Senator CONROY (Victoria—Leader of the Government in the Senate, Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy and Minister Assisting the Prime Minister on Digital Productivity) (14:20): That is right: those opposite talk about muzzling the free press. They talk about a statutory underpinning meaning that you have muzzled the free press. Let's look at what David Cameron and the Conservative Party in the UK have done in the last 24 hours. They have agreed to embed a legislative underpinning for an independent free— Senator Brandis: Mr President, I rise on a point of order. Once again the point of order goes to relevance. The minister was not asked about British legislation. He was asked about Australian legislation. When you overruled my point of order on the previous supplementary question I understood you to say that the minister was within the standing orders because he was responding to an interjection. He is not responding to an interjection now. Nothing he has said in answer to this question is relevant to Australia. The PRESIDENT: That is not a point of order. Let me just make one thing clear: I did not rule the interjection in order. I said the interjection was out of order and I said the minister should not answer interjections. The minister should ignore interjections. So you should not say something that I did not say. The minister still has 37 seconds remaining. Senator CONROY: Mr President, I have to say that that point of order again demonstrated that those opposite will misrepresent anything. They stood up and said, 'Mr President, I shrunk the question'—suddenly rewrote the question, as he stood there, when the question accuses the government of gagging free speech on the basis of a statutory underpinning for a press council. What can we say around the world? In Finland, No. 1 with Reporters Without Borders, they have a statutory underpinning to their processes. What do Reporters Without Borders say? The No. 1 free-speech country in the world— (Time expired)