Senator CORMANN (Western Australia—Leader of the Government in the Senate, Minister for Finance, Special Minister of State and Vice-President of the Executive Council) (14:14): The short answer to that question is yes. What I would also say to you is that I've got in front of me a document called 'A fairer tax system with no GST.' Do you remember it? It was embargoed to 2.30 pm on 27 August 1998. These were the glorious days of Kim Beazley. Senator Wong: Is this the best you can do? 1998! Is that the best you can do? Senator CORMANN: No. Because we had the shadow Treasurer and the Leader of the Opposition coming out: this was a bit of handout from the Howard government. Let me quote to the Senate point No. 5 of 'A fairer tax system with no GST.' This is what it says: Labor Will: provide a cash refund for those shareholders who can't make use of their imputation credits because they do not pay income tax. This will be a significant benefit for older Australians, especially self-funded retirees— The PRESIDENT: Senator Wong, on a point of order. Senator Wong: Senator Cormann has a little bit of an obsession with the 1990s, it appears, Mr President. As much as that might extend to his musical taste, I raise a point of order of direct relevance, which is: this has nothing to do with the question that was asked. The PRESIDENT: On the point of order, Senator Cormann? Senator CORMANN: I have to say that Senator Wong is misleading the Senate: 99 Luftballons was in the 1980s, not the 1990s. The PRESIDENT: On the point of order, I heard the minister directly answer the question at the beginning of his answer. He is allowed to add further relevant information to the question. Senator Wong: It's not relevant to the question. The PRESIDENT: It is relevant to the content of the question asked. Senator Wong: Mr President, perhaps you would enlighten us as to how an opposition policy in 1998 is in any way relevant to the question asked. We would be interested in that information. The PRESIDENT: On the point of order, the minister directly answered the question asked by Senator Keneally. He is then adding further information he considers relevant—that I consider relevant—to that answer. He directly answered the question at the commencement of it. Senator Wong: We'd like to understand why, Mr President. The PRESIDENT: Senator Wong, I will talk to you after question time. I've ruled that it's relevant. Senator CORMANN: The question by Senator Keneally goes to the heart of the modern Labor Party. The reason this is relevant, Mr President, is that I'm comparing and contrasting the Labor Party under Mr Shorten with the Labor Party of old under Mr Beazley. What we can see is that Mr Shorten is all about putting his hands into the pockets of pensioners and self-funded retirees, whereas Mr Beazley understood the cost-of-living pressures that pensioners and self-funded retirees were facing. Our government has not considered such a proposal. We are not prepared to put our hands into the pockets of pensioners and self-funded retirees. Bill Shorten's two-card trick these days is to run a vested-interest-type attack against the so-called undeserving rich, to run the— (Time expired) The PRESIDENT: Senator Keneally, a supplementary questions.