Mr WINDSOR —I will attempt to bring some sanity back to the debate. One question is on the resource super profits tax. I personally support a rent resource tax; I have some issues with the current proposal in the budget papers. My question to the minister relates to the long-term bond rate being the starting point of the tax and the definition of the resource super profits tax. Has the minister done any modelling in terms of the total revenue take—if in fact the level of the entry point into the resource super profits tax area is in fact increased? In particular, if a level of 10 per cent were placed in the definition, what would that mean in terms of the total take?

My second question is one of jurisdiction, in a sense. The minister would be well aware of some of the issues relating to the Liverpool Plains—for instance, the interface between water issues, particularly groundwater issues but also surface water issues, and the potential impacts of mining to the agricultural area and water resources. I know those areas in Queensland—which the member for Groom would also be aware of—where there are very real concerns about the jurisdiction of state governments. My question to the minister is: given that the Commonwealth has now moved into the policing and the end of valley caps in relation to the Murray-Darling system, does the minister believe that the state based planning processes that are currently in place are sufficient to safeguard the water resource and agricultural areas the Commonwealth is playing a much stronger role in?

Mr Ian Macfarlane interjecting—