Mr DREYFUS (Isaacs—Deputy Manager of Opposition Business) (14:53): My question is to the Prime Minister. Is the Prime Minister aware of reports that a consortium led by Pacific Blue Capital, a company run by his mate Scott Briggs, will bid for a $1 billion contract to privatise the government's visa-processing system? Given it's reported that the Prime Minister launched Pacific Blue Capital and that Mr Briggs worked for the Prime Minister's private investment firm, does the Prime Minister have a conflict of interest in relation to this $1 billion government contract, and, if so, how will he manage it? The SPEAKER: The Leader of the House? Mr Pyne: That question is just a slur and a smear against the Prime Minister. He has absolutely no responsibility— Opposition members interjecting— The SPEAKER: The Leader of the House will resume his seat. Members on my left will cease interjecting. I don't know how many times I have to repeat myself. I need to hear the Leader of the House. He's entitled to be heard, just as the Manager of Opposition Business is entitled to be heard. If this persists, I will just lower the temperature rapidly through ejections. I would like the Leader of the House to raise his point of order, and I need to be able to hear him. If the Leader of the House could start again, because I only heard every second word. Mr Pyne: That is a slur and a smear masquerading as a question. The Prime Minister has no responsibility for public tenders in other ministers' portfolios and therefore he couldn't possibly have any knowledge of the answer to that question. Mr Hill interjecting— The SPEAKER: The member for Bruce will leave under 94(a). Anyone else who wants to join him, speak now. The member for Bruce then left the chamber. Mr Burke: Mr Speaker, on the point of order, there are two parts to the question—whether the Prime Minister has a conflict of interest and, if so, how he manages it. The other information is provided only to the extent that it's necessary to make sense of the question. The SPEAKER: In ruling on this question, there are aspects of the question that I think are out of order, but not of the volume we had yesterday. The Prime Minister, as other ministers do under the Practice, has every option to answer the question himself or refer it to another minister if they so wish. So it's close to the line, but I am going to allow the question to proceed.