Madam Deputy Speaker, I rise on two points of order. Firstly, if I understood you correctly, a point of order was raised by the DA colleague and you ruled that you will respond to that point of order once properly advised. I would like to point out that, in terms of the Rules, you bear the responsibility of ruling on any point of order which affects the conduct of the debate, as this one does. If this debate is to continue, I submit to you that it is incumbent upon you to rule whether or not it is legitimate for the Deputy Minister not to respond on the basis of the matter being sub judice. So we cannot delay the debate.
The second point of order, Madam Speaker, is that you should not be able to entertain the exception of a sub judice situation without you and the House having been provided with specific information, whether the case is pending or not; it is an affirmative defence. The burden is on the Deputy Minister to tell us that it is pending. It is not sufficient to stop a parliamentary debate on the mere possibility that the person might have announced that civil action might be brought at a future time. Thank you. [Applause.]