Deputy Speaker, may I address you on the point of order or the point made by the Chief Whip of the Majority Party? I would like to just bring to your attention that we are dealing obviously, as we all understand, with a very serious matter. On the one hand, we have the ruling that you have made, in terms of the order of the House, but we also have the provisions of the Constitution, in terms of freedom of speech, and we need to balance those.
The way I understand it - and it is important for me and, I think, for all members in this House also to understand - is that we have always had a ruling from the Chair, since the beginning of 1994, that if a member refers to another member in terms of what you said, then it may be unparliamentary.
The distinction has been that a member was allowed to refer, for example, to another political party. It was in order for the ruling party or for an opposition party to refer to another party's policies and to say that a specific policy is bad. That should be separate, and understood to be separate, from when a member specifically refers to a specific hon member and reflects on the integrity of that member.
All I am asking is this, that you make 120% sure that the statement was made in terms of a direct reflection on the person of the President or on the person of a specific member. If it is not the case, if it is a general reflection on a policy by a party, be it from this side on a policy from that side, then I would ask us to reconsider in terms of the provisions of the Constitution that allow freedom of speech. That is all I am asking. Thank you.