The Hon. Ravi Karunanayake
Ravi Karunanayake raised a procedural objection regarding Questions under Standing Order 27(2), stating that he attended Parliament because he had been informed in writing that answers would be provided that day. He argued that when a Minister seeks time to answer, the Member who asked the question should be able to be present when the answer is given and verify the Minister’s presence. He objected to the late notice that answers would not be provided, while acknowledging that Ministers may legitimately seek more time.
Verbatim record (translated)
Machine-translated from Sinhala / Tamil / English¶ 01 Yes. You had informed in writing that answers would be given today; I came here for that. Since no answer was given, I am raising this. Normally, Mr. Speaker follows the Standing Orders.
¶ 02 Under SO 27(2), when a Question is asked, an answer should be given. If the relevant Minister seeks time, the Member who asked should be allowed to be present on the day the answer is given, and ascertain whether the Minister is present. What happened today? It was said answers would be given. I said I have a question. But because answers were promised, I came here. Then within eight hours it is said the answers will not be given. Seeking time to answer a SO 27(2) Question is not the issue. Ministers have duties.
Provenance
- Source
- Hansard, Friday, 6 June 2025 ·No. 1750753418078417 ·English daily/uncorrected Hansard
- Page · column
- not yet extracted — page/column anchors are not in the current dataset; the source PDF is the citable location.
- Permalink
/lk/speeches/28393
Cite as: The Hon. Ravi Karunanayake. 10th Parliament, Parliament of Sri Lanka. Hansard, 6 June 2025. No. 1750753418078417. Politick, https://staging.politick.io/lk/speeches/28393