Dr CHALMERS (Rankin—Treasurer) (14:42): Thanks to the member for Bennelong for the considered way that he engages with the big issues in our economy. The Reserve Bank legislation before the House is all about modernising our central bank, strengthening its decision-making and making it more independent, not less independent. It seeks to implement the considered recommendations of the review, which reported about a year and a half ago and which has been in the public domain for a long time now. It's been the subject of a lot of welcome discussion and debate. The Reserve Bank governor herself is 100 per cent behind the changes and has said she wants to see them legislated. I want to thank her for her efforts working with the government to bed down the changes that have already been implemented. Opposition members interjecting— Dr CHALMERS: As those opposite interject, I want to read to them a quote from a big supporter of the changes to the Reserve Bank: The recommendations of the review will clarify the Reserve Bank's monetary policy role, strengthen its governance arrangements, improve the transparency of its decision making, and deepen its economic expertise. … … … It is essential the implementation of the review be as bipartisan as possible … That's what the shadow Treasurer said about the recommendations of the review, and now he says he's going to vote against it. I have tried to work with the shadow Treasurer to implement the changes in a bipartisan way. Mr Taylor: You're stacking the board! The SPEAKER: The Treasurer will pause. The member for Hume has been yelling non-stop all throughout question time. Mr Taylor: I'm helping. The SPEAKER: You're not helping. You're showing disrespect, so you'll leave the chamber under 94(a). The member for Hume then left the chamber. Dr CHALMERS: I've tried to work with the shadow Treasurer in a bipartisan way. I have accommodated every single one of the six issues that he raised with me. I have accommodated every single one of the concerns that he raised with me by making sensible changes to what had originally been proposed. I met with him, I arranged briefings for him, I engaged with him genuinely and respectfully, publicly and privately, on this really important matter. That's because my preference was and continues to be a bipartisan agreement between the major parties. I say, respectfully, I'd rather not deal with the crossbench in the Senate, because I want these changes to endure any future changes in government. That's why I tried to take the shadow Treasurer seriously, even if his colleagues don't. Unfortunately, all along in this process, we have been hostage to the shadow Treasurer's ability to carry an argument internally in his show. He has been unable to do that. If the House listens closely, they will hear the familiar sound of the shadow Treasurer getting rolled once again. The decision that they've announced today is irresponsible. It creates uncertainty, it's disappointing, but it's not surprising, because this is what happens when the opposition leader's destructive negativity collides with the shadow Treasurer's weakness. This is why they have no credibility on the economy; they're always looking for unnecessary conflict to distract from the fact that they have no credible or costed economic policies, and they won't tell us where $315 billion in cuts are going to come from.