Senator FAULKNER —My question is directed to the Leader of the Government in the Senate and Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Hill. Minister, I refer to the Remuneration Tribunal's decision in December last year to alter the conditions regarding parliamentarians' use of charter flights, and I ask: who wrote the government submission to the tribunal; when was the submission lodged; who authorised the submission; what did the government submission propose or recommend; and what was the reasoning for proposing the change? Most importantly, what prompted the government's submission?

Senator HILL (Environment and Heritage) —I presume what prompted it was the ambiguity that has been recognised not only by our side of politics but also by the Labor Party, including Mr Beazley today. Alternatively—and I will have to check this—the Remuneration Tribunal, as I recall it, acknowledged the ambiguity itself the year before. So there were plenty of reasons for it to move to overcome that ambiguity and clarify the rules, and it so did. With respect to any specific submission that was made by the government in that regard, if it was made I presume it was made by the Minister for Finance and Administration, who I think normally makes these submissions. But I will seek information on that and provide it to Senator Faulkner as soon as I can.

Senator FAULKNER —Madam President, I ask a supplementary question. I thank the Minister for seeking that information. My question, Minister, went to who wrote the submission, when it was lodged, who authorised it, what the submission proposed and recommended and what the reasoning was. If the minister would care to take all those aspects of my question on notice and provide an answer, I am sure we would all appreciate it.

Senator HILL (Environment and Heritage) —I did hear it all the first time. Now I have heard it a second time. We will do our best to answer.