Mr TURNBULL (Wentworth—Prime Minister) (14:57): I have addressed this several times, but I will do so in more length, because I think what the opposition is doing here demeans this House and it demonstrates a desperation that really insults the intelligence of the Australian people. For the benefit of Australians who are watching this, let us consider this: at 20 past two yesterday I answered a question from the member for Hindmarsh and I spoke about the Labor Party's proposal to increase capital gains tax on personal income. I said that on a top marginal rate it would effectively go to 37 per cent, which is true. I said that would be higher than the United States, higher than the UK and much higher than the— Mr Ewen Jones interjecting— The SPEAKER: The member for Herbert has been warned, and he should not blame the member for Braddon! As I made clear in the last ruling—I am perhaps unfairly trying to anticipate the Manager of Opposition Business's point of order—I decided to allow the question because I think there should be openness and free-flowing debate. Where a question contains a number of statements—and there were quite a number of them; more than three, I think—it is almost impossible for the Prime Minister on that topic to not be relevant. If I allow broad questions, then I am going to allow broad answers. Mr Burke: Mr Speaker, I respect what you have said, but in terms of the answer yesterday, the Prime Minister is quoting every part of that answer except the part that was in the question which was the mislead. Mrs Griggs interjecting— The SPEAKER: The member for Solomon will cease interjecting. Just before I call the Prime Minister, I have made very clear he is on the policy topic of tax. As I said, it was a broad question. Other speakers could have been more restrictive. But if you want me to be not restrictive on questions; I am not going to be as restrictive on answers. Mr TURNBULL: As I was saying, the answer I gave to the member for Hindmarsh discussed the very negative consequences of Labor's proposal to increase capital gains tax so dramatically for individuals. I noted that, for example, on an asset that grew at six per cent over five or six years, it would amount to 20 per cent tax on the real gain. That was my answer. Then at 2:23, the member for McMahon rose and said, 'My question is to the Prime Minister and refers to his previous answer', all of which was devoted to talking about personal income tax and Labor's proposal to change the CGT discount. He asked me whether I ruled out announcing any changes to capital gains tax—referring to the previous answer—to which I said, 'I can say to the honourable member that increasing the capital gains tax is no part of our thinking.' I then went on to talk about negative gearing and the impact on housing and so forth from the proposed changes they made to capital gains tax. It is perfectly clear that I was talking about Labor's proposal to increase capital gains tax on individuals and it was perfectly obvious that that was what the member for McMahon was talking about. But then those opposite want to waste the time of the House by pretending that my remarks addressed a topic that went utterly undiscussed in the whole debate yesterday. Mr Mitchell interjecting— The SPEAKER: The member for McEwen is warned. Mr TURNBULL: This is the depth of childlessness and desperation to which they have sunk. I say to those honourable members: when you are in a tax hole, stop digging.