1
00:00:00,799 --> 00:00:06,080
did the treasurer

2
00:00:02,840 --> 00:00:10,559
ask if Mr Desmond was giving from the

3
00:00:06,080 --> 00:00:14,719
profits of spunk loving or Asian

4
00:00:10,559 --> 00:00:18,199
babes or Tri XX pornographic television

5
00:00:14,719 --> 00:00:18,199
or the prophets of the Daily

6
00:00:18,640 --> 00:00:23,760
Star as I said I wish to give the

7
00:00:21,199 --> 00:00:27,320
honorable gentleman as much leey as I

8
00:00:23,760 --> 00:00:29,560
can and I promised him of course I would

9
00:00:27,320 --> 00:00:31,399
do this for any honorable member to make

10
00:00:29,560 --> 00:00:34,920
sure that he has the protection of the

11
00:00:31,399 --> 00:00:36,000
chair but we are discussing the report

12
00:00:34,920 --> 00:00:38,280
of the

13
00:00:36,000 --> 00:00:41,239
procedures committee and privileges

14
00:00:38,280 --> 00:00:43,640
committee and therefore uh the matters

15
00:00:41,239 --> 00:00:46,280
that he's raising at the moment are not

16
00:00:43,640 --> 00:00:48,199
relevant to this report and he must come

17
00:00:46,280 --> 00:00:50,640
back to it sir well Mr Speaker with

18
00:00:48,199 --> 00:00:53,039
respect they're highly relevant it's a

19
00:00:50,640 --> 00:00:56,039
question of glass houses and people

20
00:00:53,039 --> 00:00:57,440
throwing stones it's a question of a

21
00:00:56,039 --> 00:01:00,559
committee of

22
00:00:57,440 --> 00:01:03,920
politicians criticizing me

23
00:01:00,559 --> 00:01:07,320
for political fundraising when they

24
00:01:03,920 --> 00:01:09,880
themselves are responsible for political

25
00:01:07,320 --> 00:01:13,439
fundraising on a gigantic

26
00:01:09,880 --> 00:01:16,520
scale from the most dubious of

27
00:01:13,439 --> 00:01:19,840
sources in which they never applied to

28
00:01:16,520 --> 00:01:23,360
themselves the standards which they seek

29
00:01:19,840 --> 00:01:27,159
to apply to me in this

30
00:01:23,360 --> 00:01:30,680
report it's a question not of Standards

31
00:01:27,159 --> 00:01:32,439
Mr Speaker but of double standards

32
00:01:30,680 --> 00:01:35,320
the members of the committee may know at

33
00:01:32,439 --> 00:01:37,280
least the more worldly members of it

34
00:01:35,320 --> 00:01:38,840
that their committee is now known as the

35
00:01:37,280 --> 00:01:41,079
double standards

36
00:01:38,840 --> 00:01:42,759
committee the double standards in

37
00:01:41,079 --> 00:01:46,200
defense of privilege

38
00:01:42,759 --> 00:01:48,799
committee order order I say to The

39
00:01:46,200 --> 00:01:51,920
Honorable gentlemen that all members of

40
00:01:48,799 --> 00:01:54,119
this committee acted in good faith and

41
00:01:51,920 --> 00:01:56,880
were were were nominated to that

42
00:01:54,119 --> 00:01:59,159
committee by the house and conducted

43
00:01:56,880 --> 00:02:02,200
them their Affairs properly and there's

44
00:01:59,159 --> 00:02:04,600
been no complaint whatsoever about the

45
00:02:02,200 --> 00:02:08,520
way that they have conducted their

46
00:02:04,600 --> 00:02:10,440
Affairs and in no way can I tolerate any

47
00:02:08,520 --> 00:02:11,640
honorable gentleman and I know that

48
00:02:10,440 --> 00:02:13,840
feelings are running high with the

49
00:02:11,640 --> 00:02:16,879
honorable gentleman to say that the the

50
00:02:13,840 --> 00:02:18,400
indulge in double standards they don't

51
00:02:16,879 --> 00:02:20,640
but Mr Speaker you say there's no

52
00:02:18,400 --> 00:02:23,319
complaint whatsoever but I have a

53
00:02:20,640 --> 00:02:25,400
complaint and I wish to lay it before

54
00:02:23,319 --> 00:02:28,879
the house and the country would surely

55
00:02:25,400 --> 00:02:31,480
be intolerable to forbid me to argue

56
00:02:28,879 --> 00:02:33,840
that the committee have Ed unjustly

57
00:02:31,480 --> 00:02:36,200
because of the notion

58
00:02:33,840 --> 00:02:38,120
and if the honorable gentleman says that

59
00:02:36,200 --> 00:02:41,120
he feels that the committee have acted

60
00:02:38,120 --> 00:02:44,400
unjustly then that is a case that he is

61
00:02:41,120 --> 00:02:47,720
legitimately able to put but to say that

62
00:02:44,400 --> 00:02:49,080
they indulge in double standards is it

63
00:02:47,720 --> 00:02:51,760
is saying that they're acting in a

64
00:02:49,080 --> 00:02:54,239
dishonorable way but if you say that the

65
00:02:51,760 --> 00:02:57,280
The Honorable GES has not had justice

66
00:02:54,239 --> 00:02:59,440
then put that case and he's highly

67
00:02:57,280 --> 00:03:02,080
you're highly articulate and you're able

68
00:02:59,440 --> 00:03:04,480
to do so I know that over the period of

69
00:03:02,080 --> 00:03:07,159
years that I've known you but what I say

70
00:03:04,480 --> 00:03:09,760
to you is this is that uh having a

71
00:03:07,159 --> 00:03:11,840
complaint against the committee is one

72
00:03:09,760 --> 00:03:14,760
thing but to say that you haven't had

73
00:03:11,840 --> 00:03:18,239
justice is something you're entitled to

74
00:03:14,760 --> 00:03:21,519
say without attacking the good character

75
00:03:18,239 --> 00:03:23,920
of any member of that committee M Mr

76
00:03:21,519 --> 00:03:25,720
Speaker I'm I'm really in a a bit of a

77
00:03:23,920 --> 00:03:27,760
difficulty here if I'm saying that I

78
00:03:25,720 --> 00:03:30,280
haven't had justice that means I've been

79
00:03:27,760 --> 00:03:33,000
treated unjustly How can I argue that

80
00:03:30,280 --> 00:03:34,519
I've been treated unjustly without

81
00:03:33,000 --> 00:03:37,360
alluding to the

82
00:03:34,519 --> 00:03:39,519
fact what what I'm saying as I says to

83
00:03:37,360 --> 00:03:42,840
The Honorable gentleman is that he can

84
00:03:39,519 --> 00:03:47,000
put the case that he felt that he he was

85
00:03:42,840 --> 00:03:49,879
treated unjustly that I I understand and

86
00:03:47,000 --> 00:03:53,159
it's for the house to decide after this

87
00:03:49,879 --> 00:03:54,840
debate finishes whether the house feels

88
00:03:53,159 --> 00:03:58,120
that the strength of argument is with

89
00:03:54,840 --> 00:04:01,239
the honorable gentleman or with uh the

90
00:03:58,120 --> 00:04:03,400
committee indeed Mr Speaker I'm I'm just

91
00:04:01,239 --> 00:04:05,920
10 minutes into what I'm afraid is going

92
00:04:03,400 --> 00:04:09,000
to be a long speech and it's been now

93
00:04:05,920 --> 00:04:10,840
regularly interrupted by our teasing out

94
00:04:09,000 --> 00:04:14,480
of what's in order and what's not in

95
00:04:10,840 --> 00:04:16,799
order I I I I do assure you Mr Speaker

96
00:04:14,480 --> 00:04:19,519
there's considerable interest in this

97
00:04:16,799 --> 00:04:22,080
debate this evening in the country and I

98
00:04:19,519 --> 00:04:24,880
don't think that the I don't think that

99
00:04:22,080 --> 00:04:27,560
the I don't think that the country would

100
00:04:24,880 --> 00:04:29,840
consider that it had been well served by

101
00:04:27,560 --> 00:04:32,520
the House of Commons if a member who

102
00:04:29,840 --> 00:04:35,800
about to be thrown out was not allowed

103
00:04:32,520 --> 00:04:37,759
to proceed with the argument against him

104
00:04:35,800 --> 00:04:42,440
being thrown out that he had come here

105
00:04:37,759 --> 00:04:45,680
to make and I I I really appeal uh to

106
00:04:42,440 --> 00:04:48,000
your spirit of generosity in that

107
00:04:45,680 --> 00:04:51,400
because it will not be possible for me

108
00:04:48,000 --> 00:04:54,600
to make the case that I've been treated

109
00:04:51,400 --> 00:04:56,880
unjustly without criticizing the way

110
00:04:54,600 --> 00:04:59,759
that I've been treated I know that the

111
00:04:56,880 --> 00:05:02,479
notion is Mr Speaker that we're all

112
00:04:59,759 --> 00:05:05,320
honorable members here but I'm actually

113
00:05:02,479 --> 00:05:08,600
being accused of being dishonorable and

114
00:05:05,320 --> 00:05:11,880
it's not possible for me to defend

115
00:05:08,600 --> 00:05:14,960
myself without dealing with the way in

116
00:05:11,880 --> 00:05:18,560
which I've been treated and so um I hope

117
00:05:14,960 --> 00:05:21,360
that I will be able to make my case uh

118
00:05:18,560 --> 00:05:25,120
always of course at your direction let

119
00:05:21,360 --> 00:05:27,400
me begin if I may with my criticism of

120
00:05:25,120 --> 00:05:30,600
the Parliamentary commissioner for

121
00:05:27,400 --> 00:05:34,120
standards sir Philip Moore who in one of

122
00:05:30,600 --> 00:05:36,479
the delicious ironies or order order I'm

123
00:05:34,120 --> 00:05:39,479
very reluctant to keep interrupting The

124
00:05:36,479 --> 00:05:42,720
Honorable gentlemen uh I usually in

125
00:05:39,479 --> 00:05:45,160
these situations leave honorable members

126
00:05:42,720 --> 00:05:48,400
who have had an accusation against them

127
00:05:45,160 --> 00:05:50,080
to allow them to develop the case but I

128
00:05:48,400 --> 00:05:52,639
could put it to The Honorable gentleman

129
00:05:50,080 --> 00:05:55,400
to the house that there is a long

130
00:05:52,639 --> 00:05:57,880
tradition of not attacking individuals

131
00:05:55,400 --> 00:06:00,400
such as officers of the house who are

132
00:05:57,880 --> 00:06:02,840
not able to defend themselves

133
00:06:00,400 --> 00:06:06,039
and I remind the house that good temper

134
00:06:02,840 --> 00:06:08,560
and moderation are the characteristics

135
00:06:06,039 --> 00:06:11,000
of parliamentary

136
00:06:08,560 --> 00:06:13,560
language Mr Speaker this is now

137
00:06:11,000 --> 00:06:16,319
beginning to Verge on the ridiculous and

138
00:06:13,560 --> 00:06:18,440
I do say again there are very many

139
00:06:16,319 --> 00:06:21,120
people watching this debate this evening

140
00:06:18,440 --> 00:06:22,880
that would like to hear my defense

141
00:06:21,120 --> 00:06:26,160
against the charges of the standard

142
00:06:22,880 --> 00:06:30,360
commissioner and of the committee of

143
00:06:26,160 --> 00:06:32,039
Privileges and standards if I'm to be uh

144
00:06:30,360 --> 00:06:33,960
uh although you do it in the gentlest

145
00:06:32,039 --> 00:06:37,360
way if you're to come over the ball at

146
00:06:33,960 --> 00:06:41,360
me every time I uh uh make a couple of

147
00:06:37,360 --> 00:06:44,280
uh yards advance in my argument it will

148
00:06:41,360 --> 00:06:47,319
really get nowhere I cannot criticize

149
00:06:44,280 --> 00:06:49,639
the conduct of the inquiry without

150
00:06:47,319 --> 00:06:52,319
criticizing the conduct of the person

151
00:06:49,639 --> 00:06:55,680
who conducted it I'll try to do so as

152
00:06:52,319 --> 00:06:57,599
temperately as I can but it would be it

153
00:06:55,680 --> 00:07:00,160
it will be seen Mr Speaker as an attempt

154
00:06:57,599 --> 00:07:02,919
to gag me here as a as an attempt to

155
00:07:00,160 --> 00:07:05,280
silence me here well

156
00:07:02,919 --> 00:07:07,840
honorable I I've known the honorable

157
00:07:05,280 --> 00:07:09,479
gentleman for 30 years and I've never I

158
00:07:07,840 --> 00:07:11,520
don't think I have the power to silence

159
00:07:09,479 --> 00:07:14,120
him but I I don't think I've been able

160
00:07:11,520 --> 00:07:16,800
to do that all I'm saying is this is

161
00:07:14,120 --> 00:07:19,639
that the house has given me rules a set

162
00:07:16,800 --> 00:07:22,840
of rules that I must abide by and see

163
00:07:19,639 --> 00:07:25,479
that they they are enforced and uh it's

164
00:07:22,840 --> 00:07:29,160
not an attempt to to gag The Honorable

165
00:07:25,479 --> 00:07:32,000
gentleman but he must abide by the rules

166
00:07:29,160 --> 00:07:34,039
that Parliament has given me and I'm the

167
00:07:32,000 --> 00:07:35,759
custodian of the rules even in a

168
00:07:34,039 --> 00:07:38,840
situation like

169
00:07:35,759 --> 00:07:40,680
this Mr Speaker Dr David Kelly was a

170
00:07:38,840 --> 00:07:43,479
civil servant who couldn't defend

171
00:07:40,680 --> 00:07:46,120
himself and look what happened to him

172
00:07:43,479 --> 00:07:48,360
are we really saying that an important

173
00:07:46,120 --> 00:07:51,759
official of the British state who's

174
00:07:48,360 --> 00:07:54,919
conducted a 4-year long inquiry into me

175
00:07:51,759 --> 00:07:57,560
cannot be criticized because of the

176
00:07:54,919 --> 00:07:59,919
position that he holds that will not be

177
00:07:57,560 --> 00:08:02,280
tenable in the public in the country it

178
00:07:59,919 --> 00:08:05,039
might well pass master here though I

179
00:08:02,280 --> 00:08:08,720
suspect not with everyone but it cannot

180
00:08:05,039 --> 00:08:11,879
be the case surely that I cannot develop

181
00:08:08,720 --> 00:08:15,479
my criticism of the commissioner's

182
00:08:11,879 --> 00:08:17,120
inquiry into me because I'm gagged from

183
00:08:15,479 --> 00:08:20,280
mentioning the commissioner the man who

184
00:08:17,120 --> 00:08:22,680
carried out the inquiry I I I'm I'm

185
00:08:20,280 --> 00:08:25,159
sorry that these things are causing you

186
00:08:22,680 --> 00:08:28,319
difficulties Mr Speaker but again I say

187
00:08:25,159 --> 00:08:30,720
I'm I'm now I'm now 18 minutes into my

188
00:08:28,319 --> 00:08:32,839
speech and have barely been able to get

189
00:08:30,720 --> 00:08:34,640
started with the critique that I wish to

190
00:08:32,839 --> 00:08:36,760
make about the way that I have been

191
00:08:34,640 --> 00:08:41,200
treated I am after all being excluded

192
00:08:36,760 --> 00:08:41,200
from Parliament it's not a small thing