Mr DUTTON (Dickson—Leader of the Opposition) (14:33): This is a 30-minute debate, and I hope it runs full time because there is a very important question for this parliament, for this chamber, to contemplate. It is clear not just today but in previous days; it has been documented not just in this House but across the nation, in newspapers—the Fin Review has run a very significant commentary in relation to this important issue, and that is about whether or not this government has made an appropriate decision, and the actions of the minister— The SPEAKER: The Leader of the Opposition will pause. This is not a general debate about the issue. The question before the House is dissent from the ruling of the Speaker—not the broad issue, not the topic. It is to state the reasons why you believe the ruling was not in order. Mr DUTTON: I fully understand that, Mr Speaker, and I've given you the background as to why this issue needs to be dealt with in this chamber, why the question needs to be answered appropriately by this incompetent minister. The ruling that you've provided, Mr Speaker, should be dissented from because it allows this minister to continue to escape proper scrutiny in this chamber. She's a member of the executive. She refuses to say, in response to questions, whether or not she met or spoke with Mr Alan Joyce. The relationship between Mr Alan Joyce, the Prime Minister and this minister is well documented. This is a murky situation at best. The minister's integrity is seriously in question. The Prime Minister had to come back into this chamber yesterday to correct the record when he misled this parliament. And why we need to move dissent in your ruling is obvious, because the question could not have been tighter. The circumstances could not be clearer. And the minister could not be more evasive. We need to hear from this minister, in a very direct way, whether or not she met with or spoke with Alan Joyce prior to making a decision to stop Qatar flying into our country which was of commercial benefit to Mr Joyce and to Qantas, and clearly to the detriment of the Australian flying public. This government—and this is why your ruling needs to be dissented from—is costing, through this decision, Australians thousands of dollars through their airfares when they seek to travel internationally. Not just internationally, Mr Speaker. As we have seen from Virgin, who have an alliance with Qatar, if those inbound international flights are coming in and feeding the Virgin network, you will see a reduction in domestic airfare prices as well. The SPEAKER: Order. The Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat for a moment. I have given him plenty of leeway. I'm just going to ask him to return back to the question before the House and to not bring other material into the debate. I give him the call now. Mr DUTTON: Mr Speaker, the standing orders of this parliament are sacrosanct. We need to make sure the integrity of our Westminster system is upheld, and the requirement to do so falls squarely upon your shoulders. You are a decent Speaker. You're an honourable Speaker. But you have been put into the most difficult position by a minister who is trying to escape reality. You would not be put in this position that forced our hand to move dissent in your ruling if the minister had not been so evasive. Australians are demanding answers from this government. The Prime Minister's off on another overseas flight, and you've got this minister who refuses to answer questions in his absence. I don't think the Australian public are seeing a level of transparency, and that is why this minister has put this House into disrepute. And this is why, with all due respect to you, Mr Speaker, you should have upheld our point of order, moved that the minister was not in order, moved that the minister was not relevant to the question being asked, instead of the ruling that you made. This is a serious issue, and the precedent here is important because, to be honest, this is not the first occasion where we have contemplated whether we move dissent because of the way in which the government has put you into a difficult position. Today is a red-letter day for this minister because the minister has a clear question before her. Will she answer it honestly? So far she hasn't, and the Australian public demand nothing less of her.