Hon. Members:

Honourable members interjecting—

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No. We're going to do this again because there were far too many interjections. The Treasurer will pause. The Treasurer will just resume his seat.

The minister for infrastructure—we can't have—

Honourable members interjecting—

I don't know why this is so hard. Members are entitled to ask their questions in silence and should be shown respect without snide comments on either side. In case you haven't worked it out, I'm not a fan of that. So we're just going to do this properly and invite the member for Hume—because he has earned the respect to ask his question, and I want everyone to show it to him.

Jim Chalmers (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It must be three o'clock! I welcome the question from the shadow Treasurer. I say to the shadow Treasurer and to his colleagues that they need to decide: do they want immigration to be lower or higher? They say they want it to be lower, but then they say they'll vote for it to be higher. They have to make up their mind, as the minister has pointed out to them repeatedly today. I'm asked what the RBA governor has said about some of these matters, and the two most important things that Governor Bullock has said are: first of all, public demand is not the main game when it comes to the outlook for inflation, and, secondly, the government has the right attitude when it comes to inflation. She couldn't be clearer. The Governor of the Reserve Bank couldn't be clearer. The shadow Treasurer could be a little clearer. The reason why his colleagues have been in the Saturday paper saying he has vacated the field and is not providing any direction and is just throwing rocks is that he has provided absolutely no coherent, costed or credible economic policies.

Hon. Members:

Honourable members interjecting—

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order. The Minister for Social Services is on a warning.

Honourable members interjecting—

Order. The minister for regional development is now warned. It is completely inappropriate to interject while someone is trying to raise a point of order. The member for Hume has asked his question; now he's entitled to raise a point of order.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question was specific, so I'm just going to make sure—I didn't hear exactly what the Treasurer was saying, because I was talking to the Leader of the Opposition about an important matter. But I thank the member for helping me. The Treasurer just has to make sure he remains directly relevant.

Jim Chalmers (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I said at the beginning, if the shadow Treasurer has that view, why is he voting for even higher migration with the position that they've announced on the student caps? They've got to make up their mind. They say they want lower migration, but they're voting for higher migration, and that's because they put their own political interests ahead of the national economic interest. I went through the things Governor Bullock has said about the government's policy and how it relates to inflation: the right attitude, helpful; two surpluses; and the like. The government has been clear. Those opposite haven't been clear. The reason those opposite are saying of the shadow Treasurer that he's vacated the field and is not providing direction and is just throwing rocks is that he has no coherent, credible or costed alternatives.

So, to learn what they think about the budget and inflation, we've got to go to the Liberals' deputy leader, who said today, about free TAFE, 'Remember this: it's a key principle and tenet of the Liberal Party that if you don't pay for something you don't value it.' The reason this is relevant—

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Just pause a moment. I don't want the Treasurer straying into alternative policies and approaches unless he is making it directly relevant to his answer. So, I can appreciate where he's going, but I'm going to listen carefully. Otherwise, I'll have to sit him down.

Jim Chalmers (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

When it comes to budget settings and demand, the Liberals' deputy leader has said, 'If you don't pay for something you don't value it.' And here we draw a direct line between the approach they're taking on fee-free TAFE—voting against it—and what this opposition leader did when he came after universal Medicare, when he came after universal health care. The point I'm making is that the reason we know that these characters are a risk is that we know their record. They voted against education caps, they voted against fee-free TAFE and they went after universal Medicare last time, and that's why they are a risk to household budgets and to inflation. (Time expired)