Andrew Leigh (Fraser, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Let me end on a personal note. I was born in 1972. When my mother's pregnancy reached the nine-month mark she pinned an 'It's time' badge onto the part of her shirt that covered her belly. Gough's vision and optimism helped shape my political life.

Canberrans, too, have always treasured Gough. He ensured that ACT residents got Senate representation. Given that he spent 10 years living in Canberra full time as a child at Telopea High and Canberra Grammar, and then as a resident of the Lodge, plus two more decades travelling here as a member of parliament, Canberrans are rightly proud to claim Gough as one of our own.

On the crypt of the great English architect, Christopher Wren, is engraved 'si monumentum requiris, circumspice'—if you seek his monument, look around you. It would be a fitting epitaph for Edward Gough Whitlam.

Sussan Ley (Farrer, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Edward Gough Whitlam left on extraordinary legacy which has been captured by numerous speakers. This is my personal reflection. I was a year 8 student at Campbell High School in the ACT at the time of the dismissal. My family was delighted. My mathematics teacher was anything but. My memory is of him at the front of the class glaring around, face brick red, sleeves rolled up, declaring: 'There will be no maths today. Hands up anyone who, if they could vote, would vote Liberal at this election?' Needless to say, I did not put up my hand.

Gough's social reforms have quite rightly been celebrated. Helping to end the White Australia policy and making Indigenous and new Australians feel welcome and included are to me standouts.

The social mobility that he initiated was the beginning of the end of the class system we had inherited from Britain. Above all, Gough demonstrated with wife Margaret what a partnership based on love, equality and respect look like in a modern world.

Gough left a one-of-a-kind legacy in my electorate of Farrer. Albury-Wodonga was selected as the primary focus of the federal Whitlam government's scheme to arrest the uncontrolled growth of Australia's large coastal city, Sydney and Melbourne in particular, by encouraging decentralisation. Grand plans were made to turn Albury-Wodonga into a major inland city.

As Professor Bruce Pennay from our local Charles Sturt University notes that Whitlam from opposition and then in government was 'personally responsible for imagining the rapid and joint development of Albury-Wodonga' as a collective—one city straddling the New South Wales-Victorian border.

Drop into our border towns today and many people you meet will say the growth centre concept was both bold and imaginative. Some will say it was too rushed and less than well executed. It is somewhat ironic that the federal body known for most of its existence as the Albury-Wodonga Development Corporation, which was set up to carry Gough's eventually unrealised visions from 1972, will come to a close at the end of this financial year. Regardless, Whitlam remained an enthusiast, and would visit from time to time to hail any new endeavour to promote the two cities as one and of course to rebuke those who would dare set them apart. The tax office in Albury, with over 600 staff, has provided employment and a career for many local people. In my case it was my first job after part-time study and the birth of my children, and it set me on a professional pathway that was largely instrumental in my coming to this place.

As many would be aware, the parliament owns Clifton Pugh's famous portrait of our 21st Prime Minister. The story of the picture reflects the intersection of art and this democracy of ours in several ways. When he won the Archibald Prize with his portrait of Sir John McEwen in 1971 Clif did not know Gough Whitlam, but he casually announced to the press that he would win the next year with whoever the Prime Minister was going to be. Whitlam, just as informally, sent a telegram agreeing to sit. They were relaxed times back then. My cousin-in-law, Judith Pugh, was Clif's wife and she explains that, as part of her role to keep the attention of Clif's sitters, she outlined to Gough the plan for the arts that had been developed by a number of creative and performing artists and persuaded him to be minister for the arts. What the artists at the time acknowledged but has become rather overshadowed is that, from the second Menzies government, Sir Robert and the subsequent coalition prime ministers developed a program of travelling exhibitions that engaged us with Asia, developed a remarkable collection of art and planned a national gallery in which the collection could be displayed. Gough Whitlam signed off on that gallery and of course it is now a place to see Australian and international art—a place of scholarship, a place of education and a tourist destination. Clifton Pugh's Archibald Prize-winning painting was bought by the Historic Memorials Committee, and it is fitting that it should be the most visited picture in this building, no doubt much as Whitlam would be happy to be remembered—thoroughly larger than life and just as important now that he has gone.

Terri Butler (Griffith, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Gough Whitlam changed Labor and he changed this country. He and his cabinet brought modern Australia into being. They created our modern social democracy. Last week, after we had heard the news, the Labor family walked to Old Parliament House to pay tribute to Gough together. As we walked up the steps, the member for Moreton asked me, 'How do you feel—a girl like you, a working-class girl from Cairns—to be here at such an occasion?' I said to him, 'Well, that's the point. That's what Gough did for us' and he agreed, because we both know that Gough wanted to create opportunities for everyone and he wanted to work for a more equal society. Like countless others, I am a direct beneficiary of that.

Earlier this year I gave a speech for Gough's 98th birthday. In that speech I thanked Gough for the opportunities I had had to get a higher education, and I thanked him for a lot of other things as well. I am pleased to say that he heard about the speech and that he knew of my gratitude. I received a message: 'You have made an old man very happy.' I must have been one of so many people who thanked him for everything he had done over the course of his life.

Remembering Gough reminds us all that politics matters and that public life matters. It reminds us that we must be here in this place with a sense of purpose, determined to improve the wellbeing of our countrymen and women. We all share in this great responsibility to build on his legacy. I do not claim to know Gough; I have only met him a couple of times. I was there at our national Labor conference when he and his beloved wife, Margaret, received their national life memberships of the Australian Labor Party. They were the first two people to receive those memberships from the party's national conference. But even though I did not know him it is impossible not to be grateful to him for what he did to change our nation. As I said, he also changed the Labor Party. That is important, because this nation and its people depend on Labor to be the party of great reform. The Liberals and Nationals can claim to have instigated very few of the nation's great reforms since the 1970s but, under Gough's leadership and since, our movement has won, and defended, for all Australians so many reforms.

I do not need to repeat the list of them and there are too many anyway, but I want to mention, as the member for Lingiari did much more extensively last week, Gough's work to improve the rights of Aboriginal people and Torres Strait Islanders.

As he said in 1972:

We will legislate to give Aborigines land rights—not just because their case is beyond argument, but because all of us as Australians are diminished while the Aborigines are denied their rightful place in this nation.

It is because of Labor's reformist tradition that Australia needs Labor. There is no other party able to govern that will do what is needed to build our nation at the same time and make it a fairer place for everyone.

Gough understood the imperative to make Labor a better party so that we could fulfil that obligation. As Senator Faulkner said in his speech on Gough's 90 second birth day:

… he was determined to make much needed changes to get Labor out of opposition and into government.

He pursued party reforms to make the party a viable alternative government, and policy reforms to make Labor's platform one that truly met the needs of modern Australia.

In 1977, the year I was born, Gough came to Queensland and told our Labor-In-Politics Convention bluntly that we had to get our house in order. He said:

Whenever things go badly, there is a natural tendency to look for far-fetched answers and blame the people instead of ourselves. I don't think we need to go beyond the obvious for an explanation of our troubles: the party has been run down and defeatist, our policies have been too-little explained and too-little understood.

He went on to say:

Let us not delude ourselves that dissatisfaction with Mr Bjelke-Petersen is enough to put Labor back, any more than dissatisfaction with the Fraser government will put us back in the national parliament. We must put our own house in order first. A reformed and invigorated party in Queensland must be the first step to a Labor government in Brisbane and a new Labor government in Canberra.

In 2014, we can take a great deal of inspiration from Gough's policy achievements and we can also take a great deal of instruction from the way he worked to make Labor electable again. We owe it to him to be Labor, at Labor's, best every day.

I finish by expressing my sincere condolences to Katherine, Nicholas, Tony, Stephen, their partners and their families.

Kelly O'Dwyer (Higgins, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There are but a few faces that represent an era. Yet we can certainly say that Gough Whitlam's name, voice and face bring to mind a political epoch. His features themselves can conjure memories of turbulent times—times of great aspiration and times of great controversy. He was and remains synonymous with dramatic national transformation.

Gough Whitlam was nothing if not a passionate, driven and energetic man. He implemented reforms in almost every field of government endeavour ranging from foreign policy to education. The frenetic pace at which he led this change left many gasping for breath. But his convictions led him to leave no stone unturned. Indeed, some stones he hurled metaphorically into the next paddock. Whether or not one agrees with his policies, his vision and sheer grit are characteristics worthy of our deepest respect.

I believe all sides of politics will concur, regardless of our own political inclinations, that last Tuesday we lost a great Australian. Whitlam did leave many valuable legacies, driven by passion, ideals and character. He had a strong relationship with his wife of almost 70 years who herself was an inspiration to the women of her time and an advocate for women's rights. It was from the publicly witnessed strength of such a strong relationship that he could make on marital laws so much more humane through the passing of the first no-fault divorce procedure in 1975.

The Whitlam government fought for equal pay for women and the establishment of an inquiry to lay the basis for lands right for Indigenous Australians. He also brought in the first cuts to tariffs led by the inspirational modest member Bert Kelly. So there are certainly policies to celebrate.

Whitlam also made a significant contribution to Australia' identity. He had a confidence in Australia and brought with it the idea that Australia has the power to determine its own ideals and that, even as a small country, we can still have big ideas and aspirations. Indeed, with his exciting political dash, he had the capacity to make Australians feel part of something much bigger.

However, as Greg Sheridan pointed out in The Australian, there are misperceptions surrounding Gough Whitlam's prime ministership. Greg cautions that we do not turn Whitlam into some form of political god, because many of his actions were a continuation of sensible trends. For instance, he is often credited with being responsible for the removal of Australian troops from Vietnam; yet most of the troops had already been repatriated by the previous coalition government.

Many have spoken of Gough's brilliant foreign policy legacy, in particular his engagement with China. He did recognise the new government of China after the revolution, and the Chinese government itself has, on his passing, recognised him as the father of Chinese-Australian relations. Yet he was not without flaws in consideration of other peoples and nations. For example, he recognised the sovereignty of the Soviet Union over the Baltic states without taking into account their right to self-determination. Furthermore, he was decidedly unwelcoming to Vietnamese immigrants, even when they had been very helpful to Australians in Vietnam. Nevertheless, Whitlam was a great Australian.

His legacy is enormous but he has also left us with lessons which we must not forget. All can agree that Whitlam was responsible for one of the most rapid periods of legislative change in Australian history. However, his approach, that government is the solution to every problem, is not one that fits well with many Australians. Big government often diminishes its citizens—their choices and their opportunities. Whilst Prime Minister Whitlam was enacting rapid social change, it is my view that the economy was neglected and indeed mismanaged. Government spending increased by 40 per cent, tax rates soared and in one year unemployment doubled. In one short year, between 1974 and 1975, the Whitlam government managed to completely lose control of the budget. According to the economics editor of The AFR, Alan Mitchell, it took '20 years and four prime ministers to get it back under control'.

This was his ultimate legacy to the Labor Party and the legacy that, sadly, has been repeated by Labor prime ministers since his prime ministership—for then, as now, we cannot spend beyond our means, even when implementing a dramatic reform agenda. There seemed to be a concept at the heart of his government that inflation, which reached double digits, and prudent budget administration could be handled after other reforms had been achieved. We have since learnt the important lesson that vision must come hand in hand with economic management. If we do not plan to pay for our changes, the ultimate payment is extracted from our children and their children in an uncontrolled and unplanned manner. Real leadership involves responsible choices. A great leader has a vision and an economic plan for the nation. Without these two essential ingredients a national leader can do more harm than good.

It is also true that Whitlam's management of his government was chaotic. Unable to control his own ministers, the government's inability to finance its big spending program revealed itself to the public in the Khemlani loans affair, which involved a $4 billion loan from the Middle East from undisclosed sources, meaning a bypassing of the Loan Council. The Minister for Minerals and Energy, Connor, was sacked along with the Treasurer over this loans scandal. Perhaps these economic problems and scandals contributed to the souring of his relationship with the Australian public, as evidenced by Whitlam's landslide loss at the election in 1975.

In remembering Whitlam, we remember a period of legislative change the like of which Australia has never seen before, economic problems of the Whitlam government's own making but also an increase in tolerance. Whitlam will be remembered as significantly shaping the Australian that we love today. He used the power that he had as an agent of change and reminded us all of our national identity and how proud we should be to call ourselves Australian. He was a man of great courage and vigour, so regardless of whether or not we agree with his policies it is no sin to feel saddened by his passing and blessed to have lived in the same epoch as such a man.

Julie Collins (Franklin, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Regional Development and Local Government) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is with some sadness that I rise to speak on the condolence motion to farewell the Hon. Edward Gough Whitlam AC, QC, the 21st Prime Minister of Australia. It is time for him to be with his beloved Margaret and it is time for us to say goodbye to a great Labor leader. But where to start when one talks about the most influential leader that this country has ever had? As so many have said, he was truly a giant of a man. He had a great intellect and he had a great vision, but he was also kind, funny and warm, and he had a loving family.

Gough dared to dream. He dared us to dream, to dream of what a future Australia should look like, and then he told us that we could make it so. Gough entered this parliament in 1952. He chose to do this because he believed politics is an honourable profession. He could have stayed with the law. He had served his country in the Air Force. He had so many options, but he wanted to serve his country as a member of parliament. I am sure, knowing Gough, that he would have been confident early on that one day he was going to be Prime Minister. He was Prime Minister for such a short time but it was a very busy time, with Gough and Labor in a hurry to implement their ideas and their policies after so many years in opposition. The government that he led, that implemented his vision, made so many changes to policy in this country that forever changed the people of Australia, how we thought about ourselves and how others viewed us from outside.

After winning the 1972 election, it was of course a Tasmanian in Lance Barnard, the member for Bass, who formed the two-part cabinet with Gough that made so many sweeping changes. It is hard to decide which of the many reforms had the biggest, most enduring impact. His changes to education meant so many Australians had an opportunity to get a tertiary education that would not have happened without his reforms. So many of us in this place have a story about the first ever family member who did go or is going to university because of Gough. His changes to the social security system gave poor people the dignity of being accepted and treated as equals in this country. So many children of those affected by these changes have had opportunities that they would not otherwise have had because of Gough. There were his changes to our health system, with Medibank, now Medicare, providing universal health care to so many and the start of the great Medicare. So many lives were enhanced, extended and saved because of what Gough did.

From health to education, from social security to antidiscrimination, to his wonderful land hand-back to Aboriginal Australians, to his passion for the arts, to his visit to China, to his commitment to equal pay and what he did for women's rights, to his starting to reduce tariffs, Gough really did modernise and change the face of this country. He reformed the Labor Party itself. He told us we had to believe we could win government, that we needed to win government. Indeed, he told the ALP's conference in Victoria in 1968 that 'only the impotent are pure' and that we need to change our platform and we needed to change our party.

He also changed the country's voting systems. To quote from Gough's speech from 2001 at the Federation anniversary dinner in Melbourne, celebrating the centenary of the federal ALP's caucus, Gough said:

Tonight we celebrate more than a century's commitment to change and reform through Parliament. My most constant objective has been to make Australian Parliaments more representative of all voters. The nadir of the Party's electoral fortunes was reached in March 1968, when the Dunstan Government was defeated despite winning 52% of the votes.

Only one of Australia's 13 Houses of Parliament was left with a Labor majority, the Tasmanian House of Assembly. Tasmania alone had equal enrolments in all electoral divisions in the State and Federal lower houses. In the winter of our discontent, Lance Barnard and I, the Leader and Deputy Leader in the Senate, Lionel Murphy and Sam Cohen, Premier Eric Reece and the Leaders of the five State Oppositions met in Hobart. We resolved to achieve equal franchise—one vote-one value—in the House of Representatives and in all the State Houses of Parliament.

At the joint sitting of both Federal Houses in August 1974, the House of Representatives was made the first legislative body in Australia to be elected on the principles of one vote, one value and regular redistribution.

Gough was truly a democrat. He believed in the parliament. He believed in people and their ideas.

I had the great privilege of meeting Gough on several occasions, particularly when he came to Tasmania, my home state, and, importantly, when he and Margaret were presented with their life membership at the ALP national conference in Sydney—the first people to receive a national ALP life membership.

In closing, my sympathies go to Gough's children, his family and his friends. On behalf of my electorate of Franklin and on behalf of the people of Tasmania I say, simply: 'Thank you, Gough.'

David Coleman (Banks, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am pleased to have the opportunity to contribute to this condolence motion for the Honourable Gough Whitlam AC, QC. Like most Australians, I did not know Mr Whitlam. I was not born when he became Prime Minister and I was just one year old when he left office. Like most Australians, there was much about Mr Whitlam I respected. I am fortunate to have the opportunity to express my views in this place.

It seems to me that much of the battle in public life is about having the courage to ask the big questions. You cannot move things forward unless you are willing to at least contemplate some radical ideas. Wisely, we generally shy away from radical ideas once we have contemplated them, but every once in a while it takes a leader to grasp tomorrow's conventional wisdom today. Mr Whitlam demonstrated that leadership ability in a few important ways.

He established diplomatic relations with China. He was ahead of his time. He did it during the Cold War. If, politically, Richard Nixon could go to China, it was much more difficult for Mr Whitlam—but he did do that and it has been, clearly, to the benefit of our nation in the ensuing decades. He decolonised Papua New Guinea, recognising that the era of colonies was over and belonged to another time. He drafted the first Land Rights Act for Indigenous Australians, which put us on the path we have been on for some time since and that path towards acknowledging the legal fiction of terra nullius. Importantly, he cut tariffs by 25 per cent in 1973, a very aggressive idea at the time with little public support. It was certainly not supported by his union constituency or many others but was something that helped set us on that path of tariff reduction, which has been so important to our future prosperity.

None of us are any more than human and Mr Whitlam was just a man. He made at least his share of mistakes and pursued economic policies that the Australian people understandably rejected. But he was a man blessed with the intellectual depth to conceive of big ideas and he had the powers of persuasion to make them happen. He could never be accused of entering politics simply to occupy the crease. He had ideas. He pursued them with all vigour. We can ask nothing more of a public servant. I pass on my deepest condolences to Mr Whitlam's family at this difficult time.

Laurie Ferguson (Werriwa, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Due to my age and the longevity of my political involvement, I am indisputably the only person in this parliament who was at the 1969 and 1972 victory functions at Gough Whitlam's home. I want to correct an earlier contribution regarding that, because the second 1972 event certainly was at his home. He had previously received the results at the Sunnybank motel, room 7, and then walked to the function that night.

In 2010, after the strange, brief disappearance and then revival of the seat of Reid, and in a checkmate of political faction leaders and union honchos, I found myself the member for Werriwa. I soon found two very distinct aspects of that electorate. The first is a sense of difference, a belief that the Macarthur region was distinct. If you go to any fundraiser in that electorate they always promise people that all the money will stay in the region. That is a hangover from the rural nature of Campbelltown and its environs.

I also found that not only Labor loyalists but also the general electorate had a belief that it was a great thing they lived in the electorate of Gough Whitlam. Again, in 2013, when the Liberal Party plastered the electorate with money, and pundits in both the Liberal Party and the Labor Party thought that I would lose the seat, I had newspaper commentary which constantly stressed that the iconic seat of Reid, the old seat of Gough Whitlam, would be lost to the Labor Party. So he is very much centrally involved in the history of that electorate.

I had the opportunity of observing another aspect of his political life. My father shared with him state and federal responsibilities for significant periods. They went through the obvious requirements of the electorate—attending school fetes, balls and dances and other events of the burgeoning Maltese, Italian and German communities. There were also functions at the nascent RSLs and bowling clubs. On many occasions he dropped by our house. He would take off his shoes and have a few drinks with my parents. My mother being raised in the Riverina was no mean cook, and on many occasions she commented on Gough's fondness for the tooth—a proclivity for cakes et cetera.

I want to stress that from the moment of the 1949 by-election—I have an advertisement of it here provided by Richard James Ford for a meeting at Liverpool Town Hall on 25 November—Gough Whitlam was a person who very much involved himself in the electorate, with the local education of the children and sporting and training events. He was a person who actually treated very seriously his civic responsibilities and his engagement with the local electorate. It is not only a matter of what he accomplished for this country but also the fact that he was very much a participant in local democracy within the electorate. It was, as I say, the reason that we now see such a fondness for him within that electorate.

He is respected for many breathtaking innovations during that period, and it is an important point to bear in mind that those changes still affect us today. Both sides of politics have talked about the NDIS and, hopefully, we will now see action in regard to Australia's disabled. A person called Gough Whitlam was, 40 years ago, calling in the wilderness for a national compensation scheme. In the last few months, Australia has been very proud to make its opinions known on matters as diverse as ISIS and the shooting down of the plane in Ukraine and also to make its presence felt on the Security Council. This accomplishment is very much related to a person who, in contrast to many other prime ministers, knew that there were capital cities in this world beyond Washington, Wellington, Tokyo and London. He had an incredible knowledge of the world, its diversity, and a belief that rather than being the arse end of the earth this country through is pioneering accomplishments, through its remoteness and through its independent need to survive the Second World War et cetera did have something to present. The fact that we can now see ourselves on the Security Council, that we can have a role independent to some degree of the United States—at least a degree greater than it was previously—owes much to him.

In regard to university education, a matter of controversy these days, I want to quote some figures to show how bad things are in the United States, which some people in this country would like us to emulate. Christopher Benfey in the New York Review of Books last week revealed that 100 United States schools, representing 0.3 per cent of the United States education system, were able to provide 22 per cent of the entrants to Princeton, Yale and Harvard. This is the kind of outcome that Gough Whitlam vigorously opposed. We know that he abolished university fees, introduced student income support, moved the federal sphere very strongly into tertiary education and changed many other aspects of the policy.

Another issue on the agenda today that has some connection with him is Gonski. One of the issues back in his political career was the question of state aid for schools. I have a letter here from Brother Kelvin Canavan, who was a long-term activist on this issue. He talks about Whitlam at state and other rallies in 1969. He notes:

His message was always the same. Australia must increase spending on education and both government and Catholic schools should be funded according to need. Gough had a very clear view that the Commonwealth must make "a comprehensive and continuous financial commitment to schools, as it has to universities."

A few years ago, I located a sound recording—of the Town Hall speeches. I sent a copy to Gough who phoned me the next day with his reminiscences of the campaign by Catholics for financial assistance their schools.

…   …   …

He took considerable pride in the role he played in ensuring that all students had access to well-funded schools.

On a number of occasions, he came back to the 1969 rallies. He lamented the passing of public meetings that provided a stage for a gifted orator. "Television is a poor substitute for the Town Hall," he said.

He recognised another area where Whitlam's views are still relevant today. His belief that there needs to an emphasis on areas of need for those regions that are deprived so that people have access to university and an equal education in primary and secondary schools.

In my association with people, the most common reference to Whitlam is in connection with education. The number of people who say that they personally would not have gone to university, had the livelihood that they have, brought up their family in the way that they have or had the opportunity to broaden their knowledge without Whitlam's reforms in education is the most evident of those changes.

We also have—and many people have raised this—the recognition of China. It is interesting that in the last fortnight that Jimmy Carter—who only accomplished US recognition of China in 1978 and in the process was vigorously attacked by Barry Goldwater—was treated very badly in China. It was, as I say, six years after Australia that the United States normalised responsibilities. It was a breathtaking initiative by an independent country—a country asserting its place in the world.

Finally, there was the war in Indochina and the decision by Labor to stop this lottery and to give people the opportunity to avoid involvement in this conflict which had long been opposed far more vigorously even than by Gough by other elements in the Labor Party over the previous decade.

I salute Gough and Margaret's contribution to Australian politicly life; and to his family, I express my own, my electorate's and my family's condolences.

Craig Kelly (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Gough Whitlam our 21st Prime Minister was born on 11 July 1916 and passed away of 21st October 2014 aged 98 years. The 98 years of his life, although our country has gone through many ups and downs, saw an unprecedented improvement in the prosperity and the welfare of the average Australian. We saw vast improvements across our living standards during that period.

Here are a couple of examples: when Gough Whitlam was born, life expectancy for the average Australian was under 60 years. When Gough Whitlam died, it was approaching 85 years. Australians born today have been given the gift of a quarter of a century of life.

We also saw during the time of Gough Whitlam's life substantial decreases in infant mortality. In fact, at the time of Whitlam's birth, there were around 100 deaths for every thousand live births. Today it is down to less than three for every thousand live births. It has come about through improvements in prenatal and post natal care; new medicines; mass vaccinations; and improved sanitation.

We have also seen during Whitlam's life a massive decrease in deaths from infectious diseases. When Whitlam was born, there were around 143 deaths per every thousand people per year from infectious and parasitic diseases. Today it is down to just nine.

We also saw substantial increases in real wages and increases in household wealth when we look at what we take for granted today like motor vehicles. In the 1920s, when a young Gough Whitlam would have been considering getting a car, there were only 21 motor vehicles in the country for every thousand people. Today it is over 560 for every thousand people.

When we look at household appliances, communication and education, Australians today enjoy so much prosperity because we inherited the legacy of our previous generation.

The other thing we should be very thankful to our 21st Prime Minister for is his war service. We know that Gough Whitlam registered for the Royal Australian Air Force the very day the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor. He was called up in June 1942 and he served as a navigator, spending much of his time stationed at Gove. He moved further north and undertook bombing raids on enemy supply camps in the islands of the Philippines. We Australians today who enjoy the peace and prosperity that we do should always be thankful to that generation of Australians who fought and served during the Second World War.

Gough Whitlam also had ties to the electorate that I represent, Hughes. In fact, Gough Whitlam tried to run for the Sutherland Shire Council but was defeated twice. He also ran for the state seat of Sutherland in 1950 but was again defeated. Many might say that the Sutherland Shire's loss was the nation's gain, although some of the Sutherland Shire might put it the opposite way. In 1952, he was finally elected in a by-election for the seat of Werriwa, which at that time encompassed much of the Sutherland Shire and much of the seat of Hughes that I represent today. In 1955, the electorate of Werriwa, then the most populous in the nation, was split in two, with the older part of Hughes being created—the electorate that I proudly represent here in parliament today.

It took Gough Whitlam 14 years in this parliament, which is a substantial amount of time by today's standards, before he was elected leader of the Labor Party. He went on to lose the 1969 election, but in 1972 he finally led Labor into office after 23 years in opposition.

I believe that all our past prime ministers have been great patriots of this nation and they all wanted to see our nation succeed and our prosperity continue to increase. Therefore, I believe that they would all want us not to engage in mythmaking but to look upon their terms in office critically, to look at the things that they did wrong—not for the sake of criticising but for the sake of hoping to learn from those mistakes. The Whitlam government, although they certainly did many interesting things, they did a few things that we should look at and we should learn from those mistakes.

One, I believe, was the recognition of the Soviet annexation of the Baltic states: Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia. That was undertaken by the Whitlam government on 3 August 1974. That was in the midst of the Cold War, the real struggle in the second half of the last century, the struggle between communism and the West. By recognising the communist takeover, we said it was okay for those people to remain locked behind the Iron Curtain, that the Iron Curtain was a permanent feature that we had accepted and that we had surrendered in the fight of the Cold War. History shows that that was the wrong thing to do. We have shown that that was standing on the wrong side of history. Thankfully, many other nations stood by the Baltic states, especially the Americans. When those states were finally liberated in the nineties, that recognition, unfortunately, was a very sad part of our nation's history. Thankfully, it was reversed after a short period of time.

The other thing that the Whitlam government was given much credit for was recognition of China, but that came at the expense of Taiwan. We withdrew from Taiwan and closed down our embassy, and we recognised China. We have to remember that the China that we deal with today is a different kettle of fish to the China of the 1970s. One reason, I would suggest, that China has gone down the track that it has and has seen its prosperity increase so much is that, during the eighties and nineties, the Chinese leadership had the opportunity to look at how their nation was progressing and compare it to the island of Taiwan. Whereas China's economy, GDP and standard of living were flatlining almost for decades, the economy of Taiwan continued to increase substantially. The prosperity the Taiwanese people enjoyed multiplied several-fold while the Chinese economy was flatlining. One of the reasons was that the Taiwanese people went down the track of free markets. They went down the track of democracy. They went down the track of creating an entrepreneurial culture, of allowing their own people to own and create wealth and to start up their own businesses.

I would suggest it was that prosperity—seeing the difference of the standard of living those two systems delivered, in terms of material welfare—that was one of the major reasons the Chinese government, in the 90s, decided to open its economy.

By pulling out of Taiwan, by closing our embassy there, we threatened the Taiwanese economy. In fact, the Taiwanese economy went through a very dark and harsh period, during the early 1970s, when countries such as Australia no longer recognised them—and recognised China. It is also worthwhile remembering that even in the 1980s our exports to China only represented 2½ per cent of our nation's exports. Today they represent over 30 per cent. That increase has come about because the Chinese have realised they should have followed the economic policies of the Taiwanese. What Australia and many nations did, by pulling out of Taiwan, threatened the very thing that has created the modern China of today.

There are also the mistakes we made about the Vietnamese refugees, and this was covered by a debate yesterday in this parliament. There is the decision of creating independence for Papua New Guinea. We see Papua New Guinea today experiencing as a nation great difficulties. Perhaps we rushed into giving Papua New Guinea independence. Perhaps it was because of an anti-colonialist attitude that we thought having another country as a colony—although we never treated it that way—was a bad thing.

Before we became a federation we were able to enjoy 100 years of British traditions and the establishment of those institutions to create the democracy that we have, the rule of law that we have. Perhaps we rushed into giving Papua New Guinea that independence. Perhaps we should have stayed there and helped that nation establish those British institutions, help establish the rule of law, help establish the Westminster system and help establish its infrastructure. Perhaps if we had done that Papua New Guinea would have been a stronger nation today.

The other thing we can learn from the Whitlam era is the way that we treat our troops when they come home. Much is said about the Whitlam government bringing the troops home from Vietnam, but history shows that this all happened under previous Liberal governments. When Labor came to power there were only 120 Australian troops left in Vietnam, most of those guarding our embassy. And none of them were conscripts. There were the attacks from the left when those troops came home—the demonisation of those troops—that caused many of those men many more problems than they had experienced fighting in the war.

We realise now those mistakes. We realise now the importance, whether people agree or disagree with the war, of treating our troops and armed service men and women, who serve and fight in those wars, with the utmost respect and dignity when they return home.

We also learned about the issue of so-called free education. Much is said about Whitlam making education free. We know there were many scholarships and grants, and the majority of people in university when Whitlam was in power were actually there on some type of scholarship system. We remember the word 'free', but nothing is for free. Someone always has to pay. So unless we are going to turn our lecturers in universities into slaves, someone must pay. If we are giving someone a free university education or even a subsidised university education, it means someone else out there in society—often someone who never would have the opportunity to go to university—has to pay.

We also learned about our Trade Practices Act. It is often said the Whitlam government introduced the Trade Practices Act, but we had a Trade Practices Act preceding that in 1965 and we had a Restrictive Trade Practices Act in 1971. Perhaps, with hindsight, one of the great mistakes of that Trade Practices Act was section 49, the provisions on price discrimination where, rather than following the entirety of US antitrust law at the time and implementing what was the US Robinson-Patman Act for price discrimination, we went with other wording. We tacked on the other end of our price discrimination act a substantial lessening of competition test, and that has led to much concentration in our markets today across all sectors.

The Whitlam government was certainly one of great historical importance and interest to our nation. As I said, we cannot sugar coat the period. We need to look at the mistakes that were made so we can learn from those mistakes. Of course during that period we also saw unemployment triple, we saw the tax take almost double, we saw the deficit blow out and we saw inflation soar to almost 20 per cent. When the Australian public was finally given the opportunity to give a verdict on those Whitlam years at the 1975 election, Labor were tossed out in a landslide. There was a 7.4 per cent swing against them and, of the 66 seats that the Labor Party held, 30 seats were lost. Almost half of the government lost office, with a two-party preferred vote of 55.7 per cent to 44.3 per cent. Whitlam stayed on in parliament and contested the 1977 election. Despite that, there was just a 1.1 per cent swing back and they only won back two of the 30 seats they had lost. It was still a landslide victory to the coalition.

Gough Whitlam was part of an era, a generation of Australians that has enabled my generation and my children's generation, and hopefully my children's generation in the future, to enjoy enormous prosperity. For all the errors, for all the mistakes, we must be greatly thankful for our 21st Prime Minister.

Michael Danby (Melbourne Ports, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On a balmy night on 30 November 1972 I walked down Balaclava Rd from my grandmother's house in Carnegie to the 'It's Time' rally at the St Kilda, now Port Phillip, Town Hall, and there I met for the first time, and heard, Gough Whitlam, with whom I have been intermittently in contact throughout my time in politics and indeed before my entry to parliament. He was an inspiring but flawed leader. I suppose we are all flawed.

The Menzies government was the first one to tentatively introduce state aid to independent schools in the form of funding for science laboratories, but it was Gough Whitlam who ensured that the funding of non-government schools was for ever non-partisan. Prior to 1970, the hard left anti-Catholic sectarians who dominated the Victorian Labor Party hated the idea of the federal government funding of non-government schools. Whitlam understood that unless there was a needs based, non-sectarian funding of all schools Labor would remain unelectable. Indeed the issue of state aid to independent schools destroyed the career of my predecessor, then leader of the state opposition, Clive Holding. Just days before the 1970 election the local newspaper, the Herald Sun, reported Bill Hartley, the infamous anti-Israel head of the Victorian central executive, overruling Holding's pledge to give government money, state aid, to church schools. This caused Mr Whitlam, who was then the Leader of the Opposition, with the support of then ACTU President Bob Hawke, to intervene in the Victorian Labor Party and insist on the replacement of its extreme left executive. Excising the hard left Victorian central executive, dominated by the little remembered but prominent at the time figures Bill Hartley and George Crawford, is widely judged to have been crucial not just at a state level but also nationally to Labor's election for the first time in 23 years in 1972.

Despite the ghastly ghouls in the Greens party trying to steal Gough Whitlam's mantle after his death, Whitlam was a centrist and long an enemy of the hard left. Only in conversations since his passing have I been told it was he who alerted the Red Fox, Alan Reid, and his photographer to the scene of him and Arthur Calwell, then the Leader of the Labor Party, lurking under a dim street lamp. I do not know whether it is true, but it was said to be designed to embarrass the 36 faceless men who comprised the national conference of the Labor Party, determining Australia's foreign policy without our national deputy leader present and our attitude to the then important issue of the communications base at North West Cape. It was typical of Gough if he in fact did it. His doctrine was, as in many other issues, crash through or crash.

I have to record, unfortunately, that Mr Whitlam in my view sullied his reformist record in 1975 by proposing to take a donation from the Iraqi Ba'ath party. There is and there was grainy contemporaneous footage of Saddam Hussein dragging out dissident members of the Ba'ath party from their national congress to be murdered. These kinds of events about Iraq and the Ba'ath party were known at the time.

Nonetheless, Mr Whitlam was removed by, in my view, an unethical blocking of supply, and the Governor-General's, Sir John Kerr's, dubious exercising of his undefined reserve powers in unfortunate collaboration with a former Liberal Attorney-General, the Chief Justice of the High Court at the time, Sir Garfield Barwick. As a university student leader, I organised many manifestations of ongoing public outrage at Mr Whitlam's removal. Most memorable was an American-style picket of the Royal Commonwealth Society in Queens Road in early 1976, when Sir John Kerr appeared for the first time since the dismissal. As president of the University of Melbourne student representative council, I organised over 300 students, all garbed in top hats made out of black cardboard to mock the pomposity of the then Governor-General Kerr and to highlight his constitutional improprieties.

Occasionally through the years I saw Gough Whitlam, and our relationship slowly revived. He occasionally sought to refine my speeches and questions in this place and approved of many of the historical, linguistic and geographical allusions in my parliamentary contributions. Our last conversation was several years ago at the ALP National Conference in Darling Harbour, where Mr Whitlam, typically, exhibited a keen interest in my role, as he had done with many Labor members of this parliament, as the ranking member then of the federal parliament's Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters. Former Prime Minister Whitlam was very anxious that the Liberals not roll back one vote, one value. He was passionate about electoral reform and believed that federal Labor had unfairly lost three federal elections in 1954, 1961 and 1969 because of the perversions of the electoral process, including gerrymandering and archaic voting laws. Although he tried to reform them in his time, a blockage in the Senate meant that those fair electoral laws which we now have presiding over Australia were only adopted when his colleague Bob Hawke was elected as Prime Minister in 1983, and great reforms of electoral matters took place in those days.

As Mr Whitlam stepped into his car at the ALP conference in Darling Harbour, his parting remarks to me were in his famous deep, self-mocking tone: 'I pass to you, Danby, the torch of electoral reform'—a treasured compliment, as is his memory.

Teresa Gambaro (Brisbane, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise in support of this condolence motion for the Hon. Edward Gough Whitlam AC QC. I want to make special mention of Gough and Margaret's surviving children, Tony, Nicholas, Stephen and Catherine, as well as his sister, Freda. All too often in circumstances such as this, it is the family of those who have passed who are treated as the epitaph, an afterthought at the end of speeches and news reports. I want to mention them first because as a nation we lost our 21st Prime Minister; their loss is the greatest loss of all. I recently suffered the loss of my father, and to Gough and Margaret's family I want to say this: for all the intrusions that the politics of this nation have made into your lives over the years, thank you for sharing your father and your mother with all of us. Your sacrifice has helped to make us the country that we are today.

The passing of a Prime Minister is a national event. It is something we all rightly mourn and for which we show our deepest respect. Regardless of whether any of us agreed or disagreed with Gough's politics, there are times when our humility triumphs over our differing political views, and this is one of those times. As polarising a political figure as Gough was in life, I for one have been humbled by the fact that we as a nation have all come together to celebrate his life, his triumphs, his failures and how he contributed to our view of ourselves as Australians. I do not believe that anyone in this place could be unmoved by the way that Gough's passing has brought us together, political opponents united in respect for one man.

Even in death Gough is challenging us to think beyond our petty squabbles and hatreds. As my parliamentary colleague the member for Wentworth has said:

… hatred, as we know, destroys and corrodes the hater much more than it hurts the hated, and so many people in our business, in politics, find themselves consumed by hatred and retire into a bitter anecdotage, gnawing away at all of the injustices and betrayals they have suffered through their life.

This was not the case with Gough, as both he and another former Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser demonstrated over many years.

There have been many superlatives spoken about Gough this past week, just as there have been many less forgiving and quite blunt appraisals of his competence in government—or, rather, the lack of it. This must be really confusing for a generation of Australians who did not live in Gough's time. Where does the truth lie? For me, it is a little of both. It is properly acknowledged that Gough thought big. He had big ideas, big dreams and, by all repute, a big ego which eclipsed both. I believe he genuinely wanted to change the lives of all Australians for the better. I do not believe he knew how to best go about achieving that goal, but his belief in the ideal was admirable. His government ended conscription and recalled our troops from Vietnam. He recognised China, introduced Medibank, abolished university fees and gave Papua New Guinea its independence. He transformed our approach to Indigenous Australians and he championed the cause of women. His government's incompetence in the management of the economy, however, would ultimately prove that Labor was not fit for office at that time.

In the passing of Gough, we must guard against a temptation to canonise a man who was, as Prime Minister Abbott has rightly described, a 'giant' in our country's history. There are lessons we can learn from Gough, from his successes and his failures. As a young country still creating the depth of its political mythology, it is only right and healthy that we have such debates and contest these ideas, that we seek to learn. But we cannot learn if we view our own history through rose-coloured glasses. One lesson I believe we can take from Gough is that style over substance is no way to lead a country.

But, in saying that, and as Henry Ergas said in The Australian yesterday, unlike some Labor leaders who have come after him, Gough was:

A self, not a selfie, he had character …

Edward Gough Whitlam was an Australian statesman and a patriot. He was an optimist and unashamedly ambitious for this country. If there is any legacy from Gough that we should seek to emulate it is this: we must never stop trying to make this lucky country of ours even better.

Ms Catherine King (Ballarat, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Health) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The death of Gough Whitlam is mourned across the nation as the passing of a great Australian, a leader who changed this nation for the better and left us a magnificent legacy that continues to enrich our lives today. Like many in this place—on all sides, it seems—I treasure memories of my meetings with Gough and Margaret. In my case, it was during their visits to my electorate of Ballarat.

Gough first came to Ballarat as Prime Minister in 1973 to unveil the restored Eureka flag at the Ballarat Fine Art Gallery. I know that he was pleased to hear that it had eventually gone back to where the Eureka Stockade had occurred. It now sits within the Museum of Australian Democracy at Eureka. In a landmark speech in 1973, at the time of the unveiling, he noted that:

It is a truism, perhaps, that the importance of an historical event lies not in what happened but in what later generations believe to have happened.

Gough was a great champion of the spirit of Eureka, attending numerous functions in Ballarat to mark what he believed to be both an event of great significance in the evolution of Australian democracy and a true symbol of a proud, independent nation. So, as the member for Ballarat, I particularly wanted to contribute to this condolence motion to thank Gough on behalf of the people of Ballarat for your faith in us and your continued belief in the spirit of Eureka.

Whenever I had the pleasure of meeting and talking to Gough, I was always struck by his incredibly cheeky sense of humour. In fact my very first meeting with Gough came shortly after I was elected as the federal member for Ballarat. We had our annual Eureka walk. I had worn a pair of Blundstones because the walk was quite lengthy. Gough had been brought to the event in a car. I had met him the day before. I was sitting on the podium with him and he looked down and peered most curiously at my footwear. He beckoned to his staff member, Stephen, in a very loud voice and pointed so that everybody in the audience could see him pointing at my boots, and said, 'Look, Stephen, she's got Stott Despoja boots on.' I always thought it was a difficult situation—how do you deal with someone as great as Gough suddenly taking the micky out of you? It was quite a funny experience.

In 2004, my husband and I, together with about 25 guests, hosted Gough and Margaret at our house in Ballarat. It was an enormous privilege to experience for a few hours their shared passion and extraordinary knowledge of history, culture and travel. I will never forget a young girl who since has subsequently gone on to work in politics, Susan, who I remember spent a lot of time talking to Gough. Gough was incredibly kind, generous and engaging with her. There he was in his 80s, frail, but still wanting to know about her and her aspirations for life. He encouraged her to continue her engagement with politics.

Gough not only loved Ballarat's history but also our architecture. He considered the streetscape and buildings of Ballarat to be some of Australia's finest, and Lydiard Street, where my electoral office is located, to be one of Australia's truly great preserved streetscapes.

Gough's passing has been the trigger for many of us to reflect on his legacy and his achievements. All of us who were fortunate enough to be elected to this place come here because we want to make a difference. But few politicians in this nation's history, if any, can point to a legacy as great as the one bequeathed to this nation by Gough Whitlam: ending conscription, recognising China and tearing down the last vestiges of the White Australia policy to make us a truly multicultural nation. Whitlam's government recognised land rights, introduced no-fault divorce, pursued equal pay for women and made the dream of many parents for their children to become the first in their family to go to university a reality. He introduced Australia's first consumer protection and trade practices laws and promoted the arts in all its myriad forms that today so proudly reflect our national identity. And, of course, what will come as no surprise for anyone to hear me declare is that his finest achievement was universal health care.

These are the achievements of a true political giant, a leader with a sweeping vision who saw this nation as a place that could, and must, be better than it had been; a nation that should be a fairer, decent and more inclusive society, where its rich natural resources and great wealth were shared with all of its people; a nation which pursued a vision of itself every bit as great as the continent it inhabited; a nation where we stood tall on the world stage, proud of who we were, and no longer able to be dismissed as a British outpost at the far end of the earth.

Critics often dismiss Gough's achievements as reforms that were going to happen anyway, suggesting he just happened to be the one around at the time. One only has to look at the struggles to this day to give Australia access to decent universal health care to know that this argument is false. Without Gough showing the way, demonstrating that universal health care was an idea which could be delivered, it would have been so much harder for Bob Hawke to have fought and won that battle once more. Forty years after those tumultuous times of 1975, it is now clear the Dismissal only ended Gough's time as Prime Minister, not what he sought to achieve during that brief time he was in office. His far-reaching reforms to make Australia a more modern, open, inclusive and fairer nation endure.

'If you seek his monument, look around you,' reads the epitaph of Christopher Wren in the magnificent St Paul's Cathedral. So too does Australia stand today as that monument to Gough. His monument is all of us. This nation was fortunate to have had such a great statesman in Edward Gough Whitlam. We mourn his passing, but we celebrate a life that has left us all the richer for his time among us, and we thank his children for sharing him with us during what has been a very important time in our history.

Darren Chester (Gippsland, National Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I join with the member for Ballarat and others who have already spoken in relation to this condolence motion. I am humbled to speak in relation to our 21st Prime Minister, the Hon. Edward Gough Whitlam, known universally as Gough. On behalf of all Gippslanders, I would like to extend my condolences to the Whitlam family, particularly his children—Tony, Nick, Stephen and Catherine—and also the Australian Labor Party. Our political parties are a bit like our extended families and Gough was the patriarch of the modern Labor family.

I would also like to acknowledge the members and senators from all sides who reflected so fondly on the memory of Gough Whitlam. I think we saw last Tuesday parliament at its absolute best. The condolence motion spoken on by the opposition leader, the Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister and others reflected very favourably on the way this House can pull together at appropriate times and rise to a higher standard, and I think the Australian people deeply appreciate it when we manage to reach those levels.

It was a celebration of a momentous life, and there is no question or any suggestion that Gough Whitlam ever adopted the small-target strategy which seems so popular in modern politics. Gough lived life large and to the full, and it is a great credit to him and his family that he was able to excite political debate at a time when the Australian community was desperate for someone of his ilk. So it is important that we use these events—and I cannot for a second suggest it is a sad event, because I think it is actually a celebration of a magnificent life—to recognise former leaders of our nation, particularly one who lived to the ripe age of 98 and continued to make a contribution well into what other people may regard as retirement years, often at great personal sacrifice and sacrifice from his family as well.

I do not think this is a time or a place to be running a report card on the former Prime Minister, on how we think he performed, either at the time or afterwards. I even saw on the weekend a media outlet encouraging people to give him a score out of 10, which I think is a great disservice to a Prime Minister. Whether he was 'Australia's greatest Prime Minister' or 'not our best Prime Minister' I do not think particularly matters. It is not for us mere mortals to make those assessments of a man of Mr Whitlam's great ego, if you like, as reflected on by other members last week.

Everyone will have their own opinions, but I think we can focus on the things that we do agree on—and that is, that he was a giant of political life in Australia. He was a powerful motivating force who sought to make a difference, and I think that is a great contribution. What really matters, I think, is that Gough Whitlam showed great pride, determination and passion for Australia and he pursued his policy agenda. He knew what he wanted and he set out to achieve that agenda with great passion and vigour.

I think these are the qualities that the Australian people are looking for today, perhaps even more so than in the past. They want to see members on both sides of this chamber coming here with a clear vision, a determination to participate in the great contest of ideas this parliament provides for, and pursuing their agenda with passion but with respect for each other. I think we can have a robust contest in this place—at all times we have a robust contest—but we can maintain a level of wit and good humour which I think Gough Whitlam demonstrated on many occasions.

I think there can be few more appropriate examples of members who have come to this place with a clear vision of how they wanted to shape the nation, in their mind for the betterment of the nation. I do not think we need to agree, as I said, on his success or failure, but surely we can agree that he was determined to make a difference. He had a relentless optimism and a belief in our nation.

I think the media, perhaps unfairly, over the last week or so have used the passing of Gough Whitlam to reflect on the inadequacy of current politicians and the current parliament. I would encourage the media to be a little bit less churlish in that regard. I am not going to stand here and lecture the media, but I think they could be a little bit less churlish. Rather than make comparisons with Gough Whitlam and his era and use the occasion to reflect adversely on members of the current parliament, take the time to meet many of the members in this chamber, on both sides of the House, and you will find many extraordinary community leaders who are doing some great work in their individual electorates. No-one gets elected to the House of Representatives without some ability. We may dispute the choice of the individual electorates. We may fiercely contest the next election and then try to defeat those individual candidates. But no-one makes it to the House of Representatives without some level of ability, something that appeals to their electorates. I think we have a shared passion and commitment to our individual regions. I encourage the media in that regard. Rather than reflect on the adequacy of current members of parliament, get out there, meet some of these people in their electorates and understand the work they do on a daily basis.

It is an opportunity for us to reflect on the great contribution that Gough Whitlam made to the Australian Labor Party in particular. It is an opportunity to recommit ourselves as members in this place to working together whenever we can. I accept there are many occasions when we do not agree. But, whenever we can, it is an opportunity to work together on some of these significant national projects of importance and to demonstrate the respect and personal integrity that we need to stand in this place and to have that great contest of ideas.

If there is one great legacy for Gough Whitlam—and take aside all the individual policy areas which we may dispute—it is that he excited a generation of young people to get interested in politics. His ideas excited debate in the community. He motivated young people in particular to show an interest in the great public debates of our time. He encouraged a generation to become engaged in the political process. As I learned last week, to my great surprise, that included our own Deputy Prime Minister. Warren Truss, the member for Wide Bay, remarked that many on this side were inspired to get involved in politics for the opposite reason. They thought it was necessary to stand up against some of the things that he stood for. I did indulge in a bit of tweeting at the time. I could not quite imagine my great leader and great friend the Deputy Prime Minister out there chanting slogans and manning the barricades with billboards. But you learn something every day. It is true that the member for Wide Bay was excited to enter politics through the activities of Gough Whitlam, though of course on the opposite side of the political agenda.

There were many great speeches last week and I will not go through them all now in terms of the contributions that people made. But I think the point made by the Leader of the Opposition that he articulated again last week was a very valid one. Gough's ambition went beyond his desire to service our nation. He wanted to transform it completely and permanently—and he did. And, as members here gather throughout the year, I say we all accept there are things we need to improve in our nation, that it is an ongoing process to continue to work wherever it is possible on the reforms that are required. I do not accept for a second that any government is perfect, nor do I accept that any government is a complete failure. I look at the previous government, the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd years, and I see some reforms which occurred in that time frame which I think will be reviewed quite positively by the electorate in the longer term. Perhaps the failure of that government relates more to the capacity to pay for some of the reforms when they were made. But there is ongoing reform required in issues related to education; child care; aged care; health services; making sure that people who are socially or economically disadvantaged have the support they require; making sure that we support older Australians in an ageing population; and, in an area where Gough Whitlam himself was an enormous reformer, Indigenous affairs. Particularly on the issue of land rights, that work continues today. I do not suggest for a second that we are anywhere near finished that journey, but I believe the Whitlam legacy in that regard has been a positive one and I am confident the members on both sides, members of good faith, are heading in the right direction in relation to Indigenous reforms and making sure that our Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people get the support they need to be full and complete participants in our great nation.

So the work of government is never done and there is still need for enormous reforms, but I congratulate the Australian Labor Party and its patriarch of the modern era, Gough Whitlam, for the work they undertook in that tumultuous time. No-one is suggesting for a second they were not divisive days. No-one is suggesting for a second it was a perfect time. But it certainly did excite political interest in our nation.

Just briefly and in conclusion, I want to remark on a story that was retold to me by some of my local electorate residents. As far as I can tell, during his relatively short term in government Mr Whitlam only had limited opportunities to the visit the electorate of Gippsland. I did manage to find a speech where he was at the Gippsland Field Days. This was in 1974 at Lardner, near Warragul. This is not quite in my electorate but in the electorate of McMillan nearby. I would suggest it would have been a pretty tough crowd for a Labor Prime Minister. There were reports of heckling and jeering farmers armed with tomatoes. There were no reports that Warren Truss was in the crowd, but it was a tough crowd for a—

Dan Tehan (Wannon, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What about truss tomatoes?

Darren Chester (Gippsland, National Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I acknowledge the member for Wannon. He would have hardly been a twinkle in his mother's eye at that stage!

It was 1974. But, with his usual charm, humour and robust debating style, he held his own and apparently placated the masses. He even thanked the crowd for receiving him so warmly. So I think that as Tony Abbott, the Prime Minister, said last week:

In person, it was hard to disagree with and impossible to dislike such a man …

I am sure his presence left an impression on the masses that gathered that day in 1974.

Finally, it would be remiss of me not to mention, as the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Defence, the contribution that our former Prime Minister Gough Whitlam made to the Royal Australian Air Force. Mr Whitlam signed up with the RAAF in 1941 and started training as a navigator/bomb aimer in May 1942. He was later posted to the RAAF No. 13 Squadron, operating out of the Northern Territory, Dutch New Guinea and northern Western Australia, often flying very long sorties. He served with distinction, as he went on to serve with distinction in this place, and the war experience no doubt emboldened his sense of public duty and the service which he maintained throughout his career both as a barrister and later as a parliamentarian.

It takes courage to be a RAAF officer. It takes courage to enter this parliament and to stand at the dispatch box and contest the great ideas that our nation needs to contest for its future. It was a brave decision by Mr Whitlam as opposition leader to visit China in 1971, and history will judge him very kindly for making that decision. Just look at our relationship now with our northern neighbours. It is a type of courage in decision making that we should all aspire to. As the Prime Minister said, there is a lot to be learnt from the giants of those times. As the Deputy Prime Minister said, some of the big changes Gough Whitlam influenced during his tenure are widely accepted now. He had the courage of his convictions and he acted upon them.

I will leave the final comments to the member for Sydney, who reflected that Gough Whitlam, in his own words, might be considered 'eternal but not immortal'. Certainly, when it comes to the story of our great nation, Gough Whitlam will always hold a special place. I commend the condolence motion to the House and I again extend my condolences, on behalf of the people of Gippsland, to the Whitlam family, its friends and the Australian Labor Party.

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is indeed an honour to speak on the condolence motion for Edward Gough Whitlam, the 21st Prime Minister of Australia. Throughout the course of this debate—and yet again from the member for Gippsland—it has been wonderful to hear many personal reflections about the impact that Gough Whitlam had on people's lives and how he shaped their views, beliefs and actions, on either side of the divide.

In my office sits a photograph of my baby brother—Paul will always be the baby brother!—Paul's graduation day. He graduated from Monash University, the same university that I, my sisters, Nina and Sophie, and my other brother, Tony, all graduated from—all five Burkes. The day Paul graduated, my brother Tony—who is not one for getting publicity—contacted the local paper and the Herald Sun and wanted to make comment on this momentous achievement: five children from the one family all graduating from the one university. But what he really wanted to tell was the story of how we got there and why we got there and to praise the fact that, if it had not been for Gough Whitlam, these five siblings would never have made it to university. I suspect my elder brother and sister would have, as they had gone through school on full scholarship, but my parents would have been left with the choice of which child then would not get to go. It was a choice my grandparents made in respect of my father, who never got to go to university.

So this was a momentous day for us, and both papers came down and took the photo, and the Herald Sun actually ran the story. It was not just about us completing university; it was the trail that had been blazed for us to get there. This was an absolutely magnificent day for my family—most particularly for my mother, who struggled through all those years to get us to university. As I have said in this place before, one of the proudest days our family had was seeing my mother graduate many years later as a mature-age student, something again not possible without the intervention of Gough Whitlam.

I know I am not alone in this place in my appreciation of Gough for the advantages I received in life because of his vision. Many of us here are of the generation which benefited most from Gough's reforms to our education—an education my parents dreamed of for their five children but could never have afforded otherwise, an education my father-in-law's parents dreamed of for him but that they could not have afforded. He sat his matriculation twice, not because he had not passed brilliantly the first time but because he had not passed brilliantly enough to get a full scholarship. His school allowed him to resit his matriculation so he would get a full scholarship to go on and complete his medical degree at Melbourne university. I think, if he had not had parents who were that savvy, the outer eastern suburbs of Melbourne would have missed out on a phenomenal practitioner. There was no way that the tram conductor's kid was going to get to university and do medicine! But he got there the hard way. It is something Gough took away in ensuring that all the next generations did not have to blaze that trail. The essence and principle of Gough's visions have endured. When cost is not a barrier to education, all Australians are able to access the educational opportunities that are their right—a right this government is trying to rip away as I speak. But it is not a time for partisan politics in these remarks.

Gough Whitlam viewed Australia not just through the narrow prism of an economy; he also saw Australia as a society and, in every way, he worked to improve our society as a whole to make sure that people are not excluded and that, as much as possible, everyone is given an equal chance—an equal chance, not an equal choice; a chance to strive based on your ability, not your parents' income. To quote the man himself:

Poverty is a national waste as well as an individual waste. We are all diminished when any of us are denied proper education. The nation is the poorer—a poorer economy, a poorer civilisation, because of this human and national waste.

Hear, hear, I say. It is funny how some things change but many do not. And it is a waste if we cannot ensure that everyone has access to a proper education. Gough was enormously successful in reducing this divide and in reducing the poverty in our nation as a whole.

In fact, it is hard to name a Prime Minister who has managed to achieve such a long list of lasting social changes as Gough Whitlam. As many people have remarked since his passing last week, the Whitlam legacy very much defined what we understand to be modern Australia. Even those people whose political ideology drives them to seek to destroy everything Gough Whitlam established are the first to say that no Prime Minister has changed Australia more, and it is true. Gough Whitlam made this country fairer. He broadened our horizons, made us braver and reshaped our view of ourselves and all we can achieve.

The appreciation the Australian community has not only of the Whitlam legacy but of Gough Whitlam the man has been amazing to witness. The sheer outpouring of emotion by the country when Gough died says far more about the depths of gratitude and awareness of his great contribution than any speech ever can. Indeed, my older Labor Party branch members in Chisholm, many of them who are still fighting on today will tell you they joined the party because of Gough. It is what you hear reverberate time and time again: 'I joined in 1970 because of Gough. I joined because of the Vietnam War and what Gough did.' And they are loyal to the party to this day. The fact that even today, in the modern political environment, we are still wrangling over so much that was central to the Whitlam reforms says even more about just how much Gough Whitlam had to fight to achieve change.

Gough Whitlam fought to achieve universal health care. He fought hard. It took six blocked bills, a double dissolution election and a joint sitting of the parliament to establish Medibank. Now, four decades later, all Australians enjoy access to Medicare, even though it remains under attack by the same ideology that fought so hard to prevent its establishment in the first place. It is the rock bed of what we consider to be almost an inalienable right in Australia, Medicare.

I think one of the reasons Gough Whitlam's passing has so captured the imaginations and hearts of so many Australians is how contemporary so many of Gough's reforms remain. Gough Whitlam ended conscription and completed Australia's withdrawal from the Vietnam War. He scrapped knights and dames, and introduced the Australian honours system. He established no-fault divorce. Gough removed sales tax from contraception and added the pill to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, abolished the death penalty for federal crime, supported the case for equal pay for women, reduced the voting age to 18 from 21 and changed our national anthem from God Save the Queen to Advance Australia Fairall things we are still debating in this modern era, although hopefully not the national anthem. But, while it is hard to find people who can recall and sing the second verse of the national anthem, it is now a far better reflection of the values of modern Australia which were awakened by Gough.

We also owe a debt of gratitude to Gough for the strength of our multicultural society. It was Gough Whitlam who took the first step in recognising Aboriginal land rights and addressing the profound inequality and discrimination experienced by Indigenous Australians—a lasting legacy to this day. Gough Whitlam saw past the fear of the other and reached out to the communist government of China, beginning our relationship with our most important contemporary trading partner. Again, he did this in spite of fierce opposition. The Sydney Morning Herald editorial at the time of Gough's first visit to China lambasted him:

If … Whitlam thinks that this wholesale selling out of friends to gain a despot's smile is diplomacy, then Heaven protect this country if he ever directs its foreign policy.

As the representative of an electorate that is home to more than 20,000 people of Chinese heritage, a multicultural community where half of everybody's parents were born overseas, I would like to pay particular thanks to Gough for his commitment to our multiculturalism. We are a better community and a better country because of it. Opening ties with China was visionary, and I do not think you will find anybody lambasting it as the editorial of the paper did back then.

In life, Gough Whitlam was a guiding light to his party and country for both his success and his failure. He showed the Labor Party and Australia what we can achieve if we are true to our values and our principles and maintain the courage and the rage to pursue policies of fairness and equality no matter how strong the opposition. He also showed us strength in the face of the greatest act of political bastardry that this country has ever seen. In 1997 Gough Whitlam remarked, 'I have more influence now than when I had the power.' And, in death, I imagine that Gough Whitlam's legacy and his influence will continue to grow. And so it should.

Gough Whitlam will always be a giant of Australian history, a giant of the Labor Party and a giant in our hearts. Vale, Gough Whitlam. May he rest in peace.

Dan Tehan (Wannon, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Gough Whitlam's death marks the passing of a truly remarkable era. It is funny that, as a young boy when the Whitlam government came into power, I cannot remember a lot about the debate that took place—the fierce policy debates, the fierce questioning of the economic management, the fierce questioning of some of the social programs that were put through this parliament. But the impact of what was occurring was obviously significant because, as a young boy at primary school and in junior primary school, I can still remember having discussions—fairly juvenile discussions, I must say, but discussions—about what was happening in Australia. It does show how remarkable those times must have been because it was reaching down into grade 1 and grade 2 of primary schools across the nation. I am sure that our discussions in the playground or in the classroom were similar to what was occurring around the nation. Obviously there was fierce discussion taking place across the dinner tables at teatime across the nation as to what was happening to the country. And there were remarkable things that were happening.

I think that it is worth recognising the spirit in which this discussion has occurred in this place because it has been incredibly fitting, I think, that both sides have been able to recognise both the successes and some of the shortcomings of someone who was a truly remarkable Australian.

The thing that has struck me most in listening to the eulogies and reading the tributes to Gough is his public service. He was committed to public service like few others have been in this parliament. He volunteered for the RAAF, or the RAF as it was then. He was someone who demonstrated that his public service knew no bounds, because he was prepared ultimately to put his life on the line for our nation. I think anyone who is prepared to do that, for that fact alone, deserves our recognition.

But it was not only that commitment. He then committed to a very long stint in this parliament, ultimately becoming the 21st Prime Minister of this nation. And given everything that he went through, the trials and tribulations, not only in his remarkable transformation of the Labor Party with its internal brawling, he was able to achieve that much-needed reform and then take over the prime ministership. It would only be fair to say that he was Prime Minister during a time of considerable change, but also a time of considerable debate and conflict, ultimately ending with the dismissal. There would be many people who would take their bat and ball and go home after enduring all that, but Gough Whitlam did not. He decided that he would continue to serve the public and became ambassador to UNESCO.

He also never gave up on his commitment and contribution to the Labor Party. As we heard during the eulogies on the day when we first marked his death, his commitment to turn up after he had retired from politics, to attend branch meetings and party functions, became legendary. He did so even in the electorate of Wannon. In 1990 he turned up to Portland and addressed the south-west Labor club down there, of course with much fanfare. He had visited the electorate of Wannon previously in the late 1960s. He visited Warrnambool and Portland then when the then member for Wannon, who would also go on to become Prime Minister, was the education minister. I note there was a hiatus between the late 1960s and the 1990s when he did not come to Wannon—and I imagine there is probably a very good reason for that—but even the conflict and the turmoil that took place between the former member for Wannon and Gough Whitlam, even those scores, were settled after a period of time. Very interestingly, they became what I think you would call political friends after a considerable amount of time, which also goes to show the calibre of the individual that Gough Whitlam was. I think there would be many people who, having endured what he endured and been through what he went through—and this is not saying whether what occurred with the dismissal was right or wrong, but it would have been incredibly easy for him to dismiss Malcolm Fraser and say that he would never have anything to do with him again. Yet he was prepared, after a period of time, to embrace him and to work together with him on areas where they thought there was a mutual interest. That is truly remarkable.

One thing that I would like to go into in a little bit of detail here is a lasting reform commitment, an economic reform commitment, that Gough Whitlam left. There are not many lasting economic legacies that he did leave. Unfortunately we saw government expenditure increase at rapid rates, probably at rates we have not seen until Kevin Rudd was Prime Minister after the GFC. We saw budget deficits increasing; we saw the size of government increase remarkably. We are still grappling with those issues now. But one of the things he did do upon coming to power was to cut the level of protection in Australia by 25 per cent. He cut tariffs by 25 per cent. This was remarkable, because until he did that the consensus, almost on both sides of politics, was very much that protectionism was good and healthy for our country. Gough later recognised that Bert Kelly—the modest member—had had a big impact in the decision that he ultimately made. He came in and decided that he was going to cut tariffs by 25 per cent and basically did it overnight. He also raised the dollar at that time.

That legacy, which both sides of government have taken onboard, has made us a wealthier and more prosperous nation. He knew that ultimately we had to open ourselves up to the world and open ourselves up to our region. In a way, he foresaw the impact that globalisation was going to have on our nation, and if we were not prepared and ready for it then we would be all the poorer for it. This was a brave and gutsy decision because he knew that not only would he get some criticism from our side but also, ultimately, he was going to get a lot of criticism from his own party and from the union movement, but he knew that it was the right step to take.

As we have seen, that legacy has been embraced. We saw it with the floating of the dollar, we saw it with further tariff reductions during the eighties and the nineties, and we are seeing it even now with the government's free trade agendas with South Korea, Japan and, potentially, China. It would be incredibly fitting if, in the year that Gough died and we remembered what he did to begin our modern relationship with China, we could mark the year of his death with a free trade agreement with China.

It would bookend the period remarkably. I, for one, hope that the government can achieve that because in a foreign policy sense, once again, his bravery—and we heard from the previous speaker about what TheSydney Morning Herald had to say about him travelling to China—in taking criticism from both sides and forging that path to begin the modern relationship with China is something which was truly remarkable. It showed that when he knew he thought he was doing the right thing, he had the bravery to do it. I think there are a lot of us here who could reflect on—what some have called a crash or a crash-through approach—a real firmness of conviction and a real bravery in being able to follow your convictions. Ultimately, those who have been through this place and are judged and judged well are those who have had convictions and have been prepared, through the way that they have acted in this place, to ensure that those convictions have guided what they have done. His legacy in that area stands as a tribute to him.

I will conclude there. If I could pass on my empathy and my sympathies to his family. His has been a life well lived. I hope that the passing of time will enable his family to get over the suffering and the hurt that they are feeling, and that they will be able to reflect on a remarkable life.

Ed Husic (Chifley, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Here is my Gough Whitlam story: I am in my 20s and I am a newish industrial officer at my old union, the Communications, Electrical and Plumbing Union in the postal and telecommunications branch. A big part of the job was taking phone calls and lots of them. On one particular day, we had been deluged by calls and from recollection there was a stuff-up in the processing of an allowance, so we had a lot of uptight members ringing through wanting to see what the union could do. I had finished this string of calls and decided I would just sneak out for a cup of coffee. But the loudspeaker on the phone piped up and it was reception telling me I had another call. I was at the door of my office and I leaned in and said, 'Can I just go and grab a cup of coffee?' Reception said, 'You'll want to take this call.' I said, 'I will be five minutes'—I was pleading—'take a message and I will grab a coffee.' Reception said: 'It's Mr Whitlam's office. Mr Whitlam wants to talk to you.'

At that moment, you would think that the importance would sink in and that I would respond accordingly, but I said to reception, 'Sure, put the great man through and get me next week's Lotto win as well!' So I pick up the phone and say, 'Hello' and there was silence. Then I heard, 'Comrade' and it was that unmistakable voice. There on the line was the former Prime Minister of Australia. He was ringing because I was the secretary of the Greenway federal electorate council at that time within the Labor Party and we had sent him a letter commending him on his strong response to a very disappointing inaugural speech by a former member for Oxley in this place. He had rung to express his gratitude, but then he went on to do what others have remarked upon and quizzed me about my background—where was I from, where were my parents from, where did my parents raise us, where did we live.

What would you take out of that encounter? Not that Husic is flash at writing correspondence, though I would be grateful for the compliment; rather it was his curiosity, his interest and his care. It is these personal attributes of the man that so many people cherish and remember. Inasmuch as he had an eye for detail, and we have all heard stories of him indexing and footnoting Hansard; there is something else that people valued and I want to get to that point in a way you would not expect. I ask the House: can you remember the name of the Bart Cummings's horse that won the Melbourne Cup in 1974 and 1975?

Darren Chester (Gippsland, National Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Defence) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Think Big.

Ed Husic (Chifley, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Correct. Very good work, member for Gippsland. I will remember to invite you to my next trivia night. If there was ever a horse that was so aptly named for the Whitlam era, it was Think Big—the name of the horse that won in 1974 and 1975.

Many people have celebrated his big range of achievements and they were secured in a compressed time frame. But Gough Whitlam thought big because he had big dreams for the nation. He had a big task of transforming and shaking up Australia and that demanded a big call-up of people. It was here that he did something special and why he is warmly remembered. He not only had self-belief; importantly, he believed in those who in a harder and tougher time did not benefit from the belief of wider society. If you think about it, he made a place for them all—for our nation's first people, for women, for migrants, for the families starting their lives way out in the suburbs and for the communities of our regions. He brought them within the view of public consciousness. That was the power of the Whitlam legacy. It was his faith in the capabilities of his fellow Australians.

Mr Whitlam was brought to life via the stories of my father, the man who tried so hard to peer through the windows of the Blacktown civic centre to see the man destined to become Prime Minister, when he made the call to the men and women of Australia. My dad had only just made it to Australia a few years earlier and mum followed soon after. I might have known Gough through those stories, but I actually knew him better because his belief touched our lives. He believed that working class families deserved access to quality health care or that kids of working class parents should be pushed to pursue higher education, prepared for it via good secondary schooling, or in Western Sydney that our homes should be properly sewered. Thanks to Gough, we never had to dance that dance of fear with redbacks in the outhouse!

I am here in part because of that belief that Gough Whitlam had in multicultural Australia. I am so grateful and honoured to be standing on this floor because Gough Whitlam had faith in multicultural Australia and he called up into national endeavour people of all backgrounds, and I am eternally grateful for that. On his passing, I thought of my dad's generation or the generation of Labor Party members out my way who had their belief ignited in the legitimacy of our party sitting on that other side of the House. It is from there that we can achieve so much for the people who deserve richer and better lives.

Much will be read into Mr Whitlam's style, approach and philosophy but, for me, he will always be remembered as a progressive for progress, not as a progressive championing the status quo. He recognised that the static imprisons the people we care for. It restrains Australians from capturing the opportunity emerging around them. He reformed and prepared his party—our party—as a vehicle for change in our country. As much as Mr Whitlam ushered in big change, huge change, he ensured the support was there for the people affected by it.

He had a grander plan for Australia. He called up people from the breadth of Australian society to help him bring that vision to life. He made sure his government looked after them on the way through, shielding them from the tougher short-term consequences of that change while awaiting the longer-term improvements that these changes would bring. That is a lesson for the ages. Thank you for your service and your belief. Vale Edward Gough Whitlam.

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Vocational Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to convey my condolences to the House on the passing of the Honourable EG Whitlam AC, QC. In the coming days and weeks a great deal more will be written and said about the prime ministership of Gough Whitlam. It follows decades of discussion, writing and talking about the contribution of his government. One thing that can never be questioned is the modernising and transformative impact Gough had on Australia. The Australia that existed at the start of Gough's prime ministership was vastly different from the one that existed at the end of it.

Gough told us we could aspire to higher personal and national achievements, and we did. He told us we could be confident in the world, and we were. He encouraged us to open generous hearts to the less well-off, at home and abroad, and we did. His love of our country and our people translated through his leadership. He called to all of us to be our best, and we rose to that call. This is what continued to echo throughout the decades that followed his government. Unlike his government, the legacy could not be dismissed.

Gough's vision was as vast as international policy on the recognition of China and as specific as the position—as my colleague has just outlined—of sewer services and transport to the burgeoning public-housing suburbs on the fringes of our cities. Like my colleague, I did do the dance with the red-back spider before my own suburbs were sewered as a child. I have vivid memories of that legacy as well!

He knew we needed education and employment but also that we deserved arts and sports. He knew how to think deeply and to laugh fully. Some people represent their generation, and Gough certainly did that, but a rare few inspire us to imagine and act for future generations. Gough was one of those giants in our national story.

Many contributors to this debate have talked of the depth and spread of his enduring policy achievements and those of his government. It should not be ignored in this significant policy record that in my own shadow portfolio we saw the seeds of a truly national vocational education-and-training system begin to take shape through the Kangan report, the establishment of our modern TAFE system and the ensuing debate on how to grow productivity and participation for all Australians through the VET sector.

Gough did not only see university as a path to opportunity but also recognised the critical importance of skills, training, community and further education. Gough had very strong links to my own electorate of Cunningham. His early seat boundaries included suburbs that are now in my seat—in particular, the suburb of Helensburgh, and he is still very warmly regarded in the community. Like so many here, I was motivated by the experience of the Whitlam years. I joined the ALP, in 1977, as soon as I was old enough to join the party. I had been to many rallies and campaigns in Wollongong with my mum, dad and family.

In 1989 the University of Wollongong awarded him an honorary doctorate and he regularly visited the area to assist in ALP campaigns, including my own in 2004 when I was able to spend a leisurely afternoon with him at the Mt Kembla pub—which was owned by his son Nick at the time—where Gough very generously gave me a lot of his time and wisdom on political life and purpose.

Like many of us in this place, Gough was well-served by his long-term and extremely loyal staff members: Aaron Rule, Penny Sachnikas and Michael Vlassopoulos. Aaron, Penny and Michael devoted many years to working for Gough, and I know they will be feeling the loss particularly keenly.

To Gough's son Nick and his wife Judy, who reside in the Illawarra and are good friends to many of us, I would like to extend my personal condolences to you both. Nick has told me that in the end their dad went quickly and peacefully.

I would also like to extend my condolences to Nick's brothers and sister: Antony and Stephen Whitlam, Catherine Dovey, and their families. Through their hard work and vision, Gough and Margaret opened up opportunities that have shaped my generation and many generations to follow. We thank you for sharing your parents, the powerful partnership that was Gough and Margaret, with the men and women of Australia.

In the few minutes that I have left, I wish to put on the record the words of many locals who have gone onto my website to put tributes into my condolence book. It is a great privilege that we can stand in this place and reflect on our own experiences, and they have been wonderful personal experiences. But many in our communities are also very keen to express publicly their views. These are some excerpts:

Thank you for changing our lives for the better. My parents could have never afforded to send me to university if it weren't for your reforms. Justine Griffith.

Rest in peace, Gough. An inspiration to people across the ditch as well. Mark Byford.

I heard Gough speak many times when I lived in Sydney and always enjoyed the occasions. He was one of the world's best orators along with Nelson Mandela and Martin Luther King. Carol Maloney.

A great and courageous Leader has left us. May his efforts to provide opportunity for all never be forgotten. Idalina Guerreiro.

A great man will be sorely missed A big loss to the Australian Labor Party and to Australian Politics. Jack Timpano.

A great man with a grand vision for what Australia could and should be. Although he will be missed each day we benefit daily from the legacy of his reforming and modernising agenda. Paul Scully and Alison Scully.

Gough Whitlam belonged to the 'great generation'—the one prepared to give of their lives for service to country. He went from RAAF navigator to head of government for all too brief a period. Gough Whitlam understood the important of political drama and seizing the moment. My generation sadly now takes many of his Government's hard-fought policies, in a wide range of areas, for granted Gough Whitlam's leadership and tremendous vision now belongs to the ages. I bid my own farewell to a great Australian leader and a great man. Gino Mandarino.

Australia has lost a truly great thinker, his ideas and courage to implement those ideas has never been equalled. His commitment to equality for all Australians is defined in the free education system we have at the present. Bev and Kevin Reed

A great leader, ahead of his time, who was always optimistic about our nation and what we could achieve. Janai Tabbernor and Chris Snewin

Gough, you will be missed by so many people. Goodbye Comrade. Cohn and Melissa Markham.

Inspirational leader who did so much for our country, condolences to his family. Dionne and Frank Garcia.

My heart is broken. Requiescat in pace sir, and thank you. Lyn Roseman.

My deepest condolences to the family. Rita Pozidis.

He was a truly inspiring man that shaped Australia into what it is today. Jessica Malcolm.

Gough and Margaret Whitlam did so much for our country. They will be sorely missed. Donna Tetley.

The day Gough was sacked I was a young 17 on the steps of parliament house calling out ( we want Gough). He inspired me then and still inspires me today. Mick Woods.

I am one of thousands of working class women and men who were able to go to University after Gough introduced free Higher Education. This changed my life, and the life of my sister, in numerous ways giving us opportunities to reach our fullest intellectual potential. My condolences to his family and may it perhaps assuage their grief just a little to know how many lives were changed for the better by his courage and commitment. Mary Day.

And let's not forget Margaret and her many achievements too. A great man and a great woman ... a great partnership! Eileen Day.

I wish to express my profound gratitude for the life and service of our comrade, Gough Whitlam. I owe a good deal of the standard of living of my life to his courage and determination to bring about the changes he made, particularly for women and for our First People … Let us hope he casts a long shadow, even from the grave, and inspires a new generation in these dark times. Margaret Curtis .

Thanks to Gough I was able to get a tertiary education which my family would otherwise be unable to afford. We should embrace free education. Robyn Howson .

Thank you Gough. Richard Martin .

Remembering a great Australian. Sincere condolences to the Whitlam family. Bob and Anne Bower .

My condolences go out to the Hon. Gough Whitlam ' s family as well Australia for the loss of a truly inspirational leader whose legacy will live forever. Nabil and Lola Issa .

Vale Gough did so much for us, in such a short time. So much work still to do in his name. Liz Farrer .

A great man well ahead of his time . Peter Taylor .

He was a great man for the Country. Cengiz Girgin .

I have the advantage of a tertiary education ' paid for ' by Gough Whitlam — thank you Gough! Chris Cartledge .

Giant of a man for Australia . Dorothy Park .

We have lost a great man — however we have his legacy to continue! Maria Orr .

Our lives are all the richer for your presence in our own journeys, be it close o r afar. Thank you for showing our nation how to dream with courage and lead with conviction. Peter Jones .

A great Australian & PM … He had a social conscience with an agenda for change for all. Bryan Algie.

I think the words of the people, who feel so moved by his passing and so determined to reach out and record his legacy, say it all. I thank the House.

Bernie Ripoll (Oxley, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister Assisting the Leader for Small Business) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is an honour and a privilege to speak on the death of the Hon. Edward Gough Whitlam, AC, QC. There is no doubt that Gough was and is an icon of Australian history; he was larger than life both physically and mentally. He cast a shadow far and wide, influencing people and politics not just across our nation but right across the world. In his nearly 100 years of enormous life, Gough, as he is referred to by almost everyone, was never going to be a man who merely participated in life but someone who would lead and create. Every country has at least one person, someone who has done more than most to affect our way of life and leave behind more than just their memory. For Australia, Gough was one of these people.

Be it through creating Medibank, now Medicare, or through free university degrees, which so many people have spoken about, he also gave a new level of access to Australians by reducing import tariffs and in the way that we educated ourselves. He truly reformed the way Australia saw itself as well as the way that we behaved. It has often been said that you should not measure the success or contribution of anyone, let alone of Gough Whitlam, by the number of years that he was Prime Minister, but more importantly by what his achievements were in that short period of time. Gough worked very hard and he had a great vision for Australia. He saw a bigger Australia, a more confident Australia, an Australia finding its voice on an international stage. He saw Australia as having something to say on our own future, and it was a vision that he would share with many Australians new and old. To say that Gough had courage is an understatement. In a time when the world and even the Labor Party were heading in the other direction, Gough forged a path to China and led the way for many other countries—including the United States, which would follow one month after Gough ' s historic visit to that country.

While Gough Whitlam could see the bigger picture on an international stage, he was also completely committed to domestic politics. He kept his promise to elevate the Office of Aboriginal Affairs to ministerial level once in government. Under Gough Whitlam the Senate was extended to include representatives from the territories. Cyclone Tracy struck in 1974—I am sure he was not responsible, but he was certainly there at the time. He also reformed and changed the Australian honours system. It was established to replace the British honours system. The first enactment of the National Parks and Wildlife Conservation Act took place. The evacuation of Australian and US troops from Saigon took place. The Racial Discrimination Act was enacted and outlawed discrimination on the basis of race. There was the first Family Law Act. And there was the handover, very significantly, of Wattie Creek at Daguragu in the Northern Territory to Vincent Lingiari of the Gurindji people—just to name a few of the more historic changes made by Gough Whitlam and his government. But for Gough, all of these reforms were just part of a relentless drive to contribute and to drag Australia and the Labor Party out of the past and into the future—and that he did very, very successfully.

Everyone has a story about Gough Whitlam; inevitably they all involve some humour, some funny story, some great anecdote—elements of the great wit that the man possessed and usually a whole range of elements brought together that just showed the complexity of the person that he was. For me it was the first phone call that I received in my office. Not long after being elected to parliament, having made a speech in parliament, I got back up to my office and my staff told me that there was a gentleman on the phone who claimed to be Gough Whitlam. I answered the phone to hear that very familiar voice and he quickly told me that he had been listening in on proceedings of parliament, heard my speech, appreciated all of the things I said, but gave me some frank and fearless advice on how I could have said them better. I do not recall all of the detail of what my speech was about, but I do very warmly recall the fact that he took the time—obviously not just to listen to my speeches and contributions here but to also listen to so many members of parliament. It is legendary that up until maybe just very recently he was still reading the Hansard. He still took an interest in the daily politics of Australian life; he still took an interest in what this place did, what it said, what it meant for the Australian people.

I also very fondly recall his visit to Ipswich not so long ago to celebrate the 30th anniversary of the town hall. He was welcomed back to Ipswich almost as a son of Ipswich. He was welcomed in a way that only celebrities and pop stars normally are—all the pomp and the ceremony for a person of his standing in the community. But for all the noise and the fanfare on that day, and the long and detailed speech that is customary at any place that Gough attended, what really stood out for me was his generosity—he was generous with his time with every single person that approached him; he always gave his autograph and there was always a seemingly endless line-up of well-wishers who wanted their photo taken with the great man. Even more fascinating was his ability to recall mayors or councillors or details of things that happened 30 years before—recall in detail little elements about individual people, their families, their histories and their stories. For this and probably many other reasons, people always felt this really deep, warm connection to Gough.

There is no doubt he has had a great impact on so many people in this place—regardless of their politics, regardless of their own ideology or their own view of the world, Gough had an impact. It often brings a smile to people's faces—when you mention his name it triggers a little memory, and always a good memory. Gough, you have left us a much better place, a better people and a better country for your service—service in the military, in the RAAF, which has been talked about so much; service to the country in terms of public service; and service to the Labor Party in reforming the party and giving it an opportunity to lead this country and participate at a greater level. You have certainly served us all very well. My condolences to the Whitlam family for their loss. May he rest in peace.

Maria Vamvakinou (Calwell, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I begin by associating myself with the contributions made by many of my colleagues on the passing of Gough Whitlam. I offer my condolences firstly to the Whitlam family—they have lost a father and grandfather—and of course the Australian Labor Party and indeed the broader community have lost a significant and indeed iconic figure. One cannot reflect on the life and times of Gough Whitlam without making reference to the other half of the Whitlam whole—his life's partner, Margaret Whitlam, who passed away a couple of years ago. This was Australia's power couple akin to the Roosevelts, Eleanor and Franklin Delano, and I thought that when I met the Whitlams for the first time as a 16-year-old schoolgirl during that dramatic period after 11 November 1975. The passage of time has only reaffirmed my belief that Gough and Margaret Whitlam were truly a marriage of true minds.

It is often said that everyone remembers where they were on the day that the Whitlam government was dismissed by the Governor-General, Sir John Kerr. I remember where I was. I was in class, year 11 at Princes Hill High School, and I remember the uproar in our entire school community; students and teachers alike were absolutely outraged and took to the school quadrangle, as opposed to the streets. This marked the beginning, I believe, of my own political activism. Like everyone else around me at the time I felt—such was the feeling at the time—that I had to do something. I very much wanted to be a part of the dramatic events that were unfolding. The public wrath was palpable as Australians faced what many consider to be the closest we are yet to come to a coup d'etat. So I joined the Migrant Workers Committee at the Victorian Trades Hall Council and I ended up working as a volunteer on the election campaign to re-elect the Whitlam government in the 1975 federal election. Of course, I could say that the rest is history.

When I became the candidate for the federal seat of Calwell in 2001, I wrote to Gough inviting him to launch my campaign. Quite to my surprise, and as a colleague said previously, he rang me and he actually greeted me in the Greek language. This voice on the other end of the phone said 'Tia sou ti kaneis', and I immediately recognised it as Gough Whitlam's voice. I was very surprised that he would greet me in the Greek language at the time—but not really surprised, as I will mention later.

I invited Gough because I had discovered that the last function he had officiated at as Prime Minister of Australia was the opening of the Broadmeadows Sporting Club, in my electorate. We thought at the time it was a great idea to invite him to make a return visit to Broadmeadows—unfortunately he was unable to do so because he could not travel at that time. But he was very gracious with his time and, as always, with advice. He had a propensity to give a lot of advice and to correct a lot of records. I know the people of Broadmeadows remain very chuffed that they are a small footnote in a very important historical event. He informed me that after Broadmeadows Sporting Club he went to the Melbourne Town Hall, and of course the next day he came to Canberra, where he was dismissed.

If Arthur Calwell laid the foundations for modern Australia, Gough Whitlam, as Australia's 21st Prime Minister, was the architect of the contemporary Australian identity. To this end I want to reflect on his very special relationship with migrant Australia, or the New Australians as he often referred to them. Gough Whitlam envisaged an Australia that was reconciled with its first people, our Indigenous Australians—and of course there is that memorable photograph of Gough with Vincent Lingiari. He gave hope for reconciliation and paved the way for native title. Gough Whitlam embraced the new Australians that came here, my family and I included, in a way that gave us a sense of ownership and belonging, a gesture that would become the driving principles of access and equity which underlined multiculturalism—a policy that the Whitlam government not only championed but also implemented during that period of great reform.

It is indeed a privilege for me to be given the opportunity to speak in this condolence motion as the member for Calwell. The sense of fate and history does not escape me at this moment, because the 16-year-old schoolgirl of 1975 would never have imagined that she would be here today in the House of Representatives. It is a very important moment, when you look back in time.

Universal health, free education, land rights, the Racial Discrimination Act, ending conscription, legal aid, no-fault divorce, pension reform, multiculturalism and a new national anthem are some of the most iconic policies that characterised the Whitlam government, but it is Gough's relationship with new Australians that I want to reflect on here today and in particular his relationship with the Australian Greek community. It was a very special relationship. Gough Whitlam was a philhellene in every sense of the word. Gough once said:

… there can be no doubt that the Greek language is important in Australia, and that Greek civilization is important to Australia.

Gough became very involved in the Greek Australian community. From advocating for the return of democracy to its original birthplace during the seven-year dictatorship of the 1960s and early 1970s to supporting Australian peacekeeping forces in Cyprus and advocating for the return of the Parthenon marbles he was indeed a true friend of Greece and the Australian Greek community.

He was patron of the Antipodes Festival in Melbourne for many years. He was an honorary member of the Greek Orthodox Community of Sydney and NSW. He was a recipient of the Hellenic republic's highest honour—the Order of the Phoenix—for services to Hellenism. As my constituent Kostandinos Tsourdalakis, the cantor of our local Greek orthodox church, said in the 18-stanza Homeric prose he wrote on the occasion of Gough's passing last week, Gough was 'the Greek community's second father'. I am absolutely certain that Gough would love Mr Tsourdalakis's 18-stanza Homeric epic tribute to him. I wish I could read it out in the chamber today, but I think I would be trying the patience of Hansard considerably.

The affection new Australians held for Gough is captured by what my late father always used to say to me. During the 1975 campaign at a rally in Melbourne, Gough walked by my father, stopped and shook his hand. My father always described this as the moment an Australian Prime Minister had embraced him as a fellow Australian. There is no denying that Australia is a better place today because of Gough Whitlam.

Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am saddened but proud to speak in honour of a man who has made such a significant contribution to the wellbeing of our nation: the Hon. Edward Gough Whitlam AC, QC—11 July 1916 to 21 October 2014. There is much to admire about Edward Gough Whitlam's life: his service with the RAAF as a flight lieutenant, his transformation of the political landscape in Australia, his wit and his great love affair with Margaret. Despite these many contributions, it is his reforms to the law that have left the greatest impression on me as a lawyer. Gough's legacy remains in many of the important laws that underpin civil society today.

None of us arrive in this House from a vacuum, not even Gough. We are all shaped by our early lives and the families that mould us. Gough's father, Harry Frederick Ernest Whitlam, was a very bright young man who topped his school; however, his family did not have the financial means to send him to university so he joined the Commonwealth Public Service and studied at night to obtain a law degree. Gough's dad went on to have a brilliant career as the Crown Solicitor and as a human rights lawyer at the United Nations. That struggle for a university education would shape Gough. Also Gough's father-in-law, Wilfred Dovey KC, was a successful barrister and a judge who presided over many divorce and matrimonial cases back in the bad old days of divorce.

Gough's most enduring partnership, and perhaps his greatest influence, was Margaret. I use the term 'partnership' deliberately because that is obviously what it was. Margaret was very much an equal part of that relationship. She was a modern woman for the times and had very progressive views. During her time in the Lodge she was a very strong vocal supporter of women's rights.

These three family stories would shape the Whitlam government's agenda. Gough was, of course, a barrister, admitted to the New South Wales bar in 1947. Coincidentally, one of his chamber mates was Sir John Kerr, but that is enough about him. Gough took silk in 1962. Gough's progressive legal reforms shaped the way we live in Australia today. Gough said when he spoke at Old Parliament House in 2002 that he tried to apply an overarching principle and unifying theme to all of his work which he said could be stated in two words: 'contemporary relevance'. While that theme can be identified in his legal reforms, it seems to me that there is a far simpler theme that also persists in his legal reforms: to improve the lives of every Australian—and Gough most certainly achieved that.

When the Racial Discrimination Act was introduced it had monumental benefits for Indigenous people. No longer could they be discriminated against in employment, working conditions, remuneration or housing—issues that had long been problematic for Indigenous communities. This groundbreaking legislation overrode Queensland legislation at the time which restricted the property rights of Aboriginal people and provided inequitable legal representation for them. As ridiculous as it sounds today in 2014, before the Migration Act was amended by the Whitlam government in 1973—so in my lifetime—Indigenous people had to apply for special permission before they could leave Australia.

Other significant pieces of Whitlam legislation include the first Commonwealth legislation to grant land rights to Indigenous people; legislation to abolish the death penalty for federal crimes; legislation for equal pay for women; the Health Insurance Commission Act and the Health Insurance Act that created Medicare; the Family Law Act, which changed the way people divorced and made leaving a bad relationship far less painful than previously and enshrined the principle of the 'best interests of the child' so that children's rights are prioritised in any decision concerning them; and the Seas and Submerged Lands Act in 1973, which gave the Commonwealth authority over the states in any issues relating to the seas surrounding Australia—a piece of legislation that basically created the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park down the track and thwarted Joh Bjelke-Petersen's plan to have mining on the Great Barrier Reef.

Gough Whitlam's government ratified some of the most significant international human rights agreements including the 1953 Convention on the Political Rights of Women, the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the 1966 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination and the 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees. Not only did Gough enact some of the most groundbreaking legal reforms in Australia; he also established the Australian Law Reform Commission. There is no point in having legislation that provides justice if ordinary Australians have no access to it, so what did Gough Whitlam do? He created the Australian Legal Aid Office.

In 1985, on the 10th anniversary of the dismissal, Gough Whitlam delivered the John Curtin Memorial Lecture. He said during the speech:

A conservative government survives essentially by dampening expectations and subduing hopes. We, by contrast, exist to raise hopes and expectations—to lift the horizons of the people.

Hopes were raised and so were expectations during Gough Whitlam's term in office. We would never see Australia and our futures in the same way again that we did before he was elected. We as a nation were forever changed for the better, and I will devote myself to lifting those horizons for all, not just a few.

Gough enjoyed a long life. He also enjoyed many friendships, as we have heard in the contributions from both sides of the chamber. As the member for Moreton, I am well acquainted with his friendship with one of my esteemed predecessors Sir James Killen. I have actually heard quite a few stories from Lady Killen because I see her every year when she gives out the James Killen community service award in my electorate. Although James Killen and Gough Whitlam were on opposite sides of politics, their friendship continued until Sir James died in 2007. In fact, they telephoned each other most Sundays, and there are many stories about the notes they frequently passed back and forward during parliamentary sittings, often to the dismay of their colleagues.

In fact, Gough Whitlam gave the eulogy on behalf of the Killen family at Sir James Killen's funeral. Sir James describes in his book Inside Australian Politics an encounter in his parliamentary office when Gough was the leader and was particularly upset with a colleague. The colleague wanted to attend the funeral of a former Labor minister, but his name had not been called in the ballot to determine who would attend. Gough was frustrated at being put in this position and Sir James, who was Minister for Defence at the time and charged with organising the flights for the mourners to attend the funeral, was attempting to calm him down. Sir James Killen said to Gough, 'What do you want to happen when you die?' Gough took a deep breath and said, 'I just want you to get up and say, "Let the Senate be his pyre."' Gough understood history and timelessness. The previous member for Moreton is not here to farewell his great friend, but we who are who are left behind shall do our best to keep the Whitlam legacy alive. Edward Gough Whitlam: may he rage in peace.

Stephen Jones (Throsby, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Regional Development and Infrastructure) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Today we pay tribute to Edward Gough Whitlam, QC, AC: patriot, veteran, barrister, Prime Minister, ambassador, Australian legend, husband to Margaret and father to Antony, Nick, Stephen and Catherine. We pass on our condolences to his family and all who knew and loved him.

Throughout the course of this discussion we have seen the best of the Australian parliament. We have seen the outflowing of genuine affection and admiration for a great Australian, and I believe in this discussion we have genuinely held up a mirror to the Australian nation. Gough himself was more than a reflection of Australia as he found it. He was a leader who gave political voice to Australia not as he found it, but as he thought it could be. As Gough himself explained in 1973, his government was elected on the basis of policies which were developed carefully, steadily and intelligently to meet the important demands of our community.

His was the politics of courage and conviction. Indeed it is hard to imagine Australia without the reforms that were driven through by the Whitlam government. In the area of equality, we turn our minds to the reforms to the education system: free access to tertiary education and needs-based funding for our school system. In the area of electoral reform: one vote, one value; lowering the age of voting so that the age of voting was the same as the age at which you could be conscripted to go and fight for the country—the age of 18. In the area of gender equality, we have heard many speakers talk about the importance of his family law reforms: no-fault divorce, introducing onto the PBS the contraceptive pill and reopening the equal pay case to ensure that that important principle could flow through to our industrial tribunals. In the area of land rights: ensuring that the First Australians could once again have full custodial ownership of their traditional lands. On race discrimination, one of his first acts was to ban race-based sporting contests, which was an incredibly controversial issue in the early 1970s, and we all remember the controversy around the Springbok tour. It went beyond that, he was indeed the father of modern multiculturalism.

As previous speakers have talked about, the concession of Australia to a raft of international treaties laid the platform for a broad sweep of reforms, legislative and otherwise, in areas as diverse as industrial relations, heritage and conservation; and sex and disability discrimination. Not all of this was achieved in his term, but for him it would not have been achieved.

We are currently gripped in a debate around paid maternity leave, but Australians first enjoyed the right to paid maternity leave through the reforms of Gough Whitlam and his industrial relations minister Clyde Cameron. It was Whitlam and Cameron who also introduced a great reform which ensured that when Australians today go on holidays they enjoy four weeks annual leave and not three weeks annual leave. It was the Whitlam government which extended annual leave entitlements and provided an annual leave loading to ensure that when working class families took leave they could afford to go on a holiday. Extending the long service leave provisions was another one of his important industrial reforms.

Often overlooked when we recount the contribution of the Whitlam government to modern Australia were his economic reforms. It was Whitlam who introduced the Trade Practices Act and started the process of reforming our tariff system and opened up our diplomatic and trade relations with China, which are so much a part of our modern trading relationship and our economic success.

An important lesson of the Whitlam government, a lesson that must be heeded by all of us who occupy a place in the 43rd Parliament is this: you cannot do in government that which you have specifically disavowed in opposition. Indeed, you must use those years in opposition well and this is something that the Whitlam government did. Gough Whitlam spent plenty of time in opposition. He was first elected at the age of 36 in the Werriwa by-election in 1952, and he often remarked that his brilliant career in local government was cut short by the Werriwa by-election. He did not see government for another 20 years—20 years in opposition, 20 years of doing the hard slog of reforming the party, reforming the policy so it was fit to govern in modern Australia and ensuring that he had a vision which was right the government when he eventually achieved government in 1972. It was time; that was true—but it was Gough that made that possible.

In August this year, we celebrated the 40th anniversary of the first and only joint sitting of this parliament under the deadlock provisions of the Australian Constitution—the deadlock provisions designed to ensure that when the House of Representatives passes a bill which is blocked successively by the Senate, there is a means of resolving that. In the case of the August 1974 joint sitting of parliament, central to that sitting was the Medibank legislation. When that legislation was first introduced into parliament, Gough spoke on the bill in December 1973 and he had this to say:

We propose a universal health scheme, based on the needs and means of families. This proposal—the most rigorously investigated proposal ever put by any party on any subject at any election—has to be seen against the contrast of the existing scheme, unwieldy, unjust, enormously costly, inherently costly.

He said to those who opposed it and who forced the government to a double dissolution:

Let the warning be quite clear: if Liberals propose next week to prop up, patch over, the existing scheme, it will mean more in contributions and more in taxation for everybody. Let's have a clean sweep.

All those words remain true today.

When you ask what motivated Gough Whitlam to introduce the Medibank legislation, something which is now an article of faith on this side of the House, you need look no further than his own words. He had this to say:

I personally find quite unacceptable a system whereby the man who drives my Commonwealth car in Sydney pays twice as much for the same family cover as I have, not despite the fact that my income is 4 or 5 times higher than his, but precisely because of my higher income.

These values find an echo in the 43rd Parliament.

In America they call it the 'Kennedy moment'; in Australia it is the 'Whitlam moment'. Every Australian knows where they were on 11 November 1975. He inspired a generation of political activism, he is a reference point for all who follow, and today we pay tribute to a great Australian.

Joel Fitzgibbon (Hunter, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Agriculture) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

How does one sufficiently and comprehensively pay tribute to the great E.G. Whitlam in five minutes? The reality is one does not. One could not possibly hope to. You would need at least 20 and then, of course, that would not be enough. But I say 20 because I think we need to talk about Gough through four lenses: first, Gough the Prime Minister; second, Gough the parliamentarian; third, Gough the party member—that is the Labor Party member and party leader; and, fourth, Gough the human being—and an honest, compassionate man he was, dedicated to it equity and social justice not only in this country but right around the world.

Gough was by any measure one of Australia's greatest Prime Ministers. The history of the federation, I have no doubt, will treat him well. Just as well-known were the myths, particularly around Gough's economic management. It is very true to say that Gough came to office just as the long boom was coming to a close. There has been much talk about the December 72 OECD report, which pays testament to that proposition. He also faced two very significant oil shocks and came to office at a time when the EU was enlarging and all the consequences that had for the nation's economy. I should say he was a stickler for Treasury advice and followed Treasury advice almost always. In amongst all of that he also saw a need for economic reform and began to dismantle the then out dated and economically destructive tariff system, which was make making Australia so inefficient, and, in doing so, paved the way for further economic reform and further economic restructuring.

To save time, I am going to take the second and third together—Gough the parliamentarian and Gough the party member and party leader. This is Gough's biggest legacy. Gough used the forms of the parliament from opposition to drag that then coalition government to new reforms—matters that would have been resisted otherwise if it was not for the advocacy skills of Gough Whitlam. Gough always also brought the Labor Party into the modern era, making it electable again after more than two decades in the wilderness—and it was not easy at all. He took on entrenched factional interests, faced expulsion from the party at one stage for his efforts, but, with true Gough Whitlam determination and courage, he stood up to the factional masters and those who had created their fiefdoms within their party at the expense of the party and took the party forward.

Fourth of course is Gough the man. I am one of many in this place who can say that I was honoured and privilege to know Gough and to know Gough well. I did not know Gough well when he was Prime Minister; I was only 10 or 12 years of age. I do recall meeting him at a nursing home opening in my town of Bellingen when I was around 12 years of age, which excited me somewhat, but it was in his later years that I got to know Gough well.

What always stands out for me is that—despite his public persona, his exaggerated public persona—Gough was not interested at any time in talking about Gough or his legacies. The great man was far more interested in talking about the Labor Party and how it was going—the future of the country. And more particularly he was interested in talking about me; he was far more interested to know how I was going than he was interested in talking about where he had been.

He encouraged me to study more, for example—some advice I followed. Although I must admit that, having been persuaded by him to begin a law degree, I did not finish that law degree. I think I was at about the halfway point at the time. But his advice was appreciated and his ongoing interest in my progress through that university degree was also appreciated.

I would like to share one small anecdote. I very fondly recall being contacted when I was Defence Minister by my good friend and Gough's son, Nick, to inquire as to whether there were any Ventura bombers that were still airworthy in the country; the family was starting to think about Gough's farewell and they thought if a Ventura was still airworthy it might have made a nice touch as a fly-past at his farewell.

There was something unique about Gough and his art for both self-deprecation and self-praise. He could talk himself up in a way which most people could not get away with. Gough got away with it, because amongst all of his other fantastic attributes, he had a very sharp wit and a very good sense of humour. He will be missed by many. He had a very good innings; at 98, he had a full life, almost unchallenged by anyone else in Australia's political history. He will be missed by many. I will certainly miss him. What he did for his country he can be very proud of. Certainly, his family can be very proud of him, and I again extend my sympathies to his family.

Tim Watts (Gellibrand, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Where to start in paying tribute to Gough Whitlam? Given the stature of the man, particularly as an orator and a wit, it is impossible not to feel inadequate to the task. Many members on this side of the House will pay tribute to the pantheon of Gough's achievements, initiatives that changed lives and changed our nation. I want to narrow my focus and pay tribute in this House to the way that Gough changed the Labor Party. Over the preceding week we have seen the history wars play out, both in this chamber and in the broader community about the meaning of Gough's legacy to Australia. Given the nature of his times and his leadership, it would be disappointing if this was not the case.

But we should always remember that Gough was nothing if not a moderniser. The sine qua non of Gough's achievements, the achievement that made all of the rest possible, was the way he changed the Labor Party. Gough Whitlam changed the Labor Party from an inwards looking, sectarian, ideologically obsessed movement into an outwards looking party, focused on the practical measures needed to both secure government and to increase the standards of living of Australians in our cities, suburbs and regions. In this respect, many of Gough's greatest achievements were chalked up during his time as opposition leader.

On this side of the House, we should acknowledge that the rigid, resistant orthodoxies that Gough confronted, the ideological intransigence that he crashed through, was just as often located on this side of the House. Indeed, his description of his leadership style as 'crash or crash through' was made not in reference to Fraser's obstructionism, but to the 1960s Labor Party's resistance to the change that he sought to bring, an intransigence that saw one of my predecessors, Hec McIvor, spend his entire 17 year career in this place in opposition.

Gough was an extraordinary individual, the likes of which we will probably never again see in this place, but the reason that he was so transformative for Australia, was because the Labor Party had been so bad for so long. We had failed Australia for decades before Gough ushered in three years of glorious change. Gough gave the 1967 Victorian Labor Party conference the defining articulation of the Labor Party's reason for being. He reminded us of our mission: to change the country for the working man. He told us that we were not founded to be a protest group. He said: 'The men who formed the Labor Party in the 1890s knew all about power. They were not ashamed to seek it and they were not embarrassed when they won it.'

At this time—the late 1960s, early 1970s—the idea that Gough would be remembered today as a paragon of ideological purity would have been laughable. Gough was bigger than the received ideological orthodoxy of his time. He understood that, unlike the Tories, no Labor opposition has ever been elected off the back of the same ideological agendas as the preceding Labor government. Gough understood better than anyone that Labor must always be a party that is relevant to contemporary times, relevant to the lives and aspirations of contemporary Australians, not engaged in byzantine ideological navel gazing and internal sectarianism. That is the reason Labor won government in 1972, and that is the reason we are remembering his achievements today. For that reason, the thing that I will always remember above all about Gough Whitlam was that he was nothing if not a moderniser. You can say whatever else about him, but that much will remain true.

Because Gough meant so much to members of the Labor Party, I wanted to finish my contribution with some reflections from my branch members on the great man. In deference to the other members in this chamber I will limit myself to one story. Terry Cuddy, one of my branch members told me about a meeting he had with Gough in 1975:

Back in September 1975, I went to Canberra with a high school excursion from Melbourne. We were at ANU on the day, and Gough was set to arrive to deliver a speech. There had been protests about his government and there was a rowdy protest at the Uni by the Young Liberals. Scuffles were going on and there was a robust verbal tirade from the Tories. It was pissing down with rain, thunder and lightning. The word went around that Gough was unlikely to turn up. And then the car arrived, the clouds parted, the sun shone and the birds starting singing. Gough arrived. There were smiles all around, and cheers from everyone—including the Young Liberals.

And really this sums up Whitlam's broader impact on our nation. It was rainy in Australia, there was thunder and lightning, and then the clouds parted, the sun shone and the birds started singing. Gough arrived and there were smiles all around. Thanks Gough.

Jim Chalmers (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am proud to stand here in the House of Representatives to celebrate a great Australian life. I was also proud to mark Gough's passing with my colleagues last Tuesday as we walked down to pay tribute at Old Parliament House on the steps where Gough made such a famous declaration and where he did his work in the old House of Representatives just down the hill. I am also particularly honoured to be joined in the chamber today by two great branch members from the Rankin electorate, Jeanette and Kevin Condran, who are in the gallery today. They are branch members of longstanding. They are part of the mighty Logan North branch, one of the greatest branches of the Labor Party anywhere in the country if I may say so! But they also lived in Gough's electorate of Werriwa. They lived in Green Valley. When Gough was the member for Werriwa but before he was the Prime Minister they used to drink beer with him at the Mount Pritchard Workers Club in Gough's electorate. Jeanette was a steward for the ETU and Kevin for the AWU. They used to spend time with Gough when he was their MP and before he was our Prime Minister.

Gough Whitlam was a leader, of course, but he was more than that. We have had many leaders in Australia, and some of them have been great, but we have only ever had one Gough and we only ever will. I like to think of him as a sculptor: his leadership, an act of vision and creation—a sculptor who imagined a perfect outcome and who pushed and prodded and polished and scraped and sanded to make it a reality.

Like other sculptors, the big man's masterpieces were subject to the criticism of those with smaller minds and smaller motivations. Sculpting required him to get his hands dirty as well; he was not too good nor too pure for that. At times, his was an untidy creation. He built, not a statue, but a nation; Australia as we know it—more modern and more confident than the one it replaced; more assertive and yet at the same time more generous. It was not a statue that he sculpted, of course: not a monument but a movement—a mission—one that inches forward still today. It is a movement and a mission that finds new purpose: in constitutional recognition of our Indigenous brothers and sisters; in marriage equality; in an Australian republic; in equal pay for equal work; in universal health care; in affordable higher education; in needs based school funding; and whenever we need to maintain our rage and enthusiasm, and wherever one Australian is treated less fairly than another

There is hardly an aspect of the modern Australian nation that Whitlam did not play a role in imagining and creating. For everyone whose life he changed, for all of us called to politics and public service and for the change makers in so many other fields of endeavour, his mighty and distinctive voice will echo through the ages, just like the melodic and distinctive voice of Paul Kelly will. In his famous tribute, Kelly sings of Whitlam:

Eight years went by, eight long years of waiting

Till one day a tall stranger appeared in the land

And he came with lawyers and he came with great ceremony

And through Vincent's fingers poured a handful of sand

That is one of the truly great Australian songs—real goose bump material, and it is about Gough.

I was thinking of it on Saturday as I took part in the Walk Together event, which finished on Carmody Street in Woodridge in my electorate. You see, Kev Carmody was Paul Kelly's collaborator in the writing of that song, From little things big things grow. They wrote it together—two great Australian poets, one white, one black—and later they performed it together as well.

I stood there in the middle of that proud parade of multicultural Australia on Carmody Street, thinking of the nation Gough found and the one that he left: the nation I was born into the same year he retired from the House of Representatives. I did not properly meet him beyond a handshake or two at campaign launches and national Labor conferences. But he taught my generation and the generations that followed something very important: that you can love your country and still desperately want to change it. In fact, he taught us that changing your country is the ultimate act of patriotism when that change is well considered and well motivated.

He also taught us that politics can be entertaining but it should never be trivial. We have heard some really funny stories about Gough in this condolence motion. But most of all we have heard of his achievements: free of trivia, free of pettiness, free of day-to-day polls and political commentary. And in recognising Gough Whitlam's extraordinary and selfless life we recognise that he could have instead lived a life of anonymous and comfortable privilege. Nobody forced him to join the Air Force to serve, but he did. Nobody forced him to dedicate his life to others, but he did. Because when he surveyed the Australia of mid-century, when he grasped the 'Menzian torpor', as Keating described it, he knew what needed to be done. He sculpted a new nation. Every Australian is strengthened by that creation, that contribution, and by his life.

I can only imagine how proud his family are of him—we all are—as they lay the great man to rest in eternal peace.

Gary Gray (Brand, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Resources) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The death of Edward Gough Whitlam is a time to celebrate the aspirations that Gough brought to public life. Gough showed us that a political life can make a difference.

My first memory of Gough Whitlam is from television and radio in the late 1960s and early 1970s. I was in primary school in Whyalla, South Australia, living in state housing. My dad worked at the local steel works and my mum was a cleaner. We used to watch TV or listen to the radio just to hear Gough.

While the Gorton and McMahon governments were descending into chaos, Gough was calm, dominant and determined. He used humour to win arguments. He used scholarship to gain perspective. He learned from history and he taught great lessons. Gough's style, energy and agenda spoke to us and we listened.

Gough Whitlam's impact on Australian politics began with the renewal of his party. He gave confidence to the faithful that Labor could be more than a party of opposition and complaint. Gough listened, learned and built a framework for modern Australian politics. He broadened the appeal of Labor beyond the traditional union-working class base. And he prepared Labor for government, developing shadow ministers, policy agendas and a modern world view.

He had a legendary memory, I introduced my wife, Deborah Walsh, to him, he kissed Deb and asked how Rosalie was—Deb's mum—who Gough would have met some 20 years before. Gough was, indeed, a terrific politician.

Through 20 difficult years of division and opposition Whitlam built his program, piece by piece. A modern Australia was his program, his project and his passion. He used the parliament to effect great change and as Prime Minister he used government to implement that change. He introduced a system of universal health care, abolished university fees, recognised Aboriginal land rights, supported equal pay for women, embraced multiculturalism, cut tariffs and agricultural subsidies and he celebrated Australia's identity.

He was the first Australian prime minister to recognise the People's Republic of China. He met Chairman Mao and created the diplomatic trade ties that have underpinned our relationship with China today. Gough poured a handful of desert dirt into Vincent Lingiari's hand as a symbol of dignity, prior ownership and Aboriginal land rights. Gough understood the importance of images and the media. He rose to dominate the political landscape at a time when his presence was most needed. He reimagined the role of government in Australian society, and he did it all with incredible confidence.

His government was disrupted by the 1973 oil shock and instability in global commodity and currency markets around the world, and at home unemployment began to rise. His government was not his equal. My father-in-law, Peter Walsh, was a Labor senator elected in the 1974 double dissolution election. Peter said Gough's ministers let Gough down. They were not up to Gough's standards. This taught us all great lessons about governance, lessons that were learned by Hawke and Keating. Without Gough, there could not have been a Hawke or a Keating government. Australia is now more tolerant, fair and equal because of Gough Whitlam. Following the tumultuous sacking of the Whitlam government, Gough urged his supporters to maintain public order and protest at the ballot box. He was forever a democrat.

Gough's wife, Margaret, was his equal, his ballast and his partner. She would moderate, manage and support him. We loved Margaret. Peter Walsh told me once that Gough inspired great loyalty. He remembered walking with Gough through the corridors of Old Parliament House to the opposition party room that November day in 1975.

In the middle 1980s, Gough was not fashionable in Labor circles. His book The Whitlam Government explained and defended his government. Eventually, Gough won that battle too, not just to be history but to tell it. Gough built his government and was the strength of that government. As it fell, he fought for it and he defended it against his opponents; he wrote its history and made it great. It is an epic story.

In many ways, Gough was the kind of politician that we need to see more of: humorous, educated, enlightened, courageous, engaged, resilient and persistent. Gough was a leader for the ages, a leader who cared for the rights and dignity of Aboriginal Australians, a leader who understood Northern Australia, a leader who cared for the arts, a leader for ideas, a leader who made us proud to be Australian and a leader who, although he loved Australia, still wanted to see it changed. He was a leader who made us proud to be Labor.

Mark Dreyfus (Isaacs, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Attorney General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Gough Whitlam changed Australia for the better. There is no doubt that on any side of politics Gough Whitlam was one of the great leaders of our nation. He was a bold and courageous reformer in areas as diverse as health care, social policy, foreign policy, education and reconciliation with Indigenous Australia. Many of the excellent contributions on this condolence motion have covered these reforms. I want to speak about Whitlam's contributions to the law and to the arts.

Whitlam brought about great and sweeping reforms to the laws of our nation, establishing changes that have transformed public life in Australia and that are part of our lives today. These include the abolition of the death penalty, establishing the Law Reform Commission and the Institute of Criminology, and proposing the establishing of a general Federal Court. Working with his Attorney-General, Lionel Murphy, Whitlam also created the first national scheme of legal aid, which forms one of the pillars of access to justice in our country.

In 1975, Whitlam brought in the Racial Discrimination Act, a pioneering piece of legislation that embodies modern Australia's opposition to racism and bigotry. Whitlam also recognised the ongoing injustice being suffered by Indigenous Australians, and part of his government's response was to establish the Woodward royal commission into Aboriginal land rights in the Northern Territory. The reports of that royal commission paved the way for the Aboriginal land rights act. Whitlam also brought Australia's first legal action before the International Court of Justice, demanding that France cease its nuclear testing in the Pacific. He was successful in this, with the French government stopping atmospheric nuclear testing in the Pacific in 1974.

Somehow Whitlam also found the time to introduce national trade practices legislation and the Trade Practices Commission, while also helping to modernise family law, establishing no-fault divorce, authorising civil celebrants and, in 1975, enacting the Family Law Act. This list of major legal reforms is remarkable. It is remarkable for its breadth, it is remarkable for its boldness and it is remarkable for having been achieved in less than three years.

I also want to draw attention to Whitlam's contribution to the arts, because the arts and cultural policy were central to Whitlam's vision of Australia as a modern and confident nation, sure of its identity and its place in the world. He also saw, as with other areas of public policy, that the Australian government should have a central role in encouraging and promoting our arts and our culture. His 1972 policy speech, 'It's Time', proposed the establishment of a council to promote excellence in the arts, to expand access to the arts in the community, to help establish a distinctive Australian identity, and to promote Australian culture internationally. He also proposed a public lending right for authors and measures to increase Australian content in film, television and books.

Whitlam brought to the prime ministership a passionate belief in the importance of the arts. In The Whitlam Government, he wrote:

In any civilised community the arts and associated amenities must occupy a central place. Their enjoyment should not be seen as something remote from everyday life. Of all the objectives of my Government none had a higher priority than the encouragement of the arts, the preservation and enrichment of our cultural and intellectual heritage. Indeed I would argue that all the other objectives of a Labor Government - social reform, justice and equity in the provision of welfare services and educational opportunities - have as their goal the creation of a society in which the arts and the appreciation of spiritual and intellectual values can flourish. Our other objectives are all means to an end; the enjoyment of the arts is an end in itself.

In government, Whitlam established the Australian Film Commission and the Australia Council. He saw the Council as offering:

… the prospect of a broad policy for the national development of the arts within a streamlined administration providing independence from political pressures and safeguards against centralised and authoritarian tendencies.

This is a principle of arts administration that still holds good today. He began construction of the National Gallery and, in an audacious and hugely symbolic gesture, bought Jackson Pollock's Blue Poles as a statement of Australia's confidence of its place in world culture.

Whitlam wanted the arts and our cultural heritage to be open and accessible to all. He established inquiries into the role and funding of museums and national collections, public libraries, the performing arts, and expanded the role of the National Library and introduced compensation for authors for the free loan of their books in public libraries, the Public Lending Right. As with so many other areas of public policy, Whitlam changed the way we think about the role of government for the arts and established the framework of arts policy that still exists today. Above all, he gave us the confidence and the support to speak as Australians and to tell our stories to ourselves and to the world.

Debate adjourned.