Senator BIRMINGHAM (South Australia—Minister for Trade, Tourism and Investment and Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) (14:25): That supplementary question from Senator Waters highlights the completely misleading rubbish that we get from the Australian Greens who, when it comes to addressing climate policy, decide instead to bring it into a whole range of other matters and ignore the fact that this is about dealing with a global problem through global cooperation and action. Australia plays a role. We have done so consistently over recent years in terms of signing on to global climate change agreements and acting in accordance with them, and signing on to future agreements such as the Paris Agreement and acting in accordance with that. It doesn't come down to a single piece of regulatory approval for one mining project. It doesn't come down to what the nation's electoral financing laws might look like. It comes down to working in concert with other nations to make sure that we deliver upon our commitments and to ensure that they deliver upon theirs, and that's what we're committed to doing. The PRESIDENT: Can I remind senators of a previous ruling about supplementary questions. I have taken to start reading precedent on this. I will quote President McClelland: … supplementary questions are appropriate only for the purposes of elucidating information arising from the original question and answer. They are not appropriate for the purpose of introducing additional or new material or proposing a new question, even though such a question might be related to the subject matter of the original question. That is a ruling from President McClelland from 1986. It is in Odgers and it is the guiding principle about supplementary questions.