Senator BIRMINGHAM (South Australia—Minister for Finance, Vice-President of the Executive Council and Leader of the Government in the Senate) (14:38): It seems it's okay for those on that side to throw mud about something this side of politics does in relation to funding community infrastructure and they'll call it that name. But when they were doing exactly the same thing in the lead-up to the last election it was valuable community infrastructure. It was okay for them to run around the country announcing car parks in different locations, but it's not okay for the coalition to do it! Honourable senators interjecting— The PRESIDENT: Order! Before you raise a point of order, Senator Wong, you would have heard me calling for order. I couldn't hear a word that was being said. You may have better hearing than I have, but I couldn't hear a word as I was calling senators to order. Senator Wong: Mr President, I understand the sensitivity this minister has in defending this, but he has now on three occasions avoided answering a question and resorted simply to going about— The PRESIDENT: I ask you to resume your seat, Senator Wong. A critique of the content of an answer and whether someone asserts it is an answer or otherwise is not a matter for here. That goes to the content of an answer. Points of order are for direct relevance. I genuinely could not hear a word of Senator Birmingham's quite loud voice, as I was constantly calling senators to order. Senator Birmingham, continue. Senator BIRMINGHAM: I'm happy to come into this place and answer serious questions, well-intentioned questions, when questions come from people who hold consistency in relation to their position. On this matter, I just find it so hypocritical, so amazing, that those opposite— The PRESIDENT: Senator Wong, on a point of order? Senator Wong: A point of order on direct relevance: this question goes to the expenditure of public moneys. It is not directly relevant, within the standing orders, for him to simply talk about the Labor Party. The PRESIDENT: I take that point, Senator Wong, and I ruled on that point earlier. But, as I've previously ruled too, when the minister made a comment about the opposition at that point, while answering a question about his own comments that contains politically charged phrases—I think an answer of that nature is not out of order. I have consistently ruled very tightly when questions are tight, factual questions, as I did earlier this week. This was not one of those, and the minister is entitled to defend his own record and statements in a manner he sees fit when they're contained in the question. Senator BIRMINGHAM: I am simply pointing out the double standard. The coalition announced policy commitments in relation to investing in community infrastructure in car parks. The Labor Party announced pre-election policy to invest in car parks— (Time expired)