Mr TAYLOR (Hume—Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction) (14:31): My indirect interest in Jam Land has been widely reported in the media and was declared in accordance with the rules. I have no association with the compliance action and I have never made a representation in relation to it. This has been confirmed at Senate estimates by the secretary of my department in April this year. I make no apology for seeking and receiving a briefing on policies that seriously impact the farmers in my electorate. It's what the people of Hume expect of me as their local member. Dr Mike Kelly: It's in Monaro; it's not your electorate! Mr TAYLOR: In fact, the people of Eden-Monaro should be asking why their representative didn't do the same. Around half of the affected grasslands are in his electorate. I stand up for the farmers in my electorate. Dr Mike Kelly: It is about your behaviour! The SPEAKER: The member for Eden-Monaro will stop interjecting uncontrollably or he won't get to hear the answer to the question that he has asked. Mr TAYLOR: As I was saying, I stand up for the farmers in my electorate, unlike the member for Eden-Monaro. But those opposite want to tear agriculture down. They opposed the drought fund this week in this place. They opposed the drought fund. They took policies to the last election that amounted to handing over the control of agricultural land to bureaucrats. Mr McCormack interjecting— The SPEAKER: The Deputy Prime Minister will cease interjecting. The Deputy Manager of Opposition Business on a point of order. Dr Chalmers: The question was very specific, and on direct relevance I raise that he's straying from the question. The SPEAKER: Yes, I'm very aware of that. Mr Hunt interjecting— The SPEAKER: Minister for Health, please, I'd rather just deal with those making the points of order. If it helps the minister, I don't actually hear what he's saying; I just hear noise. That's all I hear, okay? The Leader of the House on a point of order. Mr Porter: I thought your earlier ruling was very clear that, when a specific question is asked and answered, as it was, that does not mean that the minister cannot then use the remaining time to put context around that answer, otherwise this degenerates into a pop quiz, which it has never been in the history of this parliament. That is a very fair answer of context when a specific answer to a specific question was given. The SPEAKER: I thank both the Deputy Manager of Opposition Business and the Leader of the House. I allowed the question. The question wasn't identical to yesterday. Without being endlessly repetitive, I'm just telling the House that I can refer to a number of precedents, if that helps the Deputy Manager of Opposition Business. It might take up a bit of question time, though. I allowed the question. The minister has addressed the topic. He's still on the policy topic. I will just say concisely: what you can't do is ask a question and then essentially do the equivalent of having an answer you want him to read out. You can't do that. The rule for direct relevance came in in 2010. The Deputy Manager of Opposition Business has been around all of that time, and he's well aware of how that has operated with respect to the policy topic. The minister is in order. If he wishes to continue his answer, that's his business. Mr TAYLOR: As I was saying, those opposite want to tear agriculture down. They opposed the drought fund this week. They took policies to the election that amounted to handing over control of agricultural land to bureaucrats. They took policies to the last election that would hike the price of electricity for farmers, alongside gas and diesel prices. I will always stand by the farmers of my electorate. It's about time those opposite did the same.