Ms GILLARD (Lalor—Prime Minister) (14:00): I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his question. Let me explain to the Leader of the Opposition the fundamentals of this budget. This budget is bringing the budget back into surplus in 2012-13, as promised. That has meant that we have needed to take a series of tough decisions. We did not want to see in this budget the profligacy of the Howard years during mining boom mark 1. Consequently, when you look at this budget, you see an average increase in expenditure of one per cent, compared with an average increase in expenditure of 3.6 per cent under the Howard government. We are being so rigorous on bringing the budget back to surplus in 2012-13, exactly as promised, because we are determined to continue to deliver to the Australian people a strong economy which gives them the benefit of jobs—750,000 created already, with another half a million to be created in the years to come. So, yes, there have been some tough decisions taken in this budget in relation to savings. On the family payments question that the Leader of the Opposition raised, let me say what the actual information is. Mr Pyne: Mr Speaker, I raise a point of order. The Prime Minister was asked a question about the government's spending blow-out on border protection versus its cut for family benefits. She was not asked to give an adjournment speech about the budget in general. She should go back to that point. The SPEAKER: Order! The Manager of Opposition Business will resume his seat. The Prime Minister was talking about that aspect of the question as the Manager of Opposition Business rose. I am not sure whether some comments are sotto voce just for discussion amongst people, but it might help if people did not speak while I was speaking and then I would not misinterpret it as reflections upon the chair. Ms GILLARD: The Leader of the Opposition asked me about family payments. For the clarification of the House and for the Leader of the Opposition so that he has the accurate information—and I believe that he is under an obligation to make sure that what he says to the Australian people is accurate—family payments will still increase under this budget. All fortnightly rates will still increase for family tax benefits A and B. I understand that the Leader of the Opposition does not want the facts but these are the facts. For example, on 1 July the maximum rate will increase by $113 per annum for a child between the ages of zero and 12 and by $146 per annum for a child between the ages of 13 and 15. In relation to family tax benefit B, for the youngest child under five years of age, per family there is a $95 increase annually; for kids aged between five and 18 years, $66 annually. This budget honours our commitment to increase payments for the parents of teenagers, as we said we would during the election campaign. So parents of teenagers on the maximum rate can look forward to an increase of $4,208 in their family payments if they have a child of 16 to 17 years and $3,741 if they have a child of 18 to 19 years. They are important figures about family payments in this budget and if the Leader of the Opposition wants to accurately talk about this budget, he should be referring to those figures. The Leader of the Opposition also raised with me the cost of mandatory detention and continuing to process asylum seekers. I support mandatory detention. I believe it is an appropriate policy to check people who come to this country unauthorised—to check their health, to check their security status and to process their claims. So we will continue to fund mandatory detention because it is the right thing to do. We will continue with the Malaysia agreement which has been the subject of discussion in this House this week and which was announced by me and the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship on Saturday. It is a big blow for people-smugglers and aimed at breaking the people-smugglers' business model. It is the right thing to do. It is better than a three-word slogan.