Senator BRANDIS (Queensland—Attorney-General, Vice-President of the Executive Council and Leader of the Government in the Senate) (14:42): The Fair Work Commission made it perfectly clear that its decision only applies to the retail and hospitality industries. So far as I am aware, there are no proceedings currently before the Fair Work Commission of the kind that you have suggested. I will tell you what the Fair Work Commission had to say when it gave its award in relation to hospitality and retail workers: Given the distinguishing characteristics of the hospitality and retail sectors— The PRESIDENT: Order! Pause the clock. Senator Cameron, a point of order. Senator Cameron: Yes, again on relevance. The question was in response to the Australian Retailers Association publicly pushing for a below-inflation minimum wage rise. I have simply asked: does the Prime Minister also support a pay cut in real terms for those on the minimum wage? The minister has not gone to that question. The PRESIDENT: I have to interpret it by inference there that the minister is supposed to be rejecting the fact that the Fair Work Commission will be looking at this issue. So, by definition, the minister is rejecting the question that you have asked in relation to the Prime Minister's support for that. That is the only way I can interpret that. Senator BRANDIS: Let me start again. The commission said: Given the distinguishing characteristics of the Hospitality and Retail sectors, the decisions we have made in respect of the Hospitality and Retail Awards provide no warrant for the variation of penalty rates in other modern awards. What you are trying to do, Senator Cameron, is create fear and uncertainty where there is none. (Time expired) The PRESIDENT: Senator Cameron, a final supplementary question.