My question is to the Prime Minister. Can the Prime Minister explain to the House how the Attorney-General was able to consult with the Solicitor-General about a direction which did not exist, receive advice from the Solicitor-General about a bill the Solicitor-General had not seen and receive advice from the Solicitor-General about amendments the Solicitor-General had not seen? Isn't it becoming clear that the Prime Minister's leadership is so unstable that the Attorney-General is surviving for that reason and no other?

The Leader of the Opposition has a very experienced counsel in the member for Isaacs, and I think in matters of this kind he should avoid appearing for himself. The Attorney-General has my full confidence.