Mr FRYDENBERG (Kooyong—Minister for the Environment and Energy) (14:18): Unfortunately, we are seeing a pattern of mistruths and obfuscation by those opposite. Yesterday, those opposite sought to portray the Prime Minister and me as blaming renewables for last September's blackout— Mr Dreyfus interjecting— The SPEAKER: The member for Isaacs is warned. Mr FRYDENBERG: when we actually went out in writing, and in numerous interviews, saying that that was not the cause and that the cause was the storm. The SPEAKER: The Manager of Opposition Business on a point of order? Mr Burke: On direct relevance. At the end of the answer, the Prime Minister was specifically on the topic. Since the Minister for the Environment and Energy stood up, it has had nothing to do with the question that was asked—a very specific question from a member of parliament asking about a major employer in her own electorate. The SPEAKER: I am listening carefully to the Minister for the Environment and Energy. Before I call him, I will just say, on the point of order, that the minister is entitled to compare and contrast to a point, but this question referred specifically to issues in New South Wales. He needs to come back to that in the remaining 45 seconds. Mr FRYDENBERG: The facts are clear that Tomago, as the Prime Minister said, make up around 10 per cent of New South Wales's demand. Their contract with AGL, I think, goes back to 1991. There is a provision, when the prices go high, for AGL to enter a relationship to reduce the supply to Tomago. The key point is that the member for Port Adelaide said there was residential load shedding. In the press release at 7.30 pm on 10 February, he said that did not happen. This is a consistent pattern. You have been found out: mistruths and misleading the parliament again and again. Mr Burke: Mr Speaker— The SPEAKER: The minister has concluded his answer. Manager of Opposition Business, I think it is best that we move on. Mr Burke: Mr Speaker, let me just make a point of order. The SPEAKER: Okay. I will hear the Manager of Opposition Business. Mr Burke: He made a very specific unparliamentary allegation of deliberately misleading— The SPEAKER: He did not use the word 'deliberately'. Mr Burke: When you claim that it is again and again, it is a big stretch to claim that it is accidental. Those sorts of reflections should be withdrawn. Mr Dutton interjecting— The SPEAKER: The Minister for Immigration and Border Protection persistently interjects, particularly when I am hearing points of order. Mr Pyne interjecting— The SPEAKER: The reason the Leader of the House cannot hear him is that he is often interjecting with him! I am trying to inject some lightheartedness, but, in seriousness, I will have no choice but to take action on the next interjection by the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection. The Manager of Opposition Business's point is on the use of the term 'misleading'. He might find it undesirable—I may well myself—but the Practice and the Hansard are littered with that term being able to be used. It is only out of order when 'deliberately misleading' is used. That has been the case under many speakers, and it has been the case in questions that have been asked. There have been many questions—we could take the time to dig them out—asked by the opposition using the term 'misleading' that I have not ruled out of order.