Senator FIERRAVANTI-WELLS (New South Wales—Minister for International Development and the Pacific) (14:48): I certainly take issue with Senator Sterle's use of 'sensible' in relation to your policy. Can I just say, as you should be aware, Senator Sterle, I represent the Minister for Social Services, so I will deal with your question insofar as it relates to my portfolio responsibilities. Labor's policy will take money from the pocket of— The PRESIDENT: Senator Wong on a point of order? Senator Wong: There is a well-established precedent, Mr President, that ministers can be questioned about statements they've made. The PRESIDENT: Senator Wong, as you know, the minister can choose to answer the question in any manner she sees fit, as long as it is directly relevant. The question is in order. Senator Jacinta Collins interjecting— The PRESIDENT: Senator Collins, can you let me conclude before I get some advice? A minister is allowed to say they will answer part of the question. The question was in order, as I have outlined. I cannot instruct the minister how to answer the question. Senator Jacinta Collins: Point of order, Mr President. The free advice you were referring to was making the point that she has been asked to withdraw her misleading statement in its full. Leaving a statement that is misleading in the Senate is a different issue to what you are referring to. The PRESIDENT: Senator Collins, you were interjecting on me while I was providing a ruling from the chair. That was what my comment about free advice was about. The question is entirely within order, as ministers can be questioned about their statements. The minister is also able to answer parts of the question, and I am not allowed to instruct the minister as to how they answer the question. That is a matter for debate. Senator FIERRAVANTI-WELLS: I refer to the statement that I made yesterday in this place, and I suggest that Senator Sterle go and have another read of it. As I indicated yesterday, on this issue, insofar as it relates to pensioners—and I will deal with that in a moment—Senator Sterle, you need to understand that these questions in relation to this issue should be directed to the— The PRESIDENT: Senator Sterle, on a point of order? Senator Sterle: My question was completely about the senator's statement. I asked her whether she's going to withdraw her statement in its entirety. The PRESIDENT: Senator Sterle, your question had a substantive preamble to it and commentary around it. The minister is being directly relevant. I cannot instruct the minister how to answer or what parts of the question to answer when it was of such length. Senator FIERRAVANTI-WELLS: I gave a statement to the Senate yesterday. That statement deals with the issue. Go and have a look at my statement, Senator Sterle. Now I will deal with that part of your question that is pertinent to my portfolio, and that is that Labor's policy will take money from the pockets of 230,000 pensioners and part-pensioners. It is clear from the way Labor has designed this policy that it is to take money out of the pockets of pensioners. We know this. When the policy was introduced by the Howard government, with the support of those opposite, it was deliberately designed to put money into people's pockets. Pensioners with shares who will be negatively affected by this policy include age pensioners, war widows and war widowers, veterans, disability support pensioners and carers. Can I break that down for Senator Sterle a little bit more. In Western Australia, there are 21,011 pensioners who are affected by this. So you go and explain to them the money that you're taking out of their pockets, Senator Sterle—21,000 of them! (Time expired) The PRESIDENT: Senator Sterle, do you have a supplementary question?