Senator WATT (Queensland—Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry and Minister for Emergency Management) (14:13): Senator Paterson, the short answer is that we trust the Australian Federal Police to do their job. This matter has been referred to the Australian Federal Police, and we trust them to do their job. Our government is putting in place the strict measures we need to make sure that, if one single individual violates their visa conditions, it's a criminal offence. I point out that only yesterday in the House of Representatives our government tried to amend tough laws to make them tougher. What did the opposition do? They voted against them, just like they voted against cost-of-living relief. They called for cost-of-living relief and they voted against it. They called for tough laws and they voted against them. The PRESIDENT: Senator Paterson, do you have a point of order? Senator Paterson: On direct relevance, Madam President. I'd be interested to know how the opposition's alleged voting record is relevant to the question I asked about someone released into the community. The PRESIDENT: Minister, I draw you back to Senator Paterson's question. Senator Paterson, the minister did answer your question when he first stood up. Please continue, Minister Watt. Senator WATT: I did answer the question by saying that this matter is being investigated by the AFP, and we trust them to do their job. Now, Senator Paterson talks about the alleged voting record of the opposition. It's a matter of record; it's in the Hansard that yesterday the opposition voted with the Greens against our attempt to make tough laws even tougher. The only thing that's been alleged in the last couple of weeks that hasn't been true is Senator Paterson's allegation that there was a terrorist attack on the US-Canada border. He's content to go out there and make up stuff in order to whip up anxiety in the community, rather than actually working responsibly with the government to make our tough laws even tougher. Senator Scarr: Point of order on impugning motive: he talked about my colleague Senator Paterson whipping up hysteria et cetera with that intent. That's clearly impugning motive. Senator Wong: On the point of order, I think it's a reasonable political comment to respond to a very senior shadow minister talking about something as if it were a terrorist incident without being briefed and when it was not. The PRESIDENT: Senator Scarr, I don't believe it was impugning the senator, but I will remind the minister and all senators in this place to be mindful of the language that's used when responding or making statements. Senator WATT: To continue my answer, as the Border Force Commissioner said yesterday, the individual concerned has been referred to the Australian Federal Police, and this government does not comment on ongoing police matters. It would be highly irresponsible to do so. But Australians can be assured that all efforts are being made to track down this individual. In the meantime, our government will continue to put in place the tough measures that we need to make sure that, if one single individual violates their visa conditions, as is alleged to be the case at the moment, that will be deemed to be a criminal offence. These individuals have been released under the strictest possible visa conditions, and they are being monitored by a joint Border Force and AFP task force operation. If you're saying clearly not, you're having a go at the Federal Police. We're not going to do that; we're going to support the Federal Police in their job. (Time expired) The PRESIDENT: Senator Paterson, first supplementary?