Dr STONE (2:20 PM) —My question is to the Deputy Prime Minister, the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations, Minister for Education and Minister for Social Inclusion. I refer the minister to the Colbinabbin Primary School in my electorate, which has been told that it must move one of its existing classroom blocks 3.8 metres, destroying $6,000 worth of concrete ramps, power upgrades, floor coverings and other refurbishments installed only last year as a result of local school council fundraising. This is to make way for a school hall under the Primary Schools for the 21st Century program. Does the minister agree with the school council president, who has written, ‘There has been a very disappointing disregard for the real needs of this school, as assessed by the local school community. Such a waste of investment is very disappointing’?

Ms GILLARD (Minister for Education, Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations and Minister for Social Inclusion) —I thank the member for Murray for her question. I can certainly say to the member for Murray that I agree with the statement of one of her local principals, the principal of the Nanneella Estate Primary School, who said, ‘We’re pleased to have received enough funds to rejuvenate the school and create a modern learning area.’ I certainly agree with that statement.

Mr Turnbull —Mr Speaker, I raise a point of order on relevance. This is a very precise question about a particular school. The minister should address her attention to that school.

The SPEAKER —Order! The question goes to the funding to a school under a particular program.

Ms GILLARD —I can certainly indicate to the member for Murray my support for the 200 projects in the 101 schools in her electorate and the investment of $121 million, of course an investment that she voted against. On the specific matters that she has raised in relation to a local school, I am very happy to look at those specific matters.

Can I say generally that it has been drawn to my attention that the member for Sturt, the relevant opposition shadow minister, in a media release on 16 June said this:

I also note that in an article in today’s Canberra Times, ‘hundreds’ has been dropped by his office to having received ‘60 complaints’.

Mr Briggs —Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. Even under your own guidance, this is not relevant to the question.

The SPEAKER —Order! The Deputy Prime Minister is responding to the question. I will listen very carefully to the way in which she relates the material to the question.

Ms GILLARD —The member for Murray has raised an issue about a local school and I am making this very simple point and it is no more complicated than this: I presume that this matter is one of around 60 complaints the opposition says it has. That is a complaints’ record of 0.25 per cent, one-quarter of one per cent, for the biggest school modernisation program in the nation’s history. I will of course investigate the member for Murray’s complaint and I will respond to her directly. On the question of Building the Education Revolution, 9,500 schools and more than 24,000 projects: what is clearly lacking amongst the opposition is a sense of perspective.

Ms Julie Bishop —Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. On a number of occasions, the Deputy Prime Minister has said that she will come back to the House with the answer. On a number of previous occasions, the Deputy Prime Minister—

The SPEAKER —Order! The Deputy Leader of the Opposition will resume her seat. There is no provision in the standing orders that covers the request that the Deputy Leader of the Opposition believes she is making. Therefore, there is no point of order. It is not my duty to make critique about responses. But in the response, the Deputy Prime Minister indicated that she would respond directly to the member for Murray.

Ms Julie Bishop —Mr Speaker, I raise another point of order. Following on from what you just said, on a number of occasions the minister has said she will come back to the House with an answer. I have eight questions where she said—

The SPEAKER —Order! The Deputy Leader of the Opposition will resume her seat.

Mr Tuckey interjecting—

The SPEAKER —The member for O’Connor will resume his seat. Excuse me! If the member for O’Connor would first let me deal with the matter raised by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition—and there is really no need for that sort of behaviour of slamming down that book—I simply say, in finality, to the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, for the last time I hope for this question time, that there is no point of order. If the member for O’Connor has a point of order, he has the call.

Mr Tuckey —Thank you, Mr Speaker. I draw your attention to the House of Representatives Practice and the many examples given of the need for ministers to answer questions, if belatedly, and the conventions and the precedents surrounding that practice, which of course has brought great credit to past governments.

The SPEAKER —Order! I call the member for Forde.