My question is for the Prime Minister. Was the Attorney-General accurately representing the Prime Minister as his representative in Senate estimates when last night he defended the conduct of Bruce Billson, saying:

… it is very appropriate for backbench members to receive remuneration from third-party sources not inconsistent with their responsibilities as members of parliament ... it is both consistent and commonplace.

Sorry; I want to listen very closely to the question. Members on both sides are interjecting and preventing me hearing what I think could be a critical part of it. I'd like the Manager of Opposition Business to begin his question again.

My question is to the Prime Minister. Was the Attorney-General accurately representing the Prime Minister as his representative in Senate estimates when last night he defended the conduct of Bruce Billson, saying:

… it is very appropriate for backbench members to receive remuneration from third-party sources not inconsistent with their responsibilities as members of parliament … it is both consistent and commonplace.

Is the behaviour of Bruce Billson commonplace for this government? Just how many members of the government are we talking about?

The members' interest disclosure system, which all members here are very familiar with, does provide for the disclosure of income over and above a member's parliamentary salary, and it's open to the honourable member or anyone else with an interest in the matter to go through all those disclosures and determine how many backbenchers are in receipt of income from third-party sources as the honourable member described it.