Super Ted is then allowed to ask a question, which is always a fun time for all involved.

It’s for Jim Chalmers:

My question goes to the Treasurer: It follows the Treasurer’s humiliating backflip on his super tax proposal. Can the Treasurer advise the House whose rejection most influenced his decision to dump his tax? Was it (a) the coalition? (b) industry experts and economists? (c) the Prime Minister? Order! The member will pause. The member will pause.

Labor’s Josh Burns is booted for interjecting and Dugald is NOT having it today:

Look, I don’t know why this is so difficult. When people are asking questions, don’t interject. There’s a lot of intelligent people here… [there is laughter at this] well, in the gallery, there are… Order!

Super Ted asks his question again and Chalmers adopts his ‘sigh-I-have-to-deal-with-Ted-O’Brien-again-why-am-I-being-punished-pose’ which is when he leans again the despatch box and faces the speaker, because he can barely bring himself to acknowledge Super Ted across from him.

I get it.

Chalmers:

I’ll make it really clear to the House that I didn’t take the advice of those opposite. I didn’t take the advice of those opposite. And that’s because the question comes from the same people who took to this year’s election a policy to increase income taxes on every single one of the 14 million taxpaying workers in this country. The same people – the same people – who object to smaller tax concessions for 0.5% of people in super wanted to jack up income taxes for 100% of the 14 million taxpaying workers. That’s because what they really object to, as I said before, is they really object to more super for more workers. They don’t like super. They don’t like workers. We know that from their almost decade in office. They are always trying to undermine and diminish and come after the superannuation that the working people of this country need and deserve for a decent retirement. Also, don’t forget that the question comes from the same guy who wanted to borrow hundreds of billions of dollars to build nuclear reactors to push power prices up, not down. So he asks he who I take my advice from.

I don’t take my advice from the Shadow Treasurer, Mr Speaker. I really couldn’t be clearer about that. He can trouble himself all he likes with the political scuttlebutt and the internal far-right politics practised by those opposite. The difference between the Shadow Treasurer and myself as Treasurer is the outcomes. I’m here to deliver for the working people of this country. I’m here to deliver an increase in real wages. I’m here to deliver income tax cuts. I’m here to deliver more super for more workers so they get the decent retirement that this guy would deny them.

Super Ted has a whinge that Chalmers isn’t being relevant, but Dugald is like – ask play stupid games, win stupid prizes (also the name of my dating memoir) but Chalmers decides to play along:

The point I’m making is this side of the House works through issues in a collegiate, in a considered, in a methodical way, and we do what we can to find the best way through and, overwhelmingly, to deliver for the working people of this country, who send us here to represent them and their interests. The Shadow Treasurer’s here for a little pat on the head on Sky After Dark or a little tickle on the tummy on Page 13 of The Australian. We are here for the outcomes. Because it’s the outcomes that really matter. The outcomes really matter.

We’re here to deliver for working people, and that’s what we’re doing. And because of our efforts – and this is what really offends them – because of our efforts, more Australians are working, more Australians are earning more, more Australians are keeping more of what they earn, and more Australians will retire with more. And that’s because we are delivering – they are divided, they are divisive, they are in disarray. And that’s the difference.