Mr MORRISON (Cook—Prime Minister and Minister for the Public Service) (14:00): The budget that the Treasurer handed down last night was a plan to secure Australia's recovery. First and foremost, that means getting Australians back into work and getting Australians back into jobs. I'll hand over to the Treasurer in just one moment to address the specific issue that the Leader of the Opposition has raised. As we know, over the course of the current financial year and through the pandemic period many initiatives were undertaken by the government which have had an impact on how the inflation rate has been impacted as a result of those measures—whether it was through child care—and that has provided timing differences in relation to how these matters are measured technically. What I do know is that the economic recovery plan that is set out in the budget that the Treasurer handed down last night is going to mean more jobs, more investment, more support for Australians in work, lower taxes, better infrastructure— The SPEAKER: The Leader of the Opposition on a point of order. Mr Albanese: Mr Speaker, it was a very specific question. It did not go to the cuts they have got to infrastructure over the next four years or anything else. It went to page 37 of Budget Paper No. 1. The SPEAKER: The Leader of the House on the point of order. Mr Dutton: Mr Speaker, that is nothing more than a stunt. The Leader of the Opposition has been warned about it before. There is no point of order. Holding up books for the cameras does not substitute for some sort of substantive point. The Prime Minister was perfectly in order. The Leader of the Opposition shouldn't waste time. Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER: Order! Members on both sides will cease interjecting. I'll address this in two parts, as delicately as I can. It is right that members shouldn't use props; they're undesirable. But holding up the budget paper— An honourable member interjecting— The SPEAKER: No, if I stop every time someone interrupts me this might take till 10 past three. The Leader of the Opposition did raise, I think, a legitimate point of order. The Prime Minister was certainly in order up until the fact he broadened out into a number of other issues. He needs to relate his material obviously to the question. Also, to the Leader of the House, in terms of the point of order, I am not sure that he necessarily heard all of the question when it was asked. The Treasurer.