Senator GALLAGHER (Australian Capital Territory—Minister for the Public Service, Minister for Finance, Minister for Women, Manager of Government Business in the Senate and Vice-President of the Executive Council) (14:56): What I don't think is acceptable is that those opposite have opposed every single cost-of-living measure that we have brought to this place to actually deal with some of those pressures that households are feeling. Opposition senators interjecting— The PRESIDENT: Minister, please resume your seat. Order on my right! Senator Hume, a point of order? Senator Hume: On relevance: I asked a very specific question about whether it was acceptable for real household incomes to have fallen faster than in any other advanced economy, and the minister answered a completely different question. The PRESIDENT: Minitser Wong? Senator Wong: The minister was asked for an opinion about what was acceptable. I can understand why Senator Hume doesn't want the house to remind her about what she voted against, but that is relevant to the cost of living. The PRESIDENT: Thank you, Minister. Senator Birmingham? Senator Birmingham: On the point of order, previous rulings by past presidents have indicated that, while glancing references to the positions of oppositions or previous governments may be relevant, ministers should not, when they are answering a question, go directly to the position of previous governments or the position of oppositions. This minister did, when she rose to her feet, go instantly not to talking about the government, not to responding to Senator Hume's question but instead to answering about the opposition. The minister should be drawn to the question when she does that. The PRESIDENT: Thank you, Senator Birmingham. The minister had just gotten to her feet. I will continue to listen carefully to her answer. Minister, please continue. Senator GALLAGHER: I think you can see from the decisions that we've taken as a government that we do believe that we needed to take decisions to address some of their cost-of-living pressures. That's my answer to the question. So energy bill relief, cheaper child care, more Medicare bulk billing, cheaper medicines, boosting income support payments, boosting Commonwealth rental assistance, investing in skills through our fee-free TAFE policy, building more affordable homes, expanding parental leave, getting wages moving again—all of these things are in recognition— The PRESIDENT: Minister, please resume your seat. Senator Hume, a point of order? Senator Hume: Again, on relevance: the question was about real household incomes. The minister has not even mentioned the phrase 'real household incomes'. Can I please ask you to direct the minister to the question? The PRESIDENT: Senator Hume, the minister is being relevant to the question. Minister, please continue. Senator GALLAGHER: The point I make through announcing that list of measures is that, through these decisions, the government acknowledges that we have a job and a responsibility to ease pressures on households where we can, in light of the inflation challenge. That is precisely why our $23 billion cost-of-living package is so comprehensive. I would remind those opposite again that they opposed most of it.