Senator CORMANN (Western Australia—Minister for Finance) (14:31): Firstly, I completely reject the premise of the question, which suggests that we have somehow watered down consumer protections— Senator Lines: You have! Senator O'Neill: You have! Senator CORMANN: We have not watered down consumer protections; we have cut unnecessary and costly red tape which was pushing up the cost of advice without actually delivering consumer protection benefits. We have also kept the consumer protections which matter— Senator WONG: Is a sales bonus conflicted remuneration? Senator CORMANN: If the Leader of the Opposition stops interjecting, I can answer Senator Dastyari's question. Senator Wong: I was very quiet until this drivel. Senator CORMANN: We have also kept the consumer protections that matter, including the ban on conflicted remuneration. People can call it whatever they want— Senator Wong: Is a sales bonus conflicted remuneration? The PRESIDENT: Pause the clock. Order, Senator Wong. Senator Dastyari, a point of order? Senator Dastyari: I specifically asked the minister the question: is a sales bonus conflicted remuneration? The PRESIDENT: On the point of order, Senator Dastyari, you also asked, 'Is the minister aware'. And, at the commencement of the minister's answer, he indicated that he rejected the premise of the question. Minister, you have the call; you have 15 seconds. Senator CORMANN: People can call it whatever they like. If it is conflicted remuneration, it is banned and it remains banned. I refer you to ABC Fact Check, which describes these sorts of accusations as 'inaccurate scaremongering'. Don't take my word for it; take ABC Fact Check's. (Time expired) Senator Wong: Is a sales bonus conflicted remuneration? The PRESIDENT: Order on my left. Government senators interjecting— The PRESIDENT: And my right. Senator Dastyari is waiting to ask his final supplementary question. Senator Dastyari.