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) (14:16): As you can see, the decision today is about areas where the Future Fund is making investments. I strongly don't believe, as you have put it, that this is politicisation of the Future Fund. What a load of rubbish! Something that was established two decades ago can never ever be changed under any circumstances—how ridiculous is that? Why have an investment mandate? Why have a statement of expectations? Why do they exist? They exist so that shareholders can update, if they choose, and provide further advice or information. Senator Birmingham: A point of order on direct relevance: Senator Hume's question was specifically about divestment. Senator Gallagher has come nowhere close to questions of where the government would direct them to divest. The PRESIDENT: The question also included politicising the fund. I'll remind the minister of the narrowness of the question, but I do believe she's being relevant. Senator GALLAGHER: I answered it. The changes that have been outlined in the investment mandate and the statement of expectations are about where the Future Fund is considering investments. They are not about divestment; that is not covered in any way in the changes that have been made to date. (Time expired) The PRESIDENT: Senator Hume, second supplementary?