Page 1313 - Week 05 - Thursday, 25 June 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
My reading of that is that it means, "No; that is not the document we are looking for". Mr Lamont then said:
Not at all. Do you want this document tabled?
Mr De Domenico said:
The one that you were reading from.
Mr Lamont said:
You want this one?
Here is a game being played. The document that Mr Lamont was reading from is identified even by the Hansard typist. We have only the draft Hansard. Even the draft Hansard typist clearly understood that Mr Lamont was quoting from a document. Hansard has it inset as a quote from a document.
It is interesting that that document matches word for word a document that I have been given today and that I understand was an internal Liberal Party working document. I can understand why it was that the Liberal Party wanted to have that particular document tabled. The document itself is of no particular relevance to me. What is of relevance is that - - -
Mr Lamont: You have a copy there, do you not?
MR MOORE: I have a copy here which you are welcome to look at and which I was given today. What is of relevance to me is that there was a clear instruction from the parliament to table a document that was being read from. There was a clear intention about what this was about. I am waiting to hear Mr Lamont's answer, but it appears to me that we have a very clear-cut case of what was wanted and something else was given. If we allow this sort of situation to go on, it means that parliament is not important; give them what you want to give them and it is neither here nor there. That is all there is to it. It is simply a matter of thumbing your nose at a parliament. It is totally unacceptable for any member to treat the parliament with such disrespect. If we allow that to happen, we would have the lowest standards of parliament in the - - -
Mr Connolly: Shredding machines.
Mr Berry: Do you remember the shredder?
MR MOORE: We would indeed, and that would be entirely inappropriate. Mr Connolly interjects, "Remember the shredding machine?". Had Mr Lamont thought of the matter, perhaps he would not have quoted from the document or perhaps he would have shredded it. Mr Connolly may remember that I wore the result of the parliament's decision on that occasion. It may be that he wants to modify the motion. Perhaps he wants to move an amendment to the motion to make it exactly the same as the motion on the business with a shredded document. The point is that it is unacceptable to have any member thumb his or her nose at the parliament. That is why it seems to me at this stage - but I am waiting to hear from Mr Lamont - that this motion should be carried.
Mr Humphries: Are you going to defend yourself?
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .