Senator THORP (Tasmania) (15:21): Sometimes it becomes very apparent to me that I have only been in this place for a very short time, because after I saw the front page of the Australian today, with its commonly alarmist headline around the changes to the PBS payments in relation to cancer treatments, I would have thought that that would be something that the members opposite would be interested in. I thought they would see the alarm and I was correct. There were two questions asked on that issue. It was disappointing that the level of research gone into by those asking the questions was simply that of reading the front page of the Australian,which we all know is so full of facts, I say with a slightly ironic and sarcastic tone. I was hoping when I knew that I was taking note that there would be decent discussion about that issue and I would get the opportunity to put some actual facts on the table about the reports that a cut to the subsidy— Senator Brandis: Mr Deputy President, in taking a point of order, might I remind you that, although the test of relevance in this debate is not direct relevance but the general test of relevance, relevance does mean something. It means that what the senator has to say has to have something to do with the question before the chair. The question before the chair is that the Senate take note of the question about the corruption of the New South Wales government under Senator Bob Carr's premiership and nothing else. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you, Senator Brandis. Senator Thorp, I was giving you a bit of latitude for one minute to lead into the topic. I trust you are leading into the topic now. Senator THORP: Let me absolutely assure you, Mr Deputy President, that my answer will be far more relevant than the one I was subjected to from the member opposite recently. The nature of the motion that we are debating here today goes to the heart of some of the reasons the Australian public is losing heart in its politicians because, rather than using the opportunity to discuss things that may be of real concern to people—like fallacious reports in that cheap rag the Australian that try and frighten cancer sufferers all over the country—we have to use this important time in this place to not only attack the foreign minister of our country in a public forum like this but also go on to attack other individuals who have no opportunity to defend themselves against these claims. No wonder the Australian people— Senator Ryan interjecting— Senator Crossin interjecting— The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Order! Senators on my right and left, I ask you to come to order. Senator Thorp, you have the call. Senator THORP: Thank you, Mr Deputy President. The only way I can describe it is as extraordinarily mean spirited to constantly be on the attack about individuals rather than policies. We are supposed to be here discussing and debating the policies that directly affect the lives of all Australians. Senator Brandis: Mr Deputy President, I have a point of order on relevance. We are halfway through the time allotted to the senator. The senator has not yet addressed any aspect of the question before the chair. She has criticised the opposition for moving the question before the chair, because she considers that other questions are more important, but she has not addressed the question before the chair. Perhaps she is embarrassed to represent in this chamber a political party substantial sections of which are controlled by white-collar criminals. Whatever her motive is, she has to be drawn to the question. The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Senator Thorp, you have referred to Minister Carr. You have been broadly relevant, and I just draw your attention again to the matter. Senator Crossin interjecting— The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Senator Crossin, I am ruling in favour of your senator. Would you mind being quiet for the moment. Senator Thorp, you are in order to continue, but I do remind you of the context of the debate. Senator THORP: I believe that my comments are directly relevant because they are talking about the fact that we are using the valuable time of this Senate to attack the credibility and the ethics of a member of this place and to go more broadly than that and actually refer to other individual members of not only this place but also other places. So I believe my comments are directly relevant. Senator Crossin interjecting— Senator THORP: Yes, fancy having to withdraw that. That was appalling. We are here to work for the good of Australia. In fact, our place on the world stage as represented by the foreign minister, Minister Carr, is one that is enviable. In 2010, from memory, we were described by the United Nations as the second best place to live in the world, and we want things to be of a high standard. Everyone on this side of this place defends the fact that we need to have strong anticorruption measures in place. Of course we do, and we totally and utterly support them. It is unfortunate that there are times when, in the interests of the greater good, these things need to be brought out into the public arena, but they do need to be exposed to the harsh light of day if any impropriety or misbehaviour is taking place. We are all in agreement about that—not to use a debate in this place which could be about things that are really relevant to the Australian people to attack the foreign minister. We have measures in place to deal with that. The job of this place is to look at the policies that affect the Australian community. That is what the Australian people expect of us, and we, as members of government, know and expect that we should get robust criticism and forensic dissection of all the policies that we are putting into place. That is what we expect of members opposite, not trivial, small-minded, mean-spirited attacks on individuals. It disappoints me, and I am quite confident that it is a source of great disappointment to the Australian people. I am sure that all my colleagues in this place in the Greens and the Independents are disappointed that this opportunity to take note of some of the important issues that were raised today, which included cancer, the situation in Nauru— (Time expired)