Mr TURNBULL (Wentworth—Prime Minister) (14:26): The honourable member asked me where something was. I would ask him where his PhD in economics has gone, too. Really—what a pathetic response from the opposition! Seriously! We talk about the pantomime of question time. Here you have a situation where a government consults, a government listens and a government improves legislation— Dr Chalmers: It was iron clad. You said it was iron clad—you said it was an iron-clad policy! The SPEAKER: The member for Rankin is now warned! Mr TURNBULL: One element out of 12, affecting $550 million out of $6 billion. This superannuation package was well designed. It tackles major issues of fairness and major issues of flexibility, and it has been improved. Does the honourable member suggest that the member to whom he referred should be treated with contempt? Should be ignored? Does he suggest that the only wisdom is on his side of the chamber? The reality is that honourable members opposite— Dr Chalmers: He's the Treasurer now. He's got more say in it than you do! Mr Pasin interjecting— The SPEAKER: The member for Rankin will leave under 94(a). You can leave under 94(a)—I have warned you twice. The member for Barker will leave as well—he was interjecting after being warned. The member for Rankin and the member for Barker then left the chamber. Mr TURNBULL: I would refer honourable members opposite—indeed, all honourable members—to this very important principle of my government: we will seek always to improve our measures. If measures we propose or implement can be improved, we will improve them. We will listen to all those who offer criticism or suggestions for change—we will listen to them in good faith. If we can improve measures we will improve them. We have to recognise that policy making must be dynamic. What we have done here with the superannuation changes is that we have presented a set of changes in one of the most complex areas of law imaginable. Very few Australians understand the operation of the super system. We all know that. The Treasurer and the Minister for Revenue presented 12 measures, all of which made substantial changes. Their advocacy and that of our colleagues secured support for all of them. One remained subject to considerable criticism from many parts of the community—from the opposition, from those stakeholders in the industry, from constituents and from colleagues. We listened carefully to that and we thought, 'How can we achieve the objects of the package and meet those concerns?' It is a great credit to my colleagues that they have done that, and that they have done that in the constructive, modern way we operate government in 2016. (Time expired)