My question is to the Prime Minister. Will the Prime Minister confirm that Australians will pay $77 billion more tax than they get back?

I'll do my best to answer a question that didn't really make sense. It didn't really make sense. Then again, it doesn't make sense to oppose income tax cuts, but that is what they have done time after time after time. They oppose income tax cuts, and the other thing that they oppose is the real wage increases that the minister just spoke about—that 4.75 per cent increase in the minimum wage that brings the increases for those on minimum wages and awards to $12,000 since we came to office. We want Australians to earn more and to keep more of what they earn, which is why consistently we have made submissions to the Fair Work Commission arguing for increases in real wages, something those opposite have never ever done.

The Leader of the Opposition, on a point of order?

On relevance, the question was about Labor's $77 billion of tax increases.

Yes, the Prime Minister was asked a yes/no question about the $77 billion that the opposition is claiming the government is receiving back. I know you want a yes/no answer, but I can't make the Prime Minister do that. He wasn't asked about other policies than that one.

The question went to how much tax people pay and how much they get back. It worked; that's exactly what was asked.

It was!

Just acknowledging the frustration of the Leader of the Opposition, the words that you say into the microphone all form part of the question. When the words finish with 'and what they get back', then the full relationship is able to be answered and is relevant.

On the point of order, we want the Prime Minister to try and be relevant. It was a very tight question about $77 billion. Are you paying more taxes than $77 billion, yes or no? It's in your budget papers.

The question to the Prime Minister was 'will the Prime Minister confirm that Australians will pay $77 billion more tax than they get back?' It's a figure that he's given. I'll have to listen carefully to make sure he's talking about what—

Yes, thank you, Leader of the Opposition. We're dealing with this. It's a yes/no that you require. I can't get him to do that, but I can make sure he's being directly relevant to the tax question he was asked about that figure.

Honourable members interjecting—

We're just going to take the temperature down a little bit. There's far too much noise this week already. I want the House to settle, and we'll hear from the Prime Minister.

We on this side of the House, on Thursday, we'll be voting for income tax cuts. Those on that side will be only voting for higher income taxes, like they did before the last election, like they did when we changed stage 3 of the tax cuts. Consistently they have voted for higher taxes and lower wages for working Australians. We on this side of the House stand for working Australians. We stand for higher wages, for lower income taxes and for people to earn more and keep more of what they earn.