Senator LUDWIG (Queensland—Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry and Minister Assisting on Queensland Floods Recovery) (14:54): Again, I thank Senator Macdonald for his confused question. What he has done is confuse linking with a set price. They are two separate issues. Senator Cormann: You are the one who is confused. Senator Wong: No, Mathias, you are. Senator LUDWIG: I will take the interjection from Senator Cormann. He does not get it. He has deferred this question to Senator Macdonald because he does not want to be embarrassed asking it. Clearly, what he has missed is that the government stands behind the extensive modelling carried out by Treasury. We are confident of the work that Treasury has done. It has proven to be accurate since the price came into effect. You only have to look at the issue of electricity prices, where the price impact announced by regulators was consistent with the Treasury modelling. Unlike those opposite, who then decried— Senator Ian Macdonald: Mr President, I raise a point of order on direct relevance. All I asked Senator Ludwig, or Senator Wong—whoever wants to answer it—is: if they rely on the modelling, which is $29 a tonne, why are they having a floor price of $15? I am not interested in what he is talking about now. Can he tell me why they are having a $15 floor price if $29 is the modelling and what they are anticipating? The PRESIDENT: I cannot tell the minister how to answer the question. The minister I believe is answering the question. The minister has 10 seconds remaining. Senator LUDWIG: The government remains—and this is the point that Senator Macdonald seems to miss out on—committed to the Treasury modelling. The carbon price forecast to result— (Time expired)