Senator ABETZ (Tasmania—Leader of the Government in the Senate, Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Public Service and Minister for Employment) (14:05): I am delighted to talk about consistency. In the 2013-14 budget of the Labor Party, $902.7 million was taken by an efficiency dividend from most grants to universities. There was the removal of the 10 per cent HECS-HELP discount and the five per cent HELP repayment bonus from 1 January 2014—$276 million. There was the conversion of student start-up scholarships to student loans. The PRESIDENT: Pause the clock. Senator Moore: Mr President, I have a point of order on direct relevance. Senator Carr's question was specifically about the Prime Minister and this government's promises for no cuts to education. That was the question. The PRESIDENT: I remind the minister of the question. He has 29 seconds left to answer the question. Senator ABETZ: Thank you, Mr President, but I am sure you noted that the question was prefaced with the concern for consistency by the honourable senator. That is why I am pointing out to the honourable senator his and the Labor Party's inconsistency— Opposition senators interjecting— The PRESIDENT: Pause the clock. Senator Kim Carr: On a point of order, Mr President: I asked an explicit question about the consistency of the Prime Minister's statements before and after the election. While you are at it, you can tell us how it was that we increased funding for universities by nearly 100 per cent. Government senators interjecting— The PRESIDENT: Order, on my right! Senator Carr, on the first part of your point of order—I take note that the second part was not in order; it was debating and adding new material—I did remind the minister of the question that was asked. I remind the minister again that he has 15 seconds left to answer the question. Senator ABETZ: Seeing that I cannot quote the whole list, it does total $6.655 billion over five Labor budgets. So please do not come in here— The PRESIDENT: Pause the clock. Senator MOORE: Mr President, on a point of order: again it is on direct relevance. We drew the attention of the minister to the question, and he just ignored that direction. Senator ABETZ: So there is no inconsistency with that which the Prime Minister and the Treasurer— (Time expired)