Senator COLBECK (Tasmania—Minister for Sport and Minister for Senior Australians and Aged Care Services) (14:52): If someone has a booking for a vaccination, I urge them to keep it. I urge everyone who wants to take up a vaccine to make a booking. There is ample supply of AstraZeneca right now. The PRESIDENT: Senator O'Neill, on a point of order? Senator O'Neill: Yes, and it's with regard to relevance. The question was pretty straight and it did not refer to AstraZeneca. It was a particular question about the rollout of Pfizer with the three-to-eight-week delay. I urge you to bring the minister to the actual question in hand. The PRESIDENT: It was a relatively specific question. Was the word 'Pfizer' mentioned in the supplementary question? Senator O'Neill interjecting— The PRESIDENT: I didn't have that in my notes. I try to scribble as quickly as I can. This is a specific question. I'm going to ask the minister to specifically address the issues in the question, but again I cannot instruct the minister the terms on which to answer a question, the terminology to be used or the content of the answer. In my view, this question goes to the extension of the time period for the vaccine—I didn't have 'Pfizer' written down, but I take your word for it, Senator O'Neill—and it goes to whether people will have to wait longer or any other arrangements that are directly relevant. Senator Cash, are you seeking the call? Senator Cash: Thank you. On the point of order in relation to relevance, Mr President, you are right. The question was in relation to the New South Wales government's decision to extend bookings in relation to Pfizer and whether people will have to wait longer for a vaccination. The minister is directly referring to whether people have to wait longer. Senator Keneally interjecting— The PRESIDENT: Senator Keneally, we're not going to get into whether there are two words in it. I heard the interjection. I'll take your submission. Senator Keneally: Thank you, Mr President. I do appreciate that. The question was actually: would it force those who've already booked their appointments to wait longer? It didn't go to whether people should book or not book. It went directly to the question of people who already have appointments booked for Pfizer. The PRESIDENT: I appreciate it did not go to—it's not the place for a general discussion of whether someone should book for a vaccine. But, at the same time, to a tightly worded question, an answer can still be directly relevant by addressing the issues raised in the question, even if it is not addressed in the terms the opposition would like. That is what the motions to take note are for, afterwards. So I call Senator Colbeck, taking all that into account, to continue. Senator COLBECK: As I said, I would urge anyone who's got a vaccine appointment to keep that appointment and anyone who doesn't have one to make one. The Labor Party want to make this all about Pfizer, but the vaccine rollout is not just about Pfizer. There are two vaccines currently in our vaccination program, and there are ample supplies of AstraZeneca available right now. To date, we have received 32.7 million doses of vaccine: 14.5 million doses of Pfizer— The PRESIDENT: Order, Senator Colbeck. Senator Keneally, on a point of order? Senator Keneally: On relevance: this is nowhere near the question that Labor has asked, and I ask you to bring the minister back to the question. The PRESIDENT: With respect, I do not think that, to be directly relevant to an answer, a brand or manufactured version of a vaccine is going to meet—I can apply that as a strict test. If the minister is directly addressing the issues in the question, there is an opportunity to take note— Government senators interjecting— The PRESIDENT: On my right. I think— Honourable senators interjecting— The PRESIDENT: Order! I think, with respect, the submission that I instruct the minister to speak about one brand of vaccine is actually going beyond direct relevance and actually seeking me to direct him how to answer a question. Senator Keneally? Senator Keneally: Thank you, Mr President. I appreciate the point you're making, but this goes to a decision of the New South Wales government that is directly relevant to just one brand of the vaccine. We didn't have an option to ask about other brands. The New South Wales government made this decision— The PRESIDENT: And there's a chance to debate the merits of an answer— Senator Keneally: It is a simple question: if people will have to wait. The PRESIDENT: Actually, no. There is an opportunity to debate the merits of how a minister answers a question. Direct relevance does not go to using the very words raised in a question or, in this case, the brand. You have an opportunity to debate that afterwards. Senator Colbeck. Senator COLBECK: And the Labor Party directly contribute to vaccine hesitancy by their dismissal of AstraZeneca. We have two vaccines in our vaccination program: Pfizer and AstraZeneca. And I would urge every— (Time expired) The PRESIDENT: Senator O'Neill, a final supplementary question?