Senator FIERRAVANTI-WELLS (New South Wales) (15:08): It's all very good—the hypocrisy, Senator McAllister, of you to come into this place—given the history of the ALP and the scandals that you've been involved in. It's a bit hypocritical of you to come into this place and make those sorts of assertions. I will tell you why those opposite are doing this: because they have just suffered a really bad defeat at the hands of the Australian public. We won the election. You lost the election. Why did you lose the election? It's good for those opposite; they want to come in here and throw a bit of mud; they want to do this and they want to do that. You do not want to admit that, at the last federal election, you took to the Australian public a series of dud policies and that's why you lost the election, and I'd like to focus on that. You don't want to talk about some of the swings that you suffered, particularly in my home state of New South Wales. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Senator Wong, a point of order. Senator Wong: The point of order is relevance. I know that there seems to be a reluctance to defend Minister Taylor, but that is actually the answer of which we're taking note. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I do remind senators that we are taking note of questions from Senator Wong and Senator O'Neill to Senators Birmingham and Cormann. Whilst this is a wide-ranging debate, it is appropriate to address that subject matter. Senator FIERRAVANTI-WELLS: Thank you, Madam Deputy President. I would refer, in direct answer to that point of order, to the comments that were made and to the answers that were given by Senator Cormann and Senator Birmingham in relation to comments that have been made both here and in relation to what has been said in the House. Senator Wong interjecting— Senator FIERRAVANTI-WELLS: I've been here. I haven't heard what has happened in the House. It is very clear that Minister Taylor has indicated to the parliament that he has complied with his obligations. Those are the comments of Minister Taylor. I accept those comments, and we should accept them as well. As I was saying, those opposite are very happy now to steer away from their loss at the election. I was focusing on some of the swings that happened in some of the seats in my home state of New South Wales. For the Hunter it was almost 10 per cent; in Chifley, almost seven per cent; in Paterson, almost six per cent; in Shortland, almost 5½ per cent; in McMahon, almost 5½ per cent; and in Blaxland, almost five per cent. Senator Gallacher: That's not what we're debating! Senator FIERRAVANTI-WELLS: No, you don't want to talk about that! You don't want to talk about your policies in relation to abolishing negative gearing, where you went around Australia and talked about the top end of town when most of the people who negatively gear property in this country are on an average salary of about $85,000. And those people who negatively gear properties do so to get property for their children and for the inheritance of their children, in most cases. Franking credits: you attacked hardworking retirees, but you didn't do— The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Senator Fierravanti-Wells, I have been listening carefully, and whilst you did come back to the taking note topic, I would just remind you again that this taking note is about questions from Senators Wong and O'Neill to Senators Birmingham and Cormann. Senator FIERRAVANTI-WELLS: Thank you, Madam Deputy President. I thought that I addressed that quite adequately— The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Senator Fierravanti-Wells, you did momentarily, and then you— Senator FIERRAVANTI-WELLS: Well, I'm happy to do so again. As I've said, Minister Taylor has made comments in the other place. Senators Cormann and Birmingham have made comments in this place. I agree with what Senator Cormann and Senator Birmingham have said and I would refer the Senate to those comments. As I was saying in relation to those opposite—in particular to their loss at the last federal election—it is interesting to see seats like Hunter, where Labor had an almost 10 per cent swing. Their assault on the coal industry was really interesting. As I was standing on polling booths for the state election, people came up to me whingeing about the Labor Party—and that is supposed to be their heartland. It is supposed to be a centre where the coal industry is so important, and people voted against them because of their assault on the coal industry. Of course, there was the issue of religious freedom, which manifested itself also through the Folau sacking. The quiet Australians—that silent majority—rejected their policies, and they have to accept that. They have to accept that they lost the election. So no amount of muckraking or mudslinging is actually going to detract from that fact, that the Australian public rejected their policies. They elected us. They didn't want a return to the fiscal vandalism that we had for six years in this country when they were on the treasury bench. You, Senator Wong, in particular, as the finance minister gave us fiscal vandalism. (Time expired) The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Senator Fierravanti-Wells, again, I would ask, if you're taking note again, to please remain broadly around the topic. It is not acceptable just to make one statement and then move completely away from the topic. I think I was quite lenient, but I would ask you to reflect on what taking note is about.