Senator RUSTON (South Australia—Minister for Families and Social Services and Manager of Government Business in the Senate) (14:11): Thank you very much to Senator Gallagher for her question. I explained yesterday on numerous occasions, and I explained earlier—and I think that the Leader of the Government in the Senate just added his contribution—about the extraordinary and exponential increase in delivery of the NDIS over recent times. What I would actually like to draw to the attention of the chamber is what we inherited and what we have done since we inherited this— Senator Wong: A point of order on direct relevance: the minister hasn't been asked about Labor's policies in government seven years ago. She's been asked about the average waiting time for children with a disability in this country. I'd have thought that she would have sufficient empathy to respond to that question. Senator Cormann: On that point of order: in order to answer that question in a way that is directly relevant and to explain where we are now and why, it is absolutely important and directly relevant to explain where we came from as we proceed to implement this very important scheme as quickly as possible, given the bad state of affairs that Labor left behind. The PRESIDENT: On the point of order: I believe Senator Wong was anticipating where the minister was going with an answer. I don't believe that context is always not directly relevant. I am listening carefully to the minister's answer—she's only been speaking for 34 seconds—and I'll continue to do so. Senator RUSTON: As I was attempting to tell the chamber, this is an absolutely massive reform in this area—probably the most massive reform that we have seen since Medicare—and it's being transitioned through. We need to remember that this is a program that requires the investment of the states through that very complicated transition. I would remind those opposite of the Productivity Commission's recommendation that they hold it back for another year to enable the NDIA to get the program up and running— Senator Gallagher: A point of order on relevance, Mr President: it was not a broad question about the NDIS, its historic origins and its transition to where it is now. It was about the wait for children with a disability. It was quite specific. We've allowed the minister to provide the context; could she please now come to the substance of the question? Senator Cormann: A point of order on direct relevance: I know the Labor Party don't want to hear this, but the starting position that we inherited is directly relevant to the reason why we're where we are. That's why, if Labor was interested in the truth, they would let the minister answer the question. The PRESIDENT: On the point of order: the point on direct relevance you're raising, Senator Gallagher, goes to the part of the question, I believe, where you asked why there are— Senator Wong interjecting— Senator Cormann interjecting— The PRESIDENT: Wait! I'm not willing to rule out a question that asks why a minister explaining material that she believes to be directly relevant—and that, in my hearing from this chair, I am not willing to say that that is not directly relevant when the question commences with 'why'. Senator RUSTON: The reason that the waits are so long, as you put it, and have been reduced significantly under this government is the fact that 115,000 people have gone on it in the last 12 months. I will go back to my point, and that is that we inherited a program that was half built when we got it. But the problem was, as was said by the NDIA review, that basically what we inherited from those opposite was an agency that is like a plane which took off before it had been fully built and is being completed whilst it's in the air. We've completed it while it's in the air. If you'd like to have a look at what you left us—and we are delivering on the plan. The PRESIDENT: Senator Gallagher, a supplementary question?