Mr FITZGIBBON (Hunter) (14:16): My question is to the Deputy Prime Minister. Yesterday in question time, he said, 'I will never, ever background a journalist.' Does he stand by that answer and is he aware that Ray Hadley said today that the office of the current Deputy Prime Minister was the source of many of the leaks against the former Deputy Prime Minister and that people in glass houses should not throw stones? Mr Littleproud interjecting— The SPEAKER: Excuse me, the Minister for Agriculture and Water Resources will cease interjecting. I'm struggling to see how that question is in order. Before I call the Manager of Opposition Business, in the interests of being upfront, I always review question time and, in reviewing yesterday's question time, I feel I did err in not ruling yesterday's question out of order, having looked at the text of it. I can't see how the question is in order. I'm happy to hear from the Manager of Opposition Business and then the Leader of the House. Mr Burke: Mr Speaker, yesterday in question time the Deputy Prime Minister made a number of statements and it should be in order for us to be allowed to ask whether or not he stands by those statements. It is also clear in Practice that ministers are meant to be across what is being said in the media about their portfolios—that's specifically referred to. When something has been said in the media that contradicts what was said yesterday, it should be right and proper for us to ask whether he stands by his answer. Mr Pyne: Mr Speaker, ministers are responsible for matters within their portfolio and they are specifically, in the standing orders, not responsible for the comments and statements of, for example, media commentators, and nor are they really responsible for allegations made anonymously about their office doing or not doing something. So the part of the question about whether or not he stood by a statement he has already made in the House may well be in order, but the rest of the question is not in order. The SPEAKER: Yes, I think certainly the bit about yesterday's answer and standing by the statement is in order. The rest of the question and references to media commentary are not in order. And the only reason that part of the question today is in order is because I failed to rule yesterday's question out of order, which I should have, so I'm making that very, very clear. The member for Hunter is lucky, but I will be listening very carefully to any other questions he has. The Deputy Prime Minister will address himself to that part of the question that asked him whether or not he stands by his statement yesterday and he doesn't need to address any of the material other than that. Mr Albanese: Less is more, Michael!