Senator MURPHY(9.58 a.m.) —During his contribution, and in relation to a question that I asked in the estimates, Senator Parer said that I was wrong.

Senator Parer —No, you said I was wrong.

Senator MURPHY —That is right, I said you were wrong and just a minute ago I understood you to say I was wrong.

Senator Parer —Yes, you were wrong in the second reading.

Senator MURPHY —I just got the Hansard transcript of those proceedings and I would like to correct you again. I asked you a question in the estimates that went specifically to the application of the diesel fuel rebate scheme to the cement industry, and you said:

The previous government removed it. You are talking about lime and limestone.

And then you said:

The previous government had removed it for limestone.

Correct, but I asked you that in terms of the cement industry. I reiterate, you said:

That is right—for the cement industry.

Clearly, that was not the case because the then minister, Senator Schacht, had written to the cement industry and made the point. Customs may well have put a definition for a determination themselves on what application it had to the cement industry, but the previous government did not. The previous government had written a letter to the cement industry saying that, under mining and the extraction of a mineral, if that were the case, they would still be entitled to it.

Senator Parer —You are splitting hairs.

Senator MURPHY —I am not splitting hairs, Senator. I am just saying that that is the case. Those are the facts—not as you have presented them. As you pointed out, there have been cases before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal and, indeed, the Federal Court. The outcome of those will be somewhat interesting. I would like to point that out because I was not wrong. I asked a very specific question relating to a particular industry and the letters from the previous minister support that position.

Amendment negatived.

Original question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill read a second time.