Senator CORMANN (Western Australia—Minister for Finance and the Public Service, Vice-President of the Executive Council and Leader of the Government in the Senate) (14:18): The final supplementary asked by Senator McKim reflects very poorly on him. As I indicated in my first two answers, we completely reject the assertions that have been made. The assertions that have been made are vexatious and wrong, and clearly Senator McKim didn't listen in any way, shape or form to the primary answer. The PRESIDENT: Senator Bernardi, on a point of order? Senator Bernardi: I wonder whether you could clarify for me: if you've ruled a supplementary question to be out of order, then it has to be out of order to invite the minister to respond to something that is not part of the parliamentary process. The PRESIDENT: Senator Wong? Senator Wong: I appreciate the position that Senator Bernardi is advocating but, on the point of order, it has been the practice, where there is disputation about the parameters of a question, for a President to invite the minister to answer to the extent that the question is within order and falls within the portfolio, and I think that is a sensible practice. Senator CORMANN: On the point of order, I do think—I'm always happy to answer questions, of course— Opposition senators interjecting— Senator CORMANN: No, this is a serious point. I think we ought to reflect that, if there's no sanction and no consequence to asking questions that are in breach of standing orders, what will prevent people from raising issues in a way that is in breach of the standing orders, in the future, as part of making a political point? The PRESIDENT: As a general point, on this, when questions are asked that might be outside ministerial responsibility, it has long been the practice of successive presidents to invite ministers to answer that part of a question which relates to their ministerial responsibilities in cases where it is not clear a question entirely falls within the parameters of the standing orders. I took a similar approach with respect to this particular question to provide the minister with the opportunity. Any place for sanctions is not really a place for this chair, the President, but they are matters for the Senate. What I will, again, remind senators of is the standing orders and what is allowed and not allowed to be in questions. That includes limitations around epithets and imputations. I will strictly apply these because there has been some slippage, in my time in this chamber over the last decade. I invited the minister to answer or to respond, even though I do not consider that to be a supplementary question, because I think it is fair and reasonable to give the minister an opportunity to respond to the assertion contained within it. Senator Bernardi. Senator Bernardi: Just in respect to that ruling, I'd ask you to, perhaps, reflect on it. I understand exactly where Senator Wong is coming from and the custom, but you were very explicit. You said, 'This supplementary question comes nowhere near to being appropriate as a supplementary question.' It wasn't relevant at all to the primary or the secondary question, notwithstanding the dispute there, but that was your ruling. So I would consider that, in the light of that ruling, there shouldn't be an opportunity for any response whatsoever. This is just a point of practice. The PRESIDENT: I'm happy to reflect upon it, and any senator who wants to make a submission to me please feel free to do so over the course of the day. I take the starting point that people should be given an opportunity to respond or to answer, as we've generally taken with response to questions that might not be technically in order, but I will reflect upon it as you request and I will come back to the chamber.