Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Hansard source

In making a submission on Senator Wong's point of order, which you're going to consider, I put two points to you. The first relates specifically to this question being asked by Senator Hume, and I think you will find when you review it that both the primary question and the first supplementary question went to the accuracy of budget forecasts. The primary question did not make any comment or seek any response in relation to the policy propositions that the $2 billion was allocated for. It was about the accuracy of budget forecasting, as was the first supplementary, and so I think you will find that they clearly are related.

The second point I would make, though, is that in Senator Wong speaking about tangential relationships, if the word 'budget' is there is that sufficient for further supplementaries? I would note that, in many answers given, ministers take one word out of a question, one particular title out of a question, and use that as their defence for direct relevance, even if it is not clearly responding to the question that has been asked. So it is quite a stretch, in relation to the argument being offered by Senator Wong in this regard. If we want to have a tighter ruling, in relation to questions, the opposition would certainly welcome a tighter ruling in relation to direct relevance of answers.