Joel Fitzgibbon (Hunter, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister, and I refer him to his previous answer on the question of the coalition agreement. Can the Prime Minister confirm that his government has spent almost three years and tens of thousands of taxpayers' money on lawyers to hide the secret coalition agreement? Why is the Prime Minister spending tens of thousands of taxpayers' money in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal and the Federal Court to hide the inept deal the Prime Minister struck to get his job? Will he now commit to releasing the secret coalition agreement?

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That question is out of order.

Mr Fitzgibbon interjecting—

Yes, happy to hear from you.

Joel Fitzgibbon (Hunter, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I accept you couldn't hear it over—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Manager of Opposition Business.

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Opposition Business (House)) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, raising a point of order—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Why don't I give you an explanation first?

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Opposition Business (House)) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It must be in order for us to ask about the cost of legal fees that the government has used. They can't be spending taxpayers' money and we're not allowed to ask about it.

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I made the point about the coalition agreement. It did refer to the previous answer. I've said on numerous occasions: you just can't refer to a previous answer and ask a separate question. If you want to ask a question simply about legal costs, you need to frame it that way. The substance of that question—

Mr Fitzgibbon interjecting—

No, look, the member for Hunter will resume his seat. He's not going to help by interrupting at this point. He's certainly not going to help himself—put it that way. I'm making it very clear: I'm not going to allow the Practice to be warped. It specifically refers to coalition agreements. I think I said: on page 554, it specifically refers to that. If you want to ask a question about legal costs, you need to ask that, and not ask it under the cover of a coalition agreement, which is specifically in the Practice as not being in order. You've got a choice: you can rephrase it, or we're going to move on.

Joel Fitzgibbon (Hunter, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister, and I ask him how much his government has spent with respect to the lawyers it has engaged in the matter of Joel Fitzgibbon v Malcolm Turnbull, Prime Minister of Australia?

Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'll get back to the honourable member on that. I'm sure that, in the honourable member's electorate of Hunter, that's what everyone's talking about—that's right! It's the coalition agreement and the legal costs! There's no-one there talking about jobs, are they, Member for Hunter; no-one there talking about investment; no-one talking about infrastructure; no-one talking about national security! They're only talking about their out-of-touch federal member who doesn't want to focus on the real economic issues that secure their future. The member for Hunter is an embarrassment.

Honourable Members:

Honourable members interjecting—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Members on both sides could cease interjecting.