Mr ABBOTT (Warringah—Prime Minister) (14:17): I am happy to have question after question on this subject from the Leader of the Opposition. Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER: Order! We will have quiet on my left and my right. Mr ABBOTT: I am happy to have question after question on this subject from the Leader of the Opposition, because what is on display in the parliament today is the difference between— Mr Dreyfus: Because you are unwilling to answer! The SPEAKER: The member for Isaacs will desist. Mr ABBOTT: this government and its predecessor. When these sorts of issues arose— Mr Burke: Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Under the old standing order 104, which only referred to relevance, this answer would already be out of order. Under direct relevance, the word 'direct' needs to mean something and he should be brought to the question. The SPEAKER: I thank the Manager of Opposition Business for his point of order. I have indeed used it myself—it was treated the same way. However, the Prime Minister has the call. Mr ABBOTT: When issues of this nature arise, this government does the right and the honourable thing, as Senator Sinodinos did yesterday. He did the right and the honourable thing. That is not just my judgement. It is also the judgement of Kelvin Thomson—I cannot remember his seat— The SPEAKER: Wills. Mr ABBOTT: The member for Wills. But it is also the judgement of the member for Wills. Mr Burke: Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Under standing order 91(c), the Prime Minister is persistently refusing to abide by the standing orders. Question time is here for him to respond to questions, he— The SPEAKER: The member will resume his seat. Points of order may not be points of debate. Mr Burke: What is the ruling on my point of order? The SPEAKER: There is no point of order. Mr ABBOTT: Plainly, Senator Sinodinos has done the right and the honourable thing, and that is not just my judgement but also that is the judgement of the member for Wills, who said this morning at the doors, 'Stepping aside in the face of an inquiry like the ICAC inquiry is the right thing to do'. And he added—good on the member for Wills—'And there is plenty of precedent for it'. Not too much precedent on that side of the House, I hasten to add.