My question is again to the Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction. I refer the minister to his previous answer and to the requirement for members to disclose indirect interests. I have a copy of the minister's statement of interests. Will the minister confirm that it contains no reference whatsoever to Jam Land?

As I said a moment ago, my indirect interest in Jam Land has been widely reported in the media and it was declared, in accordance with the rules, through my family company. There are many on this side of the House who are part of family farms. We invest through our family companies. That's how we own our farms. Those opposite, who have never participated in small businesses or farming, wouldn't understand that for a moment. This issue has been raised by those opposite as a grubby smear campaign against me and my family. I can safely say that the work that I did with respect to the listing that has been referred to in this place in the last 24 hours was to protect the interests of the farmers in my electorate. They need protection against, most of all, the sorts of policies that those opposite brought to the last election.

Point of order.

The minister has concluded his answer, but I'm happy to hear the point of order as always.

It relates to the dignity of the House. I just want to confirm that there has been, even though it's not reflected in the standing orders, a practice on both sides that we don't question and don't make allegations about people's families. I just want to assure you that the opposition has deliberately not referred to families in any of these questions and will not.

I do thank the Manager of Opposition Business. I'm not quite sure what the point of order was, but I appreciate that he wished to make a statement.