Senator PAYNE (New South Wales—Minister for Foreign Affairs and Minister for Women) (14:38): I thank Senator O'Neill for her question. As we discussed in this chamber and in the other place yesterday, the announcement of this inquiry is recognition of the government's commitment to ongoing improvement of the family law system to ensure that it helps families to separate in a safe, child centred, supportive, accessible and timely way. We did move to establish a joint parliamentary committee, of both the House and the Senate, to conduct a wide-ranging inquiry into the family law system. That inquiry will be chaired by the Hon. Kevin Andrews MP, the member for Menzies, who has considerable experience, across his lengthy parliamentary career, with these issues. Indeed, the Senate passed the motion yesterday to establish the committee. This inquiry is going to enable the members and senators who are members of the committee— The PRESIDENT: Senator O'Neill, on a point of order? Senator O'Neill: Yes, Mr President. I have, I think, given the minister sufficient time to come to an answer in response to my one query, which was about a particular consultation with the Office for Women. I did not ask about anything else. I would like an answer to that very specific question. The PRESIDENT: Senator Cormann, on the point of order. Senator Cormann: On the point of order: the question that the senator is asking about is not actually in relation to an initiative in this chamber by executive government. It was a motion moved by a backbench senator, Senator O'Sullivan, supported by Senator Chandler and Senator Bernardi. So in all of those circumstances, essentially, Senator Payne is asked to provide commentary in relation to a backbench senator's initiative. The PRESIDENT: Senator Wong? Senator Wong: Mr President, I wasn't going to rise, but, on the point of direct relevance, the Leader of the Government in the Senate is saying we're asking the minister to provide commentary. We're asking her to advise whether an office within her portfolio was consulted. The PRESIDENT: On the point of order, I can't instruct the minister how to answer a question. Prior to this specific question—which I appreciate you have emphasised, Senator O'Neill—you did make an assertion about the minister's behaviour in the chamber yesterday, about supporting a particular resolution. I believe the minister is being directly relevant to that part of the question when explaining—what I am hearing as an explanation for the position she adopted. I don't mean to misattribute, but I believe that is directly relevant. Senator O'Neill, on the point of order? Senator O'Neill: Thank you for your ruling, Mr President. But, if I were simply to come to the chamber to ask the question, 'Was the Office for Women consulted on the inquiry?' and did not give you the context in which I was asking that question, the minister would be incapable of answering it. I gave the context because it was required for comprehension of the question, not as an excuse for this minister to avoid answering the question. Was she consulted or was she not? The PRESIDENT: I can't instruct a minister how to answer a question. There is an opportunity for debating people's views of answers after question time; that goes for half an hour. It was a relatively specific question, but I believe the minister is being directly relevant to the assertion made prior to the bit that you quoted then. Senator PAYNE: Thank you very much, Mr President. This is a matter which those on this side take very seriously. I don't have the full details of the government consultation process with me in the chamber this afternoon. I'll take that part of the question on notice. The PRESIDENT: Senator O'Neill, a supplementary question?