Senator CORMANN (Western Australia—Minister for Finance, Leader of the Government in Senate, Vice-President of the Executive Council and Leader of the Government in the Senate) (14:17): Firstly, I will not go into private conversations with crossbench senators. Senator Cash: We never do. Senator CORMANN: We never do. And that applies to conversations with Senator Di Natale in the same way as it applies to conversations with Senator Wong and any other conversations. What I can say is that there has been no deal to change any policy on border protection or anything else— The PRESIDENT: Senator Di Natale, on a point of order? Senator Di Natale: Mr President, there was no preamble; it was a very direct question. Has there been an exchange of letters— A government senator interjecting— Senator Di Natale: He didn't say no. Has there been an exchange of letters— The PRESIDENT: Senator Di Natale— Senator Di Natale: I haven't finished. The PRESIDENT: What is the point of order? It can't be that you don't like the answer. It needs to be about direct relevance. Senator Di Natale: The point of order is on relevance. Has there been an exchange of letters and, if so, are there any undertakings that go beyond the repeal of the medevac legislation? It was a very straightforward question. The PRESIDENT: I give senators advance warning that, when we come back next year, I'm going to be much more strict on people simply standing up and saying 'relevance' and reading out a question again. I asked you to come to the direct relevance and you simply restated the question, Senator Di Natale— Senator Wong: Mr President— The PRESIDENT: I'll come to you in a moment, Senator Wong. I'd like to rule on this—unless you are making a submission on this point. Senator Wong: I'm making a submission on the ruling you've just made, Mr President. Whilst I understand that it is inconvenient for the government for questions to be restated, I again submit to you—and I would ask that, if you intend to change this procedure, you take submissions that engage with all parties to this place—that it is relevant to a claim that a minister is not being directly relevant to restate the relevant aspect of the question. The PRESIDENT: Senator— Senator Wong: With respect, Mr President, simply dismissing points of order on the basis that we are restating the question is, in my submission, unfair and inconsistent with the standing orders. So I would like the opportunity for all parties to make submissions if you intend to change procedure. The PRESIDENT: I did not say one could not restate the question. I simply said that someone can't get up and yell the word 'relevance' and then read out the question again. I want a point of order to draw the point as to why the answer is not directly relevant. That requires a little bit of effort, and it is an effort that most senators go to the trouble of. Simply saying the word 'relevance' and then restating the question is not sufficient to comply with the standing orders. On this, Senator Di Natale, in your submission then, you alluded to the fact that you did not like what the minister was saying in response. I do not believe— Honourable senators interjecting— The PRESIDENT: Can I make my ruling before the interjections start? And then I'll take more submissions. My point is that I cannot instruct the minister how to answer a question. I cannot instruct him to address a particular part of a question. Your question was specific. In my view, he was being specific in the answer, even if that was not the answer sought. There is an opportunity to debate that after question time. Senator CORMANN: Let me say again we provided Senator Lambie with detailed briefings at a classified level. We did not provide any undertakings to change policy on border protection, resettlement arrangements or anything else in order to secure the support of Senator Lambie for the legislation that went through the Senate earlier today. Senator Lambie, as she has stated, raised various issues to us. She raised various issues to us and she put a proposal to us. And what we did is we provided detailed briefings, detailed explanations of what we were already doing. (Time expired) The PRESIDENT: Senator Di Natale, a final supplementary question?