Hon members, before I adjourn the House, there is a ruling that I need to make.
On Thursday, 22 August 2013, following my decision to ring the bells for five minutes after my attention was drawn to the absence of the prescribed quorum required for the decision of a question on the Second Reading debate of the Criminal Law (Forensic Procedures) Amendment Bill, two points of order were raised requesting a ruling in respect of certain remarks.
I undertook to study the Hansard and return to the House with a ruling. Having had an opportunity to study the unrevised Hansard, I wish to rule as follows.
In the first instance, the hon S V Kalyan rose on a point of order asking for clarity on the remarks made by hon the Deputy Minister of Home Affairs, I quote: "You are not the first person to be duped by the DA."
Seeking clarity on a remark is not a point of order. To constitute a point of order, the matter must relate to the Rules of Parliament or parliamentary practice. A point of order may be raised when a member is of the opinion that a Rule or an accepted parliamentary practice is being transgressed.
In addition, the hon Deputy Minister's remark was not out of order as it clearly reflected on a political party, and not on the character of a particular member of this House. A reflection on a political party is not out of order as long as the member in question did not cast aspersions on the character of members of this House. This approach is consistent with previous rulings by the presiding officers.