Page 2458 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 6 August 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
damage it causes across the world and we recognise that we have a responsibility. We are prepared to face that responsibility squarely and we are prepared to do without the particular income".
I still find it difficult to understand the duplicity of people as far as their concept of morality goes - what we ought to do and what we ought not to do. And, if what we ought to do is dictated by what pays most money, how can we have that view with reference to this and the opposite view with reference to X-rated movies? How can we say that governments are not on about interfering with this sort of morality, but we should be interfering with private sexuality? It is a very difficult issue.
I noted a short while ago that Mr Duby and Mr Connolly referred to a Canberra Times editorial, and Mr Duby commented on whether he liked to read Canberra Times editorials. I imagine that Mr Duby would like reading Ian Warden even less. I am sure it will be a worry to Mr Connolly that he does not get "the most hated man in Canberra" award from Ian Warden; nor does he get the award for "hyperbole of the year", which I graciously received from Mr Warden. No, he gets the "smooth-arm, cannily articulate Mr Connolly". If I were Mr Connolly I would be very worried. When Ian Warden is singing your praises, you have problems.
Mr Humphries: That is right; your days are numbered.
MR MOORE: Exactly. I would think that this is a great worry. Those of us who have received the end of Mr Warden's pen, of course, are aware of the effect that it has.
Where do these arms go? Although I have prepared my speech, these areas have been well covered by previous speakers. I congratulate each of the speakers that we have heard - other than those from the Liberal Party - particularly Dr Kinloch and Mr Duby, on their speeches. They dealt with the concept of the suspect regimes and just where these arms go.
It is quite clear to me that we ought not be party to this type of trading. We can take a moral stand and we can stand up and say it. We can get some people throughout Australia to say, "Hey, the ACT is not prepared to do that; I wonder why not". And, for every person who asks why we are prepared to let that money go, we go a step further to peace. After all, that is exactly what we are after.
The sort of stance proposed by Mr Stefaniak and Mr Humphries in no way heads towards peace. We are in an era of international disarmament. Let us not be part of the international arming.
Mr Humphries: Tell that to the Federal Government.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .