DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): A further question for the Minister, then. I take the principle that this $31,096 threshold has been calculated by making sure that the maximum someone could theoretically get on a benefit is going to be $1 less than what they would get if they were working. Now, I just wondered, does that include a benefit for somebody that was not working at all, because it would seem that, in order to qualify for that $1, a person would have to work 20 hours a week, 52 weeks a year—make it 1,000 hours. They'd have to work 1,000 hours for $1, and I just did some quick mental arithmetic, and I wonder if you could confirm or get the Treasury officials to confirm that that amounts to working for 0.1c an hour. I know this Government is very committed to higher wages; that seems like a very small amount of money. It can't be the case that the difference between the benefit and working is 0.1c an hour, but that sounds like the logical conclusion of what the Government's saying.