My question is addressed to the Prime Minister and I ask: how can the Prime Minister claim his industrial relations changes don't allow for cuts, when the cuts are right here in schedule 3 part 5 clause 19 of the Prime Minister's own industrial relations legislation that is before this parliament right now?

They're simply not, and that provision doesn't do what the Leader of the Opposition is saying before the House that it does do. And, being asked by the opposition a form of question which falsely puts something that the bill does, it is useful to look at the things that the bill actually does and which are all opposed by members opposite.

An opposition member: No.

The bill imposes—

The minister will resume his seat. The Leader of the Opposition on a point of order?

Yes, Mr Speaker: there have been a number of questions here this week, as you'd recall, Mr Speaker; here we have clarified: schedule 3, part 5, clause 19—we had down to the paragraph in the legislation that this question's about.

I'd just say: you need to state what the point of order is. I'm assuming—

It's on relevance. The minister can't talk about every other clause; he has to talk about this clause, which is the better off overall test.

Yes. I just—

Honourable members interjecting—

I would like to rule on the point of order. Unlike the last question, there's not any tolerance in this. The minister has been asked about a specific clause and he needs to confine himself to that. I mean, obviously, as he started the answer he dealt with the matter very directly, but the Leader of the Opposition is right—it's not about any other clauses and doesn't enable him to do that. The minister has the call.

I can reiterate that what the Leader of the Opposition contends could occur in that clause cannot occur, will not occur and does not occur now, with precisely the same drafted protections that Labor put into the act.

Opposition members interjecting—

Members on my left! Members on my left, when we've had a specific question, the Leader of the Opposition's raised a point of order and I've asked the minister to answer the question directly, a wall of noise is just going to result in a whole series of ejections from the chamber.