Tanya Plibersek (Sydney, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. Three months ago, this very day, the Prime Minister said: 'My government is undertaking a significant reform agenda.' Given that we now know the Prime Minister has abandoned reform and resorted to Abbott-style scare campaigns, isn't it the case that the—

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

The Deputy Leader of the Opposition will resume her seat. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition knows—

Ms Plibersek interjecting—

The Deputy Leader of the Opposition will not interject when I am making a ruling, and she is warned. And that will be her final warning. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition needs to refer to members by their proper titles. I have made this point over and over again, and I made it to her, in fact, on the matter of public importance earlier in the week. The Manager of Opposition Business, on a point of order?

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On a point of order, Mr Speaker. Just to confirm the ruling, if I may—

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

Yes.

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

because I want to make sure that the rest of the questions are viewed as in order. References previously to 'Turnbull government' or 'Abbott government' have been accepted. I am just checking that is still the case.

Karen McNamara (Dobell, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

She didn't say that.

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I know she didn't. I am asking for the purposes of the rest of question time.

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

The member for Solomon and the member for Corangamite are warned. Obviously, members can refer to previous governments and current governments—of course they can. But that was not what was said. The Deputy Leader of the Opposition will start her question again, and we will start the clock again. We will not pause it unless we have a Groundhog Day moment.

Tanya Plibersek (Sydney, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. Three months ago, this very day, the Prime Minister said: 'My government is undertaking a significant reform agenda.' Given that we now know the Prime Minister has abandoned reform and resorted to Abbott government style scare campaigns, isn't it the case that the Prime Minister has now taken on every characteristic he criticised the former Prime Minister for?

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

I think we can say, without any doubt, that the member for Sydney has abandoned every characteristic of a shadow foreign minister. Here we have, today, the defence white paper covering some of the biggest strategic issues of our time, canvassing the issues and challenges of regional stability—the South China Sea foremost in everybody's mind.

Mr Danby interjecting—

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

The member for Melbourne Ports is warned.

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

No questions from the shadow minister for foreign affairs on that; no questions from her on the cyclone in Fiji and our response to that. Simply, one cheap shot—the first cheap shot from the Leader of the Opposition and then a cheap shot from his deputy. On a day when the Australian people are concerned, legitimately, about their defence, their security, and they are focused on the defence white paper—the massive investment that is being undertaken to secure our safety and our safety for decades to come—does the opposition have any interest in that? Apparently not. They are simply complaining about what they describe as a 'scare campaign'.

Mark Dreyfus (Isaacs, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Attorney General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Your cheap shots.

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

The member for Isaacs will cease interjecting.

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

On the question of scare campaigns, let me simply remind honourable members of these very simple facts. Housing is the largest single asset class in Australia. It represents most of each Australian family's net worth. Under the Labor Party's plan, from 1 July 2017 investors will not be able to offset their rental losses against wage and salary and, presumably, other personal professional income. So that will remove for residential housing, we estimate, based on the percentage of loans made in December, something in excess of a third of the buyers. That can only have the effect of reducing housing prices. Reduce the number of buyers and prices will come down. That is not a scare campaign. That is economics 101.