Senator COLBECK (Tasmania—Minister for Aged Care and Senior Australians and Minister for Youth and Sport) (14:41): The question actually demonstrates why this government is taking this matter so seriously, why this government has, since last year's budget, invested $2.2 billion in new home care packages and why it increased the number of home care packages last financial year by 25 per cent, which for the first time has actually reduced the waiting list. This government not only takes this matter seriously; it continues to act. We called the royal commission because we wanted a forensic review of this industry, this sector more broadly, so that when we did reform the sector— The PRESIDENT: Senator Watt, on a point of order? Senator Watt: On relevance: the minister hasn't answered the question. How many more older Australians will die waiting for their approved home care package? The PRESIDENT: Senator Watt, I have asked before: a point of order on direct relevance is not simply an opportunity to restate the question; it must actually make a claim about direct relevance. I might say that, in that example, it was a particularly loaded question, and given what I said this morning— Senator Watt: That was the question. The PRESIDENT: Can you at least wait? That was at the end of a question, and, when there are questions loaded with pejorative terms and assumptions, a minister is allowed a lot more discretion in answering than if it is a specific question. A point of order on direct relevance should make a claim of what the direct relevance is rather than simply read out part of a highly loaded question. The minister was being directly relevant given the question, in my view. Senator Wong: The point of order is on direct relevance. Whilst I appreciate, and the opposition does appreciate, your exhortation not to simply reread all of the question, sometimes reading the relevant part is necessary for direct relevance. Senator Watt and the opposition, and many Australians, are extremely frustrated at this minister's refusal to answer questions about this serious issue. We had an interjection from the government before that this was a stupid question. Well, it's not to a lot of Australians. The PRESIDENT: Senator Wong, I do allow people to raise points of order. There must be the claim of direct relevance before there's a restatement. There was not in that case. I might also say, realistically, given that particular question that was reread, I don't think anyone expects that a minister is not going to be allowed some discretion in answering it, given that that is a highly loaded question, and a minister is entirely able to challenge the presumption in the question. There is an opportunity for debate after question time. It's not my role to determine the merits of answers to questions. It is not my role to determine the merits of questions themselves. Senator COLBECK: The government, in taking this matter seriously, in calling the royal commission in the first place so that we could develop a policy platform that built an aged-care system that is fit for purpose in this country, does take this matter seriously. We want to see older Australians getting the services they need when they need to get them. The PRESIDENT: Senator Smith, a final supplementary question?