My question is to the Acting Prime Minister. I refer to the Acting Prime Minister's previous answer. Given the 450 additional gigalitres is to be acquired through investment in on-farm infrastructure, how can it be possible for there to be negative consequences for communities caused by taxpayers paying for farmers to improve their infrastructure? Isn't it the case that the National Party is simply looking for any excuse while the Prime Minister is away to tear apart the bipartisan consensus on the Murray-Darling?