My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer to Labor's plan today to make multinational corporations pay their fair share of tax. Given this plan would raise more than double what the Prime Minister's unfair GP tax would raise, why is the Prime Minister still slugging Australians with his unfair GP tax rather than making multinational corporations pay their fair share?

On the subject of tax changes, why will the Labor Party not support in opposition the changes that they proposed in government? If they want to talk about measures that would help the revenue, what about supporting in opposition the changes that members opposite proposed in government? Labor can talk all they like now, but they do not have much of a record. When it comes to tax, there were some 100 measures that had been proposed but not implemented by members opposite.

I rise on a point of order regarding relevance. To be directly relevant, the Prime Minister might refer to the question at some point.

There is no point of order. It was a very wide-ranging question.

Now they seem to think that if you spend another $100 million on the ATO you can raise $1 billion.

Why didn't we think of that!

I suppose they can spend $1 billion on the ATO to raise $10 billion! That is the kind of ouzo economics that we have come to expect from members opposite. When it comes to the subject of Medicare, this Prime Minister intends to be the best friend that Medicare has ever had, as I was as health minister. We are determined to protect a sustainable Medicare for our future. We are determined to protect bulk-billing for vulnerable people. As members opposite know, the Minister for Health is consulting broadly with the medical profession, and we will have more to say in due course.