Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download Full Day's HansardDownload Full Day's Hansard    View Or Save XMLView/Save XML

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Wednesday, 13 March 1968

Mr DALY (Grayndler) - The honourable member for Hindmarsh (Mr Clyde Cameron) has referred to an incident involving the honourable member for Adelaide (Mr Andrew Jones) which I believe has brought a feeling of shame to every decent member of the community. This young man, who ought to be in uniform himself, was instrumental in having taken into custody a conscripted soldier who might well be killed in a war for which he should never be conscripted - a soldier who is being asked to fight for the right of this honourable member to be in parliament. The soldier was taken into custody because he was wearing a uniform while handing out cards at a polling booth. Would the honourable member have put that soldier in had he been handing out Liberal howtovote cards? Would he have been put in had he been giving out dodgers on how to conscript young men? You know, Mr Speaker, that in districts such as you and I represent, persons who tell on others are called top-offs or informers. What is the difference between the honourable member for Adelaide as a member of parliament putting in and reporting a person in uniform and a common informer or a common top-off? This matter is worthy of consideration in this Parliament. To think that the soldier concerned was fined $15 dollars out of his miserable pay, because he was informed on by a member of the National Parliament, is a disgrace to the party to which that member belongs and a disgrace to this Parliament.

Let me refer honourable members to the famous book 'Andrew Jones M.H.R., by Himself - nobody else would be silly enough to write it. At page 90 this lovely, handsome young top-off says-

Mr SPEAKER -Order! The honourable member will restrain himself in the use of his words.

Mr DALY - I will use the term 'gallant young informer'. He says at page 90:

Looking back, I wonder and even marvel at my courage in going to University, for it seemed that everybody I met was violently opposed to everything I stood for, and in most cases to me personally.

You cannot blame them, can you? But listen to the next sentence, written by Andrew Jones himself:

Whether it was jealousy, envy, or the fact that I was an imbecile, I still can't determine.

This is a book written by a man who has t'opped-off a soldier in uniform, perhaps on his way to die in Vietnam. What a contemptible and miserable action even for an imbecile, let alone a member of this Parliament. This is the individual who informs on a serviceman, who creeps around like a common pimp and puts him in because-

Mr SPEAKER -Order! I ask the honourable member for Grayndler to withdraw that remark.

Mr DALY - I withdraw that remark. If members like to read this book by Andrew Jones they will find that further on he says that he was saved by a Communist doctor when he was on one of those vessels on which he was meandering around the world at one time. I do not know what happened to that Communist doctor, but I think he ought to be expelled from the party. The charge against this member, who is a man of military age and ought to be in Vietnam if he were sincere, is that he informed on a soldier who was protesting and certainly breaking a minor regulation. Mr Speaker, you will not let me use the expression I want to use, but this soldier was taken into custody as a result of an action by a member of this Parliament. Let us see what the Melbourne 'Age' said about this on 4th March. I will read all of it' because no more striking condemnation of the contemptible action of a member of this Parliament has yet been printed, and it is worth repeating. This is what the article says:

Youth, as someone recently remarked, is the only thing Mr Andrew Jones, MHR, has in his favour, and time, alas, will soon take care of that. Certainly ia the 16 months since the 1966 Federal elections popped him out of obscurity-

To which he will soon return, of course. he has established a reputation, but it is not likely to be envied by his Parliamentary colleagues or to impress his electorate. He has indulged in name-calling on a grand scale, made a gra'mophone record almost staggering in its nationalistic hysteria, published an extravagant autobiography-cum-manifesto, and rightly been hauled over the coals inside and outside Parliament, for the enormity of his indiscretions.

But surely no one could have imagined that this 23 year old sensationalist would be guilty of the petty nastiness be showed on Saturday.

That is a very polite phrase to use in relation to his action. The article continues:

Mr Jonesreported to the military police a national serviceman who was distributing Labor how-to-vote cards at Adelaide polling booth.

The honourable member should be ashamed of this forever. The article continues:

The regulation that prohibits uniformed members of the services from engaging in political activities is essential in any society that wants to maintain a democratic barrier between the rights of ordinary citizens and the proper duties of the military. But an apparently minor breach of this principle should not inspire a Federal parliamentarian to act like a common informer.

The paper says 'to act like a common informer'. The report continues: lt might have been assumed that even Mr Jones, who was just old enough to escape the hazards of the national service ballot, would have shown some charity towards a conscript.

The trouble is that Mr Jones' antics have made him a national figure. He cannot resist any opportunity to keep himself under public notice. But his performance on Saturday lacked even the entertainment value of a joke in bad taste. His senior colleagues - particularly the Minister - should give him, in public, a crash course in behaviour fitting for a parliamentarian.

I conclude on that note because I believe that a common informer does not deserve any more comment from me.

Suggest corrections