Senator WONG (South Australia—Minister for Finance and Deregulation) (14:20): In relation to the reference to statement No. 9, if the senator does want to look at that he will see that there is, as has been the case under governments of both political persuasions, the reporting of cashflows from investments in non-financial assets and the net cashflows from such investments. He would also see that across the forward estimates, including in the 2012-13 year, to which he has referred, the net position of investments in non-financial assets is in fact a negative on the budget. If the assertion is that there is a negative net position but somehow that is not a negative net position because it is helping you in another way, what is being asserted simply does not make sense. In terms of the quantum I make the point that this was traversed at estimates. There are a range of decisions, hundreds of decisions, that go into a budget bottom line. They include things such as the $22 billion worth of savings that the government took in the budget, which added to the some $83.6 billion, I think, in savings over previous budgets since Labor came to office. Senator Joyce: Mr President, I raise a point of order on relevance. The question is: does the sale of Future Fund assets decrease, increase or in any way affect the government's $3.5 billion surplus forecast? The PRESIDENT: There is no point of order, Senator Joyce. The minister is answering the question and has 27 seconds remaining to add to the answer. Senator WONG: I am not sure how much more relevant I can be. I have taken the senator through the budget papers. I have tried to explain it to him courteously. But the fact is that he is actually not interested in the answer, just like he has never, as part of the coalition's economic team previously, been interested in putting together costings which add up.