Page 3085 - Week 12 - Tuesday, 17 November 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Kaine: That is absolutely right. That was what your Government imposed on the chairperson.
MR LAMONT: The simple fact, Mr Kaine, if you would like to sit there just for a moment, is that in preparing the additional comments we addressed the draft which we had, the second draft dated 3 November. This was the draft that included the additional slabs of information. If you go through this copy, as an example, Madam Speaker, all you need to do is to look for where there has been a mark placed beside paragraphs. This shows where there have been either alterations or material added. They are significant. Some of it was a rearrangement of information as opposed to new and additional information. That is true. Some of it was a rearrangement of that information as opposed to the new and additional information tabled by Mr Humphries and discussed by others on the Monday. The simple fact is that our additional comments - that is what they are, additional comments - reflect that second draft of 3 November.
Mr Kaine: It is the one that everybody else commented on too.
MR LAMONT: You are dead right, Mr Kaine.
Mr Kaine: What is your complaint?
MR LAMONT: My complaint is that Ms Szuty, in her opening remarks, talked about non-existing paragraphs, particularly 3.85, saying that in the final report it refers to something else. It certainly does. But when I had to write comment in relation to this document I did not have the final document. I was denied the opportunity to comment on the final document. That is the simple fact. What we were proposing referred to this second draft. Indeed, the comments attached to our document, which has been printed in the Estimates Committee's report, equate to the paragraph numbers in this document. That is the first thing.
The second thing is this: I am also somewhat disturbed that there has been a suggestion by people from the other side that there was a breach of privilege. (Extension of time granted) There is a suggestion on the other side of this house that members on this side did not attend because we had been instructed not to, or because other people did not like what was in the report.
Mr Kaine: I withdrew that.
MR LAMONT: It was ultimately withdrawn, for a very simple reason. What also concerns me about the question of privilege is that I am aware, as other members on this side of the house are aware, and possibly another member in this house is aware, that this second draft, this confidential draft, was delivered to the Canberra Times at least on Friday, 6 November.
Mr Kaine: Well, why did you do that?
MR LAMONT: Madam Speaker, first of all, I seek to have that withdrawn. Madam Speaker, I seek to have that allegation withdrawn.
MADAM SPEAKER: Mr Kaine, the - - -
Mr Kaine: All he has to do is say that he did not do it.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .