on collective bargaining rights and union shops?

[Barnes]

Order! I would like to ask the Member to address his question to a specific minister to help avoid any confusion.

[PJ]

Order! I would like to ask the Member to address his question to a specific minister to help avoid any confusion.

My apologies, the question is directed toward the Minister of Social Protection.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

To ask the Minister for Infrastructure whether he or the 'Chancellor' is responsible for industrial policy, and whether the lack of clarity on this point demonstrates that this government is interested in only its own bourgeois supporters.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

To ask the Prime Minister whether the surfeit of 'Senior Advisors' on the ministerial payroll is a good use of taxpayers money or an example of craven nepotism.

[Oakvale]

Mr. Speaker,

While the honorable member's question was directed to the Minister for Social Protection, labor relations as distinct from worker protection and so on comes under the purview of the Justice Department so if I may I will answer the member's question.

This government is a friend of working South Americans and will endeavour to protect the rights of workers. We have no objection to unionisation in principle, provided it does not cripple business, endanger the security of the nation, or act as a strangehold on innovation and growth.

What this government, since we are not a Socialist government, will not do is throw ourselves at the mercy of the capricious demands of sectional factions and self-interested big labor. The government does not accept the false dichotomy that pits business against workers.

Because we place the highest priority on the liberal principle of fairness and opportunity for all, the government opposes union shops.

[Potus]

To ask the Prime Minister whether the surfeit of 'Senior Advisors' on the ministerial payroll is a good use of taxpayers money or an example of craven nepotism.

Mr. Speaker,

I hope the irony of the right honorable member's charges is not lost on all those in attendance here. Socialism is synonymous with governmental bloat. How tedious, asinine, and possibly deceptive of the Socialists in this body to turn a blind eye to our neighbors to the north. Each day, millions of people are forced by circumstance to awake or be born into the socialist nightmare that is Atlasia. Their rise to power in the north was paved with tawdry political parlor tricks such as frivolous charges of nepotism. Be mindful of the political ploys and deceptions of the Socialists and their Red allies. This Government keep those forces at bay and we ask the people of South America to join us putting the work of the people firmly ahead of politics.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Answer the question!

[Türkisblau]

To ask the Prime Minister if his rhetoric is appropriate for someone leading a coalition including a supposedly left-wing party - do we need a new Red Scare, Mr. PM?

[Oakvale]

To ask the Prime Minister whether the surfeit of 'Senior Advisors' on the ministerial payroll is a good use of taxpayers money or an example of craven nepotism.

Mr. Speaker,

I hope the irony of the right honorable member's charges is not lost on all those in attendance here. Socialism is synonymous with governmental bloat. How tedious, asinine, and possibly deceptive of the Socialists in this body to turn a blind eye to our neighbors to the north. Each day, millions of people are forced by circumstance to awake or be born into the socialist nightmare that is Atlasia. Their rise to power in the north was paved with tawdry political parlor tricks such as frivolous charges of nepotism. Be mindful of the political ploys and deceptions of the Socialists and their Red allies. This Government keep those forces at bay and we ask the people of South America to join us putting the work of the people firmly ahead of politics.

Hear hear!

[Potus]

Answer the question!

Mr. Speaker,

It is clear to you and to the people that elected this Government with an overwhelming mandate that the Socialist member's concerns are unfounded. This ploy, which is nothing more than the tricks and distractions against which I previously warned, is an effort by the radicals in Parliament to minimize the influence of the Social Liberals and divide our Government. The advisor positions exist to guarantee the adequate representation of both parties in Government in regards to policy produced.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Snouts in the trough!

[Potus]

To ask the Prime Minister if his rhetoric is appropriate for someone leading a coalition including a supposedly left-wing party - do we need a new Red Scare, Mr. PM?

Mr. Speaker,

The Social Liberals are upstanding, patriotic, freedom-loving South Americans. I assure the right honorable gentlemen that the Social Liberal would reject any inclination toward the radical revolutionaries that inhabit the far-left of South American politics. There is no Red Scare or hysteria, there is only the truth. The truth is clear: Atlasians are being forced to endure a long, socialist nightmare which was perpetrated on them by the gentleman's ideological and tactical allies. The people, through their elected Government, will keep that nightmare from coming here, to our great land.

[PJ]

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if the Prime Minister is putting words in the mouths of the Social Liberals, or if the Social Liberals agree with the Prime Minister that the Socialists are "radical revolutionaries" using "ploys and deceptions" in exposing the nepotism and wastes of taxpayer money in this Government.

[Barnes]

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if the Prime Minister is putting words in the mouths of the Social Liberals, or if the Social Liberals agree with the Prime Minister that the Socialists are "radical revolutionaries" using "ploys and deceptions" in exposing the nepotism and wastes of taxpayer money in this Government.

Order! I must rule this question out of order.  The Deputy Prime Minister's portfolio does not cover the the affairs of the Social Liberals, and certainly not of his opinion of the Conservative Party's opinion of the Socialist Party!

I invite the Honorable Member to rephrase his question to target the Deputy Prime Minister's portfolio responsibilities in the government.

[Murica!]

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if the Prime Minister is putting words in the mouths of the Social Liberals, or if the Social Liberals agree with the Prime Minister that the Socialists are "radical revolutionaries" using "ploys and deceptions" in exposing the nepotism and wastes of taxpayer money in this Government.

Order! I must rule this question out of order.  The Deputy Prime Minister's portfolio does not cover the the affairs of the Social Liberals, and certainly not of his opinion of the Conservative Party's opinion of the Socialist Party!

I invite the Honorable Member to rephrase his question to target the Deputy Prime Minister's portfolio responsibilities in the government.

Are you not a member of the Social Liberals? Answer the question of comrade PJ!

[Barnes]

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if the Prime Minister is putting words in the mouths of the Social Liberals, or if the Social Liberals agree with the Prime Minister that the Socialists are "radical revolutionaries" using "ploys and deceptions" in exposing the nepotism and wastes of taxpayer money in this Government.

Order! I must rule this question out of order.  The Deputy Prime Minister's portfolio does not cover the the affairs of the Social Liberals, and certainly not of his opinion of the Conservative Party's opinion of the Socialist Party!

I invite the Honorable Member to rephrase his question to target the Deputy Prime Minister's portfolio responsibilities in the government.

Are you not a member of the Social Liberals? Answer the question of comrade PJ!

Order! The Member will respect the ruling of the chair as well as desist in a belligerent attempt to involve party politics in points of order.

[PJ]

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if the Prime Minister is putting words in the mouths of the Social Liberals, or if the Social Liberals agree with the Prime Minister that the Socialists are "radical revolutionaries" using "ploys and deceptions" in exposing the nepotism and wastes of taxpayer money in this Government.

Order! I must rule this question out of order.  The Deputy Prime Minister's portfolio does not cover the the affairs of the Social Liberals, and certainly not of his opinion of the Conservative Party's opinion of the Socialist Party!

I invite the Honorable Member to rephrase his question to target the Deputy Prime Minister's portfolio responsibilities in the government.

The statement in question was made by the Prime Minister of a Government of which the Honorable Deputy Prime Minister is a member, so to ask if he agrees with the statement is certainly covered under his portfolio. Additionally, the Deputy Prime Minister is the highest ranking Social Liberal in government and as such is representative of the junior coalition partner. Nevertheless, the question has been rephrased:

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he agrees with the Prime Minister that the Socialists are "radical revolutionaries" using "ploys and deceptions" in exposing the nepotism and wastes of taxpayer money in this Government.

[Barnes]

I thank the Member for his rephrasing of the question. 

Question Time is meant for Members to question Ministers about their conduct with regards to their portfolio and administrative duties, and not the functioning of a political party of which a Minister is a member.  Questions can very easily be rephrased to ensure that they follow those guidelines, as the Honorable Member has shown. 

[Simfan34]

To ask the Minister for Infrastructure whether he or the 'Chancellor' is responsible for industrial policy, and whether the lack of clarity on this point demonstrates that this government is interested in only its own bourgeois supporters.

Mr Speaker,

Despite my right honourable friend's hysterical venting, I can say with confidence that industry and commerce are not under my remit, that we do not seek a planned economy or industrial policy, and that the Chancellor would be responsible for such things if we were.

[TNF]

I would like to ask the Prime Minister why he is a toady of the American imperialists. Explain yourself, bourgeois swine!

[Barnes]

Order! I would like to ask the Honorable Member to withdraw that final word that he used. That is most certainly an example of unparliamentary language, and cannot be tolerated within the House.

The Member's question itself is in order.

[Talleyrand]

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he agrees with the Prime Minister that the Socialists are "radical revolutionaries" using "ploys and deceptions" in exposing the nepotism and wastes of taxpayer money in this Government.

Mr. Speaker,

I believe that while the Prime Minister's views have clearly been influenced by the disaster that has been our northern neighbor in recent years, he was simply pointing out that the criticism of the adviser positions by members of the Socialist Party is quite clearly just political in nature. There are many experienced former government officials in the Right Honorable Member's party who understand that it is fundamentally impossible to orchestrate ministries of massive size without having an assistant minister in these departments. Otherwise, the duty we owe to the South American people cannot be fulfilled to the best of our ability. Atlasian-style fragmentation to create multiple additional ministries would be far more inefficient and wasteful than the rational system that the government has put in place.

[Potus]

I would like to ask the Prime Minister why he is a toady of the American imperialists. Explain yourself, bourgeois swine!

Mr. Speaker,

I again draw the chamber's attention to the irony of this bogus claim. The member standing before you is a communist, attempting to label the people's Government as "imperialist" and tether it to the "Americans."

This communist before us sympathizes with one of history's most evil empires. The Soviet Union, responsible for tens of millions of dead innocents, launched invasion after invasion in the name of the same revolution this man says he'd like to see brought to South America.

Beyond the crimes of the past, these vanguards of the revolution are responsible for great tragedies of the present. Each day, millions upon millions of Atlasians are forced to endure oppression where they know nothing of freedom. This is the Red crime against the present.

I reject out of hand the premise of the Member's question.