Mr HOCKEY (North Sydney—The Treasurer) (14:28): I thank the honourable member for Hindmarsh for his question. Mr Dreyfus: You got what you wanted, Joe! The SPEAKER: Order! The member for Isaacs is warned! Mr HOCKEY: Now that Mike Devereux has had time to speak to his workers, it is appropriate for us— Mr Champion: Have an arm wrestle— The SPEAKER: Order! The member for Wakefield is warned! Mr HOCKEY: Obviously, they are not taking it too seriously. Now that Mike Devereux has had the chance to speak to his own workers, I want to provide— Mr Dreyfus: You got what you wanted, Joe! The SPEAKER: The member for Isaacs will remove himself under standing order 94(a). The member for Isaacs then left the chamber. Mr HOCKEY: There wasn't that outrage around when, under Labor, Mitsubishi left and Ford left! Where was that outrage? Where was that outrage from Labor? What a surprise! Ford left and Mitsubishi left and Labor wasn't too outraged then. Mr Bowen interjecting— The SPEAKER: Order! The member for McMahon is warned! Mr HOCKEY: We are the ones who are concerned about the workers not only at Holden but at all of the components manufacturers associated— Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER: The Treasurer will resume his seat. There is a general warning to all those sitting on my left. This is a serious issue. As I said before, the questions are important and the answers are important. Mr Albanese: Madam Speaker, I rise on a point of order on the contradiction between a general warning—which, by definition applies to every member of the House—and the fact that you said— The SPEAKER: I said, 'On my left.' Mr Albanese: That is my point of order. It is not possible to have a general warning to just one side of the House, Madam Speaker. The SPEAKER: Then I will name you one by one, if I have to. Mr HOCKEY: Now that Mr Devereux has had— Ms Macklin interjecting— The SPEAKER: The member for Jagajaga has already had a warning. If she wishes to leave under 94(a), that is just fine. Mr HOCKEY: Now that Mr Devereux has had the opportunity to speak to his workers, I say on behalf of the government—together with the Minister for Industry, the Acting Prime Minister, the member for Sturt and all members—that we will work closely with the government of South Australia, the opposition in South Australia, the unions and all of the stakeholders to ensure that the fact that Holden are leaving in 2017 will not lead to a significant economic downturn in South Australia or Victoria. We will do everything we can to assist during this transition. This is hugely important and we will do it, because it is not a surprise that this should have happened. The members know it is not a surprise—and why? An OECD report to the member for Lilley in 2012, when his own former chief of staff was at the OECD, recommended: As underlined by the authorities, there is a case for help to smooth the transition, but not preventing it, when its pace and scale make it difficult to absorb, for instance at the regional level. That was written in relation to the closure of car plants in Australia. The facts are that the car industry in Australia has had enormous financial support from taxpayers. During the period when there has been a significant reduction in activity in Australia, the government—whether Labor or Liberal—has provided enormous financial support: over $1 billion a year. But the net result is that we have seen a halving in the production of Australian cars on a world scale. These are the things that we have to deal with in order to address some of the challenges for Holden—(Time expired)