My question is to the Treasurer. Labor's homegrown inflation has increased for four months in a row, in stark contrast to peer countries. Markets and leading economists don't see any rate cuts coming in the next 12 months and, worse, now see a rate rise in August as a real risk. Three failed budgets have left the Reserve Bank doing all the heavy lifting, and there is no relief in sight for struggling families. When will this Treasurer cut the spin and take responsibility for his failed budgets?

When will you take responsibility for leaving inflation so high!

Order! The Minister for the Environment and Water will cease interjecting. She is now warned, for interjecting before a minister has even begun answering a question.

That's what happens when you have to put months of questions into one opportunity.

Spin your way out of this one, Jim!

The Treasurer will pause. The member for Deakin, we are three seconds into an answer—

Six.

Six seconds, my apologies! We are six seconds into an answer. You'll leave the chamber under 94(a). You've been constantly interjecting.

The member for Deakin then left the chamber.

Make it permanent!

The Minister for Home Affairs is now warned. Honestly! There is far too much noise. I'm not mucking around today. We are going to hear these answers in silence.

Homegrown inflation is non-tradeable inflation, and it's lower now than when those opposite were in office. That's the first point. The second point is: headline inflation was 6.1 per cent when we came to office. It's still higher than we'd like, but it's much lower than what we inherited from those opposite.

If he wants to talk about international comparisons, I know that he—and he's encouraged the Leader of the Opposition to make this mistake too—wants to use Canada as an example. He did it yesterday. He's done it today via the Leader of the Opposition. He really should know that the cash rate is higher in Canada than it is in Australia. Inflation is going up in Canada in most recent data. Unemployment in Canada is 6.1 per cent, and here it's around four per cent. It's hard to know where to begin with the sorts of things that the shadow Treasurer puts to the parliament in the hope that we won't know the actual numbers.

I think the most substantial part of his question is about the role of the budget in fighting inflation, and, as the Governor of the Reserve Bank has said, the two surpluses that we've delivered in the two years that we've been in office are helping in the fight against inflation. As the Prime Minister rightly pointed out, you would have absolutely no idea what a surplus looks like, because you never delivered one. You printed the mugs. You said there would be a surplus in the first year and every year thereafter. You posed in those awkward photos with the 'back in black' mugs. You did everything except for actually delivering a surplus. The Governor of the Reserve Bank has said our surpluses are helping.

Of course the budgets that are handed down by parties of either political persuasion are not the only determinant of prices in our economy, but they can play a helpful role. Turning big Liberal deficits into Labor surpluses is playing a helpful role. Designing our cost-of-living relief—

Order. The member for Groom is now warned.

a big chunk of which comes in on Monday, is playing a helpful role: energy prices would be higher without it, childcare prices would be higher without it, and rents would be higher without our efforts.

But if those opposite want to say that spending in the budget is the primary determinant of inflation, then no wonder they left us with inflation much higher than it is now. They delivered a budget with no savings in it—their last budget. They spent $40 billion—almost double what we spent. They had two deficits, worth $135 billion, that we've turned into surpluses. They spent most of the upward revision to revenue, and they found no savings in their last budget. So, if it's—

Order. The Treasurer will pause.

Government members interjecting—

Members on my right, I want to hear from the member for Hume on his point of order.

On relevance, Mr Speaker: the question was about the Treasurer's failed budgets and why market interest rates have—

Resume your seat. I want to hear from the Leader of the House.

To the point of order, Mr Speaker: this question allowed full range on everything about budgets and everything about the economy. In terms of an attempt at a tightly framed question, I don't think I've seen anything worse with that aim than this one. It went across the field and the portfolio.

It was a broad question with a number of things within it. I know the question at the end was a political question, but the Treasurer has to make sure his answer is directly relevant to what he was asked by the member for Hume.

Thanks, Mr Speaker. This is why the Leader of the Opposition was moved to insist the other day that the shadow Treasurer is not incompetent, which is what his colleagues think of him.

The Treasurer will return to the question.

The reason inflation was higher under them than it is under us is that we've been more responsible with the budget than they ever were. The best evidence of that is the two surpluses that we— (Time expired)