My question is again to the Prime Minister. I refer to his previous answer, when he said that the matter was drawn to his attention weeks ago. Didn't the Prime Minister, at a press conference less than an hour ago, say, 'I have long expressed to Mr Kelly my concerns about that staff member'? How are these two statements consistent? And why didn't he do something about it, given the powerful position that he holds?

The Leader of the Opposition is wilfully conflating two different matters. There is the long-held concerns that I have had about the performance of a staff member in the member for Hughes' office. That is based on the fact that my electorate adjoins that of the member for Hughes and they relate to performance measures that don't relate to the more sensitive issues that have come up more recently—

Mr Dreyfus interjecting—

Ms Plibersek interjecting—

The Prime Minister will pause. The member for Isaacs will leave under standing order 94(a) and the member for Sydney will cease interjecting. The Prime Minister has the call.

The member for Isaacs then left the chamber.

When it was drawn to my attention, I drew it to the attention of the member for Hughes when we met together several weeks ago. He undertook to take certain actions in relation to that staff member. That was not followed through on and he took the decision.