Senator WONG (South Australia—Minister for Finance and Deregulation) (14:38): I assume that the shadow minister is referring to some of the reporting about MRRT revenue, which, if he had read subsequent articles, the Treasury has refuted very clearly the assessment made. I would make the point that the opposition on the minerals tax is really in all sorts of difficulty. Their shadow minister, Mr Macfarlane, has described the money being made in the mining sector as 'extraordinary'. He has described the profits made by mining companies as 'extraordinary'. Yet Mr Abbott's position is that—and I think I am quoting—'Mining companies pay more than their fair share of tax.' Senator Brandis: Mr President, I rise on a point of order. Commentary on the opposition's position is not directly relevant to the question that this minister was asked. Albeit that the minister has a minute and seven seconds to complete her answer, it is obvious to you, Mr President, that what she is saying now bears no resemblance to the question she was asked. You chastised the opposition before. All we seek is neutrality in the chair, with the same rules applied— The PRESIDENT: Order! That is a reflection on me. It is a reflection on my neutrality. That is a personal reflection on me, Senator Brandis. Senator Brandis: I withdraw any reflection, Mr President. Senator Ian Macdonald interjecting— The PRESIDENT: Are you reflecting on me as well, Senator Macdonald? Senator Ian Macdonald: I am saying that you should have a look at the video. The PRESIDENT: Thank you. Senator Brandis: Mr President, I withdraw any reflection on you, but I do ask you to be more conscious of the requirement of the sessional orders that answers be directly relevant to questions. A commentary on the opposition's policy is not directly relevant to a question of 'Will you release modelling?' Senator Chris Evans: Mr President, on the point of order: Senator Wong was asked a question by Senator Cormann about the minerals resource rent tax and claims that certain companies would now not have to pay it, the appropriateness of the tax and the impacts of the tax. In responding to that question, she referred to Mr Abbott's commentary on the tax and his attitude to it, which is a perfectly reasonable thing in responding to the question. Opposition senators interjecting— Senator Chris Evans: It asked for a response to commentary on the tax. She referred to remarks— Senator Ian Macdonald: What? Are you the president, are you? Senator Chris Evans: Senator Macdonald, why don't you take one of the little blue pills and calm down, all right? The PRESIDENT: Order! Senator Evans, that does not help either. So if you will withdraw that. Senator Chris Evans: Mr President, I withdraw unreservedly, as is my wont. It is perfectly in order for Senator Wong to canvass other views about that tax in responding to the question. I would ask you to rule it in order, and I would encourage everyone to calm down a bit. The PRESIDENT: The minister has one minute and seven seconds remaining. And I do draw the minister's attention to the question. Senator WONG: If the shadow minister wants to ask questions about things which are incorrect then obviously I am going to respond to them. He made an assertion at the beginning of his question regarding revenue from the mining tax. In the first part of my answer, the first thing I said was that there was also reporting, which he should have been aware of, that the Treasurer had refuted— Senator McEwen: The Treasury had refuted. Senator WONG: The Treasurer and Treasury, I should say—thank you, Senator McEwen—had refuted those assertions. If he would like to refer to the public statements which were reported today about the inaccuracy of the modelling to which he referred, I am sure that he will become aware of those facts. But he comes in here asking a question which is not correct, which is based on incorrect premises. The reality is that you are making assertions which are not correct.