Senator BIRMINGHAM (South Australia—Minister for Finance, Vice-President of the Executive Council and Leader of the Government in the Senate) (14:26): The Prime Minister's addressed those questions. I'm not aware of details around such things. I am aware of course that there are many projects that are currently underway as part of the Urban Congestion Fund. The PRESIDENT: Order. Senator Wong on a point of order? Senator Wong: A point of order on direct relevance. It was a very specific question. The Auditor-General has referred to a particular list. The Prime Minister has refused to answer that question. I would ask the minister to return to the question. The PRESIDENT: I do grant people who ask questions the opportunity to emphasise the point, but I don't think commentary about the context of the question is appropriate to go into. The minister, in my view, was answering the question. I can't instruct him how to answer it and I definitely, as I've said before, can't instruct the content of an answer to the precision of words the opposition would prefer or an asker would prefer. There are opportunities to debate the content of answers after question time. That's not a matter for points of order. Senator Birmingham. Senator BIRMINGHAM: Thanks, Mr President. As the government's made clear, all decisions regarding commuter car parks were identified based on the demonstrated needs within the community. That was the focus of our government: to make sure we were meeting needs within the community. I am sure that's what all do in relation to commuter car park type projects: look at needs within the community. I'm sure— The PRESIDENT: Order, Senator Birmingham. Senator Wong on a point of order? Senator Wong: A point of order on direct relevance. The question goes to whether the Prime Minister or his office saw the list the Auditor-General referred to. The PRESIDENT: Senator Wong, you've restated the question. I can't instruct a minister how to answer a question. If the minister— Senator Wong interjecting— The PRESIDENT: I'm happy to take a submission, but I'd like to finish what I was saying before I take another submission. I can't instruct the minister how to answer a question. If the minister, as I believe he was then doing, was explaining an alternative rationale, I believe that is directly relevant. Senator Wong. Senator Wong: Mr President, on your ruling, the question did not go to the program that he's now expanding the benefits of; the question went only to whether or not a list had been seen. In my respectful submission, I would ask you to reconsider your ruling given that a discussion of the program itself is directly relevant in accordance with the standing orders, when the only question he was asked, as the man representing the Prime Minister, is whether the list was seen. The PRESIDENT: The question referred to a list that was referred to by an Auditor-General's report, quite right. I believe, and I'm happy to review the Hansard and if I'm wrong I will come back, as I always do, or approach people individually, if the minister is explaining a rationale that is directly relevant to that question— An honourable senator interjecting— The PRESIDENT: I was trying to listen to the minister. I intend to hear the next 17 seconds of his answer, because he wasn't making comments or observations about alternative policies or the opposition or anything I've previously ruled against. Senator Wong: Mr President, if I could ask then, when you go away and reconsider Hansard, how it is possible that a discussion of the rationale about funding is directly relevant to a direct question as to whether or not a list has been sent. The opposition would be most grateful for that advice. The PRESIDENT: I am most happy to review that. Senator Birmingham, continue. Senator BIRMINGHAM: Thanks, Mr President. They are rather touchy about any comparisons that come up on this program, aren't they? They're very, very touchy over there about the fact that they were pursuing— An honourable senator interjecting— The PRESIDENT: Order! Senator Wong. Senator Wong: Mr President, he is completely ignoring standing orders. This is a question about a list. The PRESIDENT: And the question about the list referred to an Auditor-General's report, which, in my view, makes an answer about the context of an alternative rationale directly relevant. But I've said I will review it— Honourable senators interjecting— The PRESIDENT: There were interjections coming across the table. There were breaches of the standing orders going across the table as well. If there are no interjections then ministers can't be pulled up for talking about the opposition. But it is relatively common in this chamber for people to take disorderly interjections. They won't be taken if they're not made. Senator Birmingham. Senator BIRMINGHAM: Thanks, Mr President. The ANAO report to the Senate about the Prime Minister's letter of 10 April—it is probably worth just emphasising that from our perspective there is nothing unusual about that 10 April correspondence—(Time expired) The PRESIDENT: Senator McCarthy, a final supplementary question?