Mr FITZGIBBON (2:36 PM) —My question is to the Minister for Financial Services and Regulation. Minister, can you confirm the receipt of advice from Westpac that, due to the GST, it intends putting prices up the full 10 per cent on 14 separate fees and charges it imposes on its small business customers—something you said could not happen? Didn't the government tell the public before the last election that bank charges would fall, not rise, because of its tax package? Minister, how do you justify this latest example of GST deceit?

Mr HOCKEY (Minister for Financial Services and Regulation) —Mr Speaker, I take the opportunity to inform the House that I have today referred Westpac to the ACCC for investigation of the pricing nominations made on the front of one of today's papers. I also point out to the House—and I think every member of the House and every bank customer should be aware of this—that the original ANTS package taken to the last election was based on the abolition of $2.46 billion in financial services taxes, which the Labor Party opposed at every single point. The Labor Party opposed the abolition of taxes on financial institutions duty. The Labor Party opposed the abolition of debits tax. The Labor Party opposed the abolition of stamp duty on business conveyances. The Labor Party opposed the abolition of stamp duty on leases. The Labor Party opposed the abolition of stamp duty on mortgages or loan securities. The Labor Party opposed the abolition of stamp duty on bonds and debentures. The Labor Party opposed the abolition of stamp duty on credit arrangements. The Labor Party opposed the abolition of stamp duty on instalment purchase agreements. The Labor Party opposed the abolition of stamp duty on rental and hiring arrangements. As I say, in each case when it comes to bank fees and charges, I urge bank customers to shop around.

Opposition members interjecting—

Mr HOCKEY —The opposition scoff at my remark about shopping around. I ask the opposition—who said this:

Who said that? Who would that be? Who said this:

Who said that? Which member of the Labor Party said that?

Mr Cox —Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order which goes to relevance. The minister cannot tell the difference between a shopping centre and a bank.

Mr SPEAKER —The member will resume his seat. I had allowed the minister to continue down that course believing he would be in some way relevant to the question asked about bank fees, and I invite him to return to that question.

Mr HOCKEY —Mr Speaker, I ask the question—who said this:

The member for Lilley is not the sharpest tool in the shed, but on this occasion he is right on the money.

Mr SPEAKER —The member for Lilley! If the member for Lilley persists in interjecting, I will deal with him.

Mr Cox —I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I draw your attention to standing order 85 on irrelevance and tedious repetition—

Mr SPEAKER —The member for Kingston will resume his seat. If he takes the trouble to read standing order 85, he will see that it bears no relevance to question time.

Mr Cox —Mr Speaker, I was just about to read standing order 85.

Mr SPEAKER —The member for Kingston will resume his seat. I am familiar with standing order 85, and I have ruled.