Senator COLBECK (Tasmania—Minister for Aged Care and Senior Australians and Minister for Youth and Sport) (15:31): As I said earlier in question time, the projects that are being funded through this program were election commitments. The government made election commitments in the lead-up to the election, in exactly the same way that the opposition did. In fact, the opposition promised many of the same projects. The PRESIDENT: Order! Senator Wong, on a point of order. Senator Wong: Direct relevance. Would you like me to repeat the question, Mr President? It was a quantitative question. The PRESIDENT: Quite right. That's a good way to describe it. I'm listening very carefully to the minister's answer. In being directly relevant, my view is that he is entitled to talk about grants made and timing. I don't view discussion of alternative policies to be directly relevant to such a specific question. Senator Cormann, I will take your submission on the point of order. Senator Cormann: On the point of order, I would just point out how the minister has been directly relevant. He was asked about the projects that had been approved. The minister clearly spelled out that the projects under this program—those that were publicly announced prior to the election—were election commitments. The PRESIDENT: That's exactly where I was going, on the basis: being asked about a number I consider to be asking the chair to instruct the minister on how to answer the question. He is being directly relevant, as long as the answer pertains to what I believe he was talking about at that point, which was the grants made prior to the time stated in the question. Senator COLBECK: All of the projects that are being funded under this program were the subject of election commitments. Senator Wong is right in her chatter across the chamber. There were 41 projects allocated funding through election commitments that are now being administered under this program. The PRESIDENT: Senator Chisholm, a final supplementary question?