My question is for the Prime Minister. Prime Minister, every electorate in Australia has a need for infrastructure funding for important and worthy projects, but, under your invitation-only scheme, funding of $17 went to Labor seats for every dollar that went to an independent seat. Don't you agree that government spending should be based on merit and need and should be transparent, rather than being based on retaining and winning marginal seats?

I thank the member for Kooyong for her question and for having regularly advocated for projects in her electorate, as have all of the members up in that corner—including the member for Mackellar next to you, who got the major upgrade of Mona Vale Road, which wasn't promised for a long period of time but was committed to after lobbying from the crossbench—just as, when by-elections are on, I get lobbied, as well, by members on the crossbench. I make this point—that the program that the member—

The member for Mackellar is warned.

It's embarrassing.

Order! The member for Mackellar will leave the chamber under 94(a). If I warn someone, that is a definite—

Stop him yelling at me.

The member for Mackellar then left the chamber.

The same rules apply to everyone in the chamber.

Members across this parliament make representations to government, and political parties make election commitments during election campaigns. As to the three projects that are referred to in my electorate, I hesitate to find anyone who would regard them as not being worthwhile: fixing a women's health centre that literally needed repair after more than 50 years of providing services; a project dealing with women and children having a safe place to go when escaping domestic violence; and an environmental project stopping raw sewage going into the Cooks River during flooding. That is the system that occurred. Those three projects in my electorate were certainly, I am proud to say, all worthwhile. All of them provide community benefit or benefit for people who are most in need. We will continue, as do—

Order! Has the Prime Minister concluded his answer? We'll move to the next question.

I seek leave to table the Centre for Public Integrity paper titled Public money, political advantage?Community infrastructure grant program raises serious integrity concerns.

Leave not granted.