Mr TAYLOR (Hume) (14:00): My question is to the Prime Minister. The Albanese Labor government is the weakest and most incompetent since the Whitlam government. The RBA forecast that inflation will not return to the midpoint of the target for two years. Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER: I want to hear the question. I think I know we are going with the point of order, but the descriptors which I illustrated yesterday, to be crystal clear with the chamber, are not within standing orders. This is the first question since we've had this, and I said that, if there were descriptors, it's going to be a problem. If we can just start the questions without the descriptors, it would assist the chamber greatly. The Manager of Opposition Business, on a point of order? Mr Fletcher: Mr Speaker, there is a distinction to be drawn between language about an individual and a fact based assessment of the performance of a government. The SPEAKER: It places the chair in a really difficult position if we go down this path, and it is a slippery path, and we'll just race to the bottom. I don't want question time to be like that. I can understand that it's an opinion, but it is not helpful, I think, for the dignity of question time and the running of the parliament. Mr Albanese interjecting— The SPEAKER: Order! The Prime Minister will cease interjecting. On the point of order? Mr Dutton: Mr Speaker, I just seek clarity from your earlier advice. I just need clarification as to what standing order it is that you might be relying on. The description of a government in these terms, as the Manager of Opposition Business pointed out, is quite distinct from a reflection on an individual member, which obviously is dealt with in the standing orders. But I do think it's difficult, with all due respect, to rule that an adequate description, such as I think we've put here in this question, can be ruled out of order. I don't think it offends the standing orders at all. If you can't describe a government in the terms that it should be described in, I don't understand how it is that we can have a breach of the standing orders. The SPEAKER: I haven't said the question is out of order. I haven't ruled that way. An opposition member: It was heading that way. The SPEAKER: No, I wasn't heading that way. I was just letting the House know my views. I'm trying to assist the House so everyone gets a fair go. I'll hear from the Leader of the House. Mr Burke: In terms of the issues just raised by the Leader of the Opposition, where he said, 'How could it be against the standing orders?' standing order 100(d) says: Questions must not contain: … … … (ii) arguments … The same standing order, in subsection (d)(iii), states that questions must not contain inferences. The same standing order, in subsection (d)(iv), states that imputations can't be contained. The same standing order, standing order 100, in subsection (d)(v), states that insults can't be included. You can then go to standing order 101, the standing order on the Speaker's discretion about questions, which states: The Speaker may: (a) direct a Member to change the language of a question asked during Question Time if the language is inappropriate or does not otherwise conform with the standing orders; and (b) change the language of a question in writing if the language is inappropriate or does not otherwise conform with the standing orders. The SPEAKER: Everyone will resume their seats. I'll deal with this. The Leader of the House will finish his point of order. Then we'll move on and I'll deal with this. Mr Burke: I only rose because the Leader of the Opposition challenged to ask: where is this an offence to the standing orders? There's a myriad of examples. Honourable members interjecting— The SPEAKER: We're going to get through this. Manager, resume your seat for a moment. I take the point from the Manager of Opposition Business, which is correct, and that from the Leader of the Opposition, which is correct also. The difficulty for the chair—and this is not the first time this has risen—is that this is not the first time in any parliament where descriptors have come into it. So I'll allow the question, but I'm just making a point to the House that we need to be careful with the language that we—on both sides—are using with questions and answers. This has come from the crossbench before, and it has been raised. I understand the issue; I'm just advising the House—for everyone's benefit—that, if we could reframe language to be more factual and to be on point, I think question time would be a better thing. I give the call to the member for Hume. Mr TAYLOR: My question is to the Prime Minister. The Albanese Labor government is the weakest and most incompetent since the Whitlam government. The RBA has forecast that inflation will not return to the midpoint of the target for two years. When will this Prime Minister finally admit that Labor's reckless spending means that inflation and interest rates are higher for longer?