Mr ALBANESE (Grayndler—Prime Minister) (14:01): I was going to give this question to the Treasurer, but the bit in the question about spending is just too much to resist. When we came to office, there was a $78 billion deficit projected and we turned that into a $22 billion surplus, and the following year we turned it into another $15 billion surplus. Those opposite were elected in 2013 with a commitment to do a surplus in the first year and every year thereafter. Dr Chalmers: None for nine, you geniuses! The SPEAKER: The Treasurer will cease interjecting. Mr ALBANESE: In spite of the money ripped out of health, education and services—in places like Veterans' Affairs, people couldn't get their payments done—and in spite of the robodebt debacle and everything that we've seen, they ran deficit after deficit after deficit, time after time after time. Dr Chalmers interjecting— The SPEAKER: The Leader of the Opposition is entitled to raise a point of order, and he shall do so now. Mr Dutton: Mr Speaker, I'd firstly like you to deal with the comment from the Treasurer, who surely will have the decency to withdraw it. The SPEAKER: Will the Treasurer withdraw, to assist the House? Dr Chalmers: I withdraw, Mr Speaker. The SPEAKER: The Leader of the Opposition. Mr Dutton: It's pretty beneath the Treasurer, I would have thought—but, anyway, I guess we see your true character. It's on relevance. The Prime Minister was asked about the Future Fund. Is the Prime Minister prepared to defend his decision on the Future Fund? The SPEAKER: The Leader of the House is also entitled to rise on the point of order. I'm not sure why everyone wants to stop everyone raising points of order. We can easily do that by not taking any. I'm sure no-one wants that. The Leader of the House on the point of order. Mr Burke: When a question refers to spending and the answer is referring to spending, it's being directly relevant. The SPEAKER: It was also talking about the financial position, the fuelling of inflation and about Australians paying for economic decisions, so, in any universe, that's a very broad topic. The Prime Minister will need to remain relevant to the question that he was asked, which is a very broad question containing many moving parts. Mr ALBANESE: I certainly will, Mr Speaker. The Leader of the Opposition, with the broadness of that question, has given me an opportunity not just to confirm the independence of the Future Fund—that's very important—and the fact that their mandate will be about maximising returns, which it will be. I'm also asked about inflation. Inflation was at 6.1 per cent when we came to office, and now it's at 2.8 per cent. We've done that while one million jobs have been created during this term of office. Unemployment is at 4.1 per cent. Real wages are increasing because we want to make sure that people earn more, and there are also tax cuts for all Australians because we want people to keep more of what they earn. Across the board, when you look at all the economic indicators—the Leader of the Opposition stands and asks a broad question about the economy and then we see the nuclear overreaction from him when we actually go through what the economic figures are. We know that there are alternatives because he wants Australians to pay more. He has a housing scheme that will drive up house prices. He has a supermarket scheme that will drive up grocery prices. He has an energy scheme that will drive up power prices. And he has a NBN scheme—I notice they want to privatise the NBN now. They want to privatise the NBN, and we know what the consequences for regional Australia will be.