Mr RIPOLL (5:10 PM) —I just want to raise one specific issue on top of the ones that the parliamentary secretary has already taken on, and hopefully not in the fear that he will not be able to answer all of them. I raise the issue of the $600, which I mentioned in my earlier contribution. The minister confirmed that the $600 put forward by the government would be indexed and that it would not proportionally, or in any other manner, be lost; that there would not be any clawback of the $600; that the integrity of that $600 would be maintained. I have actually gone and had a look at this to see specifically what changes have taken place. I ask the parliamentary secretary if he wants to make himself aware or informed, if he is not—I am assuming that he would be—about the change from the wage based indexation to the CPI based indexation.

The minister was specifically asked: has there been any change in the indexation? He clearly said: no—no change at all. But when I actually go to the legislation, I find—I will put this on the record—in 6(7)(i) of schedule 4 formula that it says to omit the formula and substitute with CPC rate by 16.6 per cent et cetera. To me that indicates that there is a change, because they are omitting the old formula and substituting a new formula. Therefore, there is an indexation change, and it is quite substantial. It is from wage based indexation to CPI based indexation. What that means in simple terms is that, over a period of about five to seven years, the $600 will be completely eroded. That was a question specifically put to the minister. The minister gave a very specific answer: no. So I would be very interested to hear what the parliamentary secretary's answer to that specific question is. It was also in another place, in 7(7)(iii) of schedule 4 formula: omit the formula and substitute CPC rate by 21.6 per cent. So in two places we specifically asked about indexation and the minister said: no, it had not changed; no, there would not be clawback. He gave his guarantee, but when we actually go and check, it is a matter of: don't listen to what they say; have a look at what they do. Here it is in black and white. Either the parliamentary secretary can explain that their own legislation is actually wrong and they have got this wrong, or perhaps the minister got it wrong. So the question is: who is wrong—the legislation or the minister?