My question is to the Prime Minister. In April, the Prime Minister halved fuel excise with the coalition's support, saying:

We are acting now to prepare and shield Australians.

Today, petrol has topped $2.40 a litre and diesel $2.80, hitting families, small businesses, farmers and regional communities hardest. Why won't the Prime Minister live up to his own words, follow the coalition's lead again and implement the coalition's fuel price shield, automatically lowering fuel prices whenever global oil prices spike?

I thank the member for his question. Indeed, April was a time, prior to Easter, where some of those opposite were actually calling for restrictions on fuel. They were calling for the odds-and-evens system to come back. They were saying that there would be shortages of fuel. And, yes, I did a national address that made a difference in encouraging people to not take more than they needed because, at that time, we had a demand surge. What we did was work constructively with organisations such as the business community, the National Farmers' Federation and others to bring together a taskforce that dealt with our states and territories. The primary concern, first and foremost, was to ensure that we had enough fuel supplies. By establishing the mechanisms, by making sure we go out there and purchase fuel on the spot market, we have—in spite of the fact that this conflict in the Middle East and problems with the Strait of Hormuz have gone on for longer than was anticipated when the conflict broke out, when there was talk of it being weeks, but we are now many, many months into this conflict, with no end in sight—ensured that farmers are able to sow their crops and to harvest at the end as well—

Mr Speaker—

Just take your seat. I'm going to give you the call, but we're not going to get into—well, I'll state the question. The question was, 'Why won't he adopt a coalition approach and automatically lower prices whenever the prices spike?' The Prime Minister is talking specifically about the prices and the action the government has taken. So it is going to be difficult. I'm just setting the scene, but I'll give the call to the Leader of the Nationals in the House of Representatives.

On relevance: the Prime Minister has set the context of historical events. He was asked about fuel prices today and whether he would follow the coalition's lead.

The leader has made his point.

You can continue with your point, if you've got other points to make.

I was going to make the point about the Prime Minister interjecting.

You've been interjecting across, the whole way through!

Let's just deal with this in a rational way. Just as we heard from the leader before, we can't pick and choose the part of the question. If you're asking about fuel prices and referring to prices in the past versus today, the Prime Minister is being directly relevant. And he was asked about coalition policy in this question, so he will be entitled to talk about the coalition as well—just so everyone knows and we're all on the same page. The Prime Minister has the call.

Thanks very much, Mr Speaker, I was asked about April. But it is no wonder that they can't find anyone in the National Party to be leader in the House of Representatives! None of them are up to it.

People want to know the prices of things. That's what they want to know

And the worse he's going, the more he babbles! Now, what we have done is ensure supply. That's the first thing. If you don't have supply, price really doesn't come into it. And they said there wouldn't be supply, in April. But when it comes to the questions, they stand here and ask about fiscal policy and ask about savings, and then they ask, 'Why don't you spend more money?' That is what they are saying. We have made sure we have supply in this country. We will respond in a fiscally responsible way as we go forward, as we always have.