Answers to Questions

O'Neill defended the government's cabinet structure, noting that the Defence and Foreign Ministers attended the exercise. O'Neill highlighted that the government had increased defence funding by $10.6 billion over the forward estimates and $57.6 billion over the decade. O'Neill contrasted this with previous opposition announcements that lacked budget allocation, arguing the current administration was delivering real investment rather than headlines.

Canavan argued that the government was failing to engage adequately with the United States on defence matters, including requests to lift spending and collaborate on projects like 155-millimetre ammunition production. Canavan criticised the Prime Minister's response to US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth's speech as dismissive and insufficient. Canavan asserted that the government was not taking the strategic partnership with the US seriously enough.

Polley defended the Prime Minister's schedule, stating that cabinet ministers handle specific portfolios such as defence. Polley argued that the government was addressing significant legacy issues in aged care and Closing the Gap targets left by the previous administration. Polley emphasised the substantial investments made in these areas to improve outcomes for Australians.

O'Sullivan expressed concern about the measurement of Closing the Gap economic participation targets, questioning the inclusion of government-funded programs like the Remote Jobs and Economic Development Program. O'Sullivan argued that true progress should be measured by sustainable, market-based employment rather than jobs dependent on government funding. O'Sullivan warned that relying on such programs could perpetuate welfare dependence rather than fostering economic independence.