Mr KELVIN THOMSON —Mr Speaker, you were kind enough to send me a copy of your letter to the member for Newcastle concerning the interpretation of standing order 144 regarding anticipation of debate and points of order raised by the member for Newcastle and me on 7 May and thereabouts. In your letter to the member for Newcastle, you concluded by saying:

I would not regard a passing reference in an answer as being out of order. Only where a minister was truly anticipating debate on an order of the day would the rule be transgressed.

I then referred back to the question asked by the member for Aston on 7 May, about which I raised the question of standing order 144. The member for Aston asked the Treasurer:

What is the government's strategy to reduce Commonwealth debt?

Mr Speaker, in a lengthy answer, the Treasurer made reference to only one thing—the part-privatisation of Telstra. That tempts one to conclude that, if the part-privatisation of Telstra does not pass through the parliament, the government has no strategy to reduce Commonwealth debt. If that is not more than a passing reference, what on earth is?

Mr SPEAKER —I thank the honourable member for Wills for his question. I do not intend to revisit or to canvass the decisions that were made then. You now have a very clear indication of how we are going to handle these points of order on interpretation and other aspects of the standing orders. It is a dynamic, viable challenge, and we make the best decisions we can on the day. However, I shall revisit it in the province of my chambers.