Senator CANAVAN (Queensland—Minister for Resources and Northern Australia) (14:21): I thank Senator Urquhart for her question. Not being the minister directly responsible, I have not myself sought advice, but I do have some information here for you, Senator. We are working in close collaboration with our state governments, who are managing detections and outbreaks of fruit fly. On-the-ground management of native pests is a responsibility for state governments and landholders. You mentioned Tasmania, Senator Urquhart, and the information I have here is that it is providing a $2 million support package for growers, distributors and retailers of fruit. Tasmania and other states with fruit-fly-free areas have a long and successful history of maintaining freedom from fruit flies. They have well-established monitoring systems to allow early detection, significant public awareness campaigns to facilitate the reporting of fruit flies and well-developed response plans to eradicate fruit flies quickly. State governments managing outbreaks have implemented measures to control the movement of fruit fly host produce from affected areas and are working— The PRESIDENT: Order! Senator Canavan, please resume your seat. Senator Urquhart on point of order. Senator Urquhart: A point of order, Mr President. My question was: what advice has the minister sought about the consequences? I know the stuff he is talking about. I've heard from the Tasmanian government about their package. I've heard about the fruit fly traps. My question was: what advice has the minister sought about the consequences of the Tasmanian Liberal government cutting $1 million from Tasmania's biosecurity budget and people still arriving in the ports in Tasmania from mainland Australia without biosecurity checks? What's the advice that the minister has received in relation to those issues? The PRESIDENT: Senator Urquhart, points of order are not a chance to re-state the question. Ministers are allowed to address part of the question. I cannot instruct— Senator Wong interjecting— The PRESIDENT: Can I please complete what I say before you rise, Senator Wong. Ministers are allowed to address parts of the question. I cannot instruct them how to. I take the opportunity, as I let you then, to remind the minister of the terms of the second part of your question. Senator Wong? Senator Wong: Mr President, it is customary for a questioner to be able to refer to aspects of the question to enable you to rule on the point of order. There seems to be some reflexive suggestion from the chair that we are not allowed to refer to a question that's been asked. That is germane to making the point of order on direct relevance. The PRESIDENT: Absolutely, Senator Wong. As has been the ruling of people prior to me, that does not necessarily constitute the re-reading of the question. I let Senator Urquhart— Senator Wong: She didn't re-read it. The PRESIDENT: In that case, my apologies. It seemed very similar to the notes I had. Senator Canavan. Senator CANAVAN: As I mentioned, I have not done that myself. I thought the question was: what advice have I sought? I'm happy to answer that, but I have not sought specific advice, not being the direct minister. But, as I have said, we are working with state and territory governments to make sure we manage these very important issues, including with the Hodgman government, which is investing $2 million to do so. The PRESIDENT: Senator Urquhart, a supplementary question?