Mr St CLAIR (3:01 PM) —My question is addressed to the Minister for Defence. Is the minister aware of an existing promise to purchase two additional submarines? Minister, would you inform the House how this would impact on the government's white paper commitments?

Honourable members interjecting—

Mr SPEAKER —Order! For some time now the member for Griffith has been seeking the call but has been denied it by his colleagues. His colleagues have not been exclusive in that regard, however.

Mr Rudd —Mr Speaker, I raise a point of order. My understanding of the standing orders is that they do not permit a question which has already been asked to be asked a second time. This question has already been asked, and answered.

Mr SPEAKER —The member for Griffith raises a point of order about questions that have been answered in full. I had a similar question yesterday, and I listened to this question. I thought that it had been answered but, as I recall, yesterday's question referred to a field of defence expenditure that was wider than the two items listed in this question.

Mr REITH (Minister for Defence) —I thank the honourable member for his novel question on the matter of the government's defence white paper. I am not surprised that he would ask such a question, because in the last few weeks in the parliament and in public debate a question has been asked: what is the Labor Party's defence policy and what will the Labor Party do if ever they might be elected? We have had so many answers to this question from the Leader of the Opposition and/or his staff and the shadow minister that I am not surprised that people are slightly confused.

Going back to the submarine saga of recent weeks, we were first told by the Labor Party that they supported the government's white paper. In fact, the Leader of the Opposition was writing in the Australian telling me to get on with it. When we started asking about their 1998 policy, we were told, `You can have free submarines,' because Labor was going to change the priority of acquisition purchases as a means of paying for them. So was born the saga of the two free subs and the free ANZAC battalion and the free bombing range. As the saga unfolded, we were then told that the 1998 policy was in fact null and void—a point that I made to the parliament only in the last few days.

We were then subjected to the entertainment of the shadow minister after question time taking us full circle from the day a month or two months back when he said he supported the white paper to when the policy was then null and void. He finally got back up yesterday and said, `In fact, we do support the white paper.' If they support the white paper, how is it that they still have a commitment to two additional submarines and how are they going to pay for them? How are you going to pay for them?

Dr Martin —Where is that?

Mr REITH —I do appreciate an ill-informed and peremptory interjection when you ask, `Where is that?' The answer comes from your own words, because you said that the policy was null and void after the 1998 election. How is it that in the middle of last year the Advertiser had this headline: `Beazley pledges a clean river and two new subs'. It did not die in 1998. He has been running around advocating two or three subs. Well, we want to know where the money is coming from. It is no good for the Leader of the Opposition to answer through a spokesman. He is definitely running the defence policy—what there is of it. He is even issuing the shadow minister's press releases—under the shadow minister's name. He has his chief of staff in the gallery backing up the position. The fact of the matter is that last week he said, `You are not going to be told about Labor's defence policy until after the next election.' That is not good enough. Do not stand here and tell us that you support the white paper but that you will not tell us what your policy is until after the next election. You either do or do not support this white paper, and it is certainly not good enough for you to prevaricate.

The Leader of the Opposition was the worst defence minister this country has had for decades. He now goes to the Australian people and says, `Put me in the Lodge.' We are entitled to say on behalf of the Australian Defence Force and the Australian public, `We want to know what your defence policy is.' Do not try to run; do not try to hide. It is about time we had a decent statement from you instead of having your shadow up here with these prevarications on a policy position that treats the Australian public in an arrogant way. I believe there ought to be a clear statement of your position.