Senator FARRELL (South Australia—Minister for Trade and Tourism, Special Minister of State and Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) (14:13): I thank the senator for the question. I don't think we want to start this. Certainly I don't want to start this process of trying to score cheap political points. Senator Birmingham: Madam President, I think the minister is imputing motives to Senator Van on what was a question entirely seeking a point of fact. Murray is bringing some talking points to the table for Don, but I think you should bring him to order in terms of imputing motives to the senator, who purely asked a factual question. The PRESIDENT: Senator Birmingham, please resume your seat. I don't believe there was an imputation against the actual senator, so I am going to call the minister and remind him of the question and the need for an answer. Senator Van: A point of order on relevance: the minister has gone nowhere near the question, other than— The PRESIDENT: Senator Van, if you were listening, you would have heard me draw the minister back to the question. Senator FARRELL: Rather than answering cheap political questions, what I'd like to do is talk about what this government is actually doing in practical terms to put downward pressure on the rental stress that so many Australians are now suffering. Obviously, one of the things that we can do is try and boost the supply of homes to rent and make substantial and significant investment in new social and affordable housing. It's these things, Senator Van, which will result in practical downward pressure on the rental stress on the Australian people at the moment. Senator Birmingham: I raise a point of order on the question of direct prevalence. This was quite a precise question. I accept the minister is being generally relevant to the question of rental markets and rental affordability, but there was a precise question there about how much rental rates have gone up. If the minister doesn't know, he can take it on notice and provide context, but simply talking around the margins of it is not directly relevant. The PRESIDENT: Thank you, Senator Birmingham. I am not privy to what government analysis Senator Van is directing us towards, but I will remind— Senator Birmingham: Any would do! The PRESIDENT: Senator Birmingham, please! I have taken your point of order in good faith. I am simply explaining to you that I am not aware how broad or how narrow the government analysis is, but I will direct the minister to the second part of the question. Senator FARRELL: A little bit of respect from the leader for the chair would be appreciated. An opposition senator: Seriously? Senator FARRELL: Yes, seriously—a little bit of respect for the President! The PRESIDENT: Senator Van? Senator Van: Again, direct relevance: the minister cannot just waffle on down a different path. The PRESIDENT: Senator Van, your leader was on his feet with the exact same question. I have directed the minister to the question. Senator Van: With respect, Chair, he hasn't listened. The PRESIDENT: No. You've raised a point of order. I've responded to that. Your leader raised exactly the same point of order. I've directed the minister to the question, and it's not for you to debate it with me. Senator FARRELL: If your side stopped interjecting, then I could answer your question, because we know a lot of people across Australia are struggling— (Time expired) The PRESIDENT: Senator Van, first supplementary?