Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download Current HansardDownload Current Hansard   

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Wednesday, 31 May 1989
Page: 3106


Senator HARRADINE(12.33) —Earlier I foreshadowed an amendment which would leave out all words after the word `censure' in Senator Chaney's motion and insert:

``the action of Senator Schacht in making use in the Senate adjournment debate on Monday, 29 May, of an illicitly-obtained transcript of a private meeting of Senators and Members held in Parliament House on Wednesday, 24 May 1989''.

The purpose of the amendment is to question the action itself-whether it was reprehensible and censurable. I do not like censuring members, but it is a question of the action. Apparently, everybody agrees that the action was censurable. The amendment would place the focus on Parliament House. We are responsible for our actions in Parliament House. The other matter of ethics of public administration for public servants and the like is a matter in which we are interested but it is also a matter for government. Therefore, I move:

Leave all words out after ``censures'', insert ``the action of Senator Schacht in making use in the Senate adjournment debate on Monday, 29 May, of an illicitly-obtained transcript of a private meeting of Senators and Members held in Parliament House on Wednesday, 24 May 1989''.

Question put:

That the amendment (Senator Harradine's) be agreed to.