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

I am pleased to be in continuation on this condolence motion for our 22nd Prime Minister, the Rt Hon. Malcolm Fraser. Last night I was going through Malcolm Fraser's greatest achievements and how time has shown that, on those big issues in his life, on the big decisions he made, he was on the right side of history. Something that I think all Australians today can be grateful to Malcolm Fraser for is the way he was able to end the chaos of the years of the Whitlam government. I would just like to quickly reflect—because we often forget—on the disastrous regime that we had here running the country and how important it was, in that 1975 election, that we had someone of Fraser's steadfastness and resolve who was able to go on to get rid of that government.

The Labor government from 1972 to 1975 actually increased government spending by an incredible 40 per cent over three years. Of course, they whacked up taxation by 30 per cent. As it has always proven throughout history, such reckless and wasteful spending, rather than actually creating jobs, destroys them. That is what we saw during the Whitlam regime. We saw a massive rise in unemployment. It actually reached, in that period, its highest since the Great Depression. Inflation at the time got to over 20 per cent, something that is almost unheard of today. Then we had the Labor government currying favour with the Soviets, when they recognised the Soviet annexation of the Baltic states, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia. We had the Khemlani affair, when the government was trying to secretly borrow $4 billion, a sum that at the time was one-sixteenth of our GDP. In equivalent terms, it is somewhere approaching $100 billion that they were attempting to borrow from a dodgy Pakistani loan shark. This was the government of the country.

But I think the greatest economic disaster that the country avoided can be shown by the way the Labor government in 1975 attempted to fund their election campaign. When I first read this in history, I thought, 'This simply cannot be true.' But it is. What happened was that the Labor leader at the time sought secret election funding of up to $2 million from the Iraqi Ba'ath Socialist Party. They sent someone who was actually a KGB operative at the time, with the codename of Kirk, to meet Saddam Hussein in Iraq to seek money to fund their election campaign. It is completely unbelievable that this would happen, but this was the government of the time that Malcolm Fraser faced. I want to quote Greg Sheridan about the enormity of the disaster that was facing the Australian public. He said:

… on any measure for an Australian political leader to seek secret electoral funds from one of the most brutal and bloodthirsty tyrannical regimes the 20th century ever saw was a monstrous moral failing.

That is what Malcolm Fraser was facing in 1975. If he had been unsuccessful then, we would have been well on the road not only to Greece or Argentina but to something much, much worse. All Australians have Malcolm Fraser to thank.

The second thing that we should all give enormous credit to Malcolm Fraser for—his decisions proved that he was on the right side of history—is reversing the previous government's shameful recognition of the Soviet annexation of those Baltic states. To think that our previous government would try and curry favour with the Soviets in Russia at the time and sell out the people of the Baltic states—it was an absolute disgrace and a stain on our nation. I have some quotes from Malcolm Fraser at the time. He said, on 30 November 1975:

We will immediately move to assert our commitment to freedom and democracy—our opposition to socialism and communism.

One of our first actions will be withdrawing recognition of the Soviet occupation of the Baltic states.

…   …   …

On December 13th, we will turn on the lights. …

Australia will come out of the darkness of the last three years.

Thankfully that was done. In a later speech that Malcolm Fraser made, when he was celebrating the 60th anniversary of the declaration of independence of Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania, is a quote that I think we all should live by. It applies every time we go to a citizenship ceremony and new citizens take that oath to become Australians. This is a quote that I will be using in future at those citizenship ceremonies. I would like to put it in the Hansard today. This is Malcolm Fraser, from 15 March 1978:

You have made Australia your new homeland. Australia has offered new hope to many who have fled oppressive authoritarian regimes—new freedom to achieve and create, new opportunity to retain and nourish distinct cultural religious and ethnic traditions.

Your communities have seized this opportunity, and it is to your great credit that you have succeeded in maintaining your identity, preserving your languages and cultures.

Australia is not a country whose culture and traditions are drawn from one source alone. We are a multicultural society and we are all the richer for it.

…   …   …

I look to you to play a most active role in helping with the Government to improve community services available to migrants in need of assistance and in helping to make our country a great country to live for all Australians.

These are wonderful sentiments from a truly great Prime Minister.

The other thing that we should be very grateful to Malcolm Fraser for was his attitude and acceptance of the Vietnamese refugees who came to the country. Given some of the way that this gets talked about and reported on in the media, Malcolm Fraser has not been given the credit he deserves. I was at a Tet festival a couple of weeks ago, and a senior member of the New South Wales Labor Party claimed that Gough Whitlam was there when the first boats arrived and spoke of the wonderful things the ALP did for the Vietnamese refugees in helping them come to Australia. The fact is that the first boatload of people from Vietnam arrived in April 1976, when the Fraser government was in power. They received a charitable reception from the Fraser government. The Fraser government went on to settle 2,000 people who came here by boat from Vietnam. Over 50,000 people were also resettled from camps in South-East Asia—Vietnamese people who were fleeing the Communist regime of Vietnam. I think that is a very important point to make, because often it is said that the people who left Vietnam were fleeing the war. The Vietnamese people that migrated to Australia had stayed and fought and helped the South Vietnamese. They migrated because they were fleeing the totalitarian jackboot of Communism.

It is also worth mentioning some of the sentiments of the day—which were from the other side of politics—that Malcolm Fraser worked against. There was a bipartisan report by the Senate Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence entitled Australia and the refugee problem, which was published in 1976. It found that Australia had failed to evacuate from Saigon the Vietnamese who had worked with Australian forces and whose lives were in danger, despite the Air Force having transport capacity available. It stated:

… we are unable to come to any conclusion other than one of deliberate delay in order to minimise the number of refugees.

That was the government before Malcolm Fraser. The opposition leader at that time, Mr Whitlam, when in government was reported in TheWeekend Australian of 26-27 November 1977 as saying:

It's not credible that, two and a half years after the end of the Vietnam war, these people should suddenly be arriving in Australia.

There are some other quotes, but I do not think they are quite suitable for a condolence motion. I suggest that anyone who is interested in this subject should read Clyde Cameron's comments in China, Communism and Coca-Cola to see what was said about the Vietnamese refugees who came to Australia and who have made such a wonderful contribution to our nation. Again, on that issue, Malcolm Fraser was on the right side of history.

The other issue where Malcolm Fraser was truly on the right side of history was when he lifted our ban on exporting uranium back in July 1977. I can remember at school the chants of: 'Export Fraser, not uranium.' Again, history has shown that Malcolm Fraser was right. If we look at the greenhouse gas emissions that have been abated by the nuclear industry around the world, it is the equivalent of 300 years of Australia's total emissions. For anyone who is concerned about the rise of CO2 emissions, the exportation of uranium from Australia and the expansion of the nuclear power industry worldwide has saved the equivalent of 300 years of CO2 emissions from Australia.

Perhaps the previous government could have done more in that area. We have one of the largest supplies of uranium in the world. This could have been an industry for us, with more guidance from government and without so many government bans—like Argentina. The OPAL reactor built at Lucas Heights in my electorate was designed and constructed by the Argentinians. The Argentinians are now doing small nuclear reactors for power generation. This is an area that we, with our great skills in engineering, could have been at the forefront of. Malcolm Fraser should at least be congratulated for that step to lift the ban on uranium sales back in 1977. Again, history has shown that he was correct.

The other area where history has shown that Malcolm Fraser was correct was in the area of competition law. The Fraser government held two inquiries into competition policy: one was the Swanson committee report in 1976 and the second was the Blunt report in 1979. Both those committees recommended the repeal of section 49, the provision against price discrimination in our Trade Practices Act. It was an overwhelming recommendation, but Malcolm Fraser stood solid. He knew the importance of small business to this country and he refused to repeal that section. Perhaps, in hindsight, it could have been modified. Anticompetitive price discrimination was finally repealed by the Keating government. It remains one of the greatest evils and greatest deterrents to small business and entrepreneurialism in this country that a small operator unfairly pays a higher price for the inputs of his goods and services in his business simply because he is small. Malcolm Fraser held the line on that, and for that he should be congratulated.

On our side of politics we also sometimes unfairly criticise Malcolm Fraser. Some on our side say he could have done more. They look at the work that Reagan did in the USA, creating so much wealth in that country, and at the reforms that Margaret Thatcher made. It is easy to look back and criticise Malcolm Fraser for not doing as much for our country as those great leaders did for their countries. To be fair to Malcolm Fraser, he was elected well before both Thatcher and Reagan. The success of their policies in their countries was not seen until Malcolm Fraser came to the end of his time, when he lost the election in 1983. Perhaps if he had continued on and had had the opportunity he would have followed more of those supply-side economic policies of Thatcher and Reagan that did create so much wealth in those countries.

In concluding this debate, I would like to make a particular comment, if I could, about comments unfortunately made in this debate by the member for Kingsford Smith about Margaret Thatcher, where he labelled her a 'racist'—such blatant partisan politics. The member for Kingsford Smith may have had disagreements with Margaret Thatcher in many areas, but to use a condolence motion to call another distinguished leader of another country a racist demeans this parliament—

Alannah Mactiernan (Perth, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Do you recall what you have been saying about Gough Whitlam during your speech.

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

I hope the member for Perth, sitting at the despatch box and interjecting, as I think she is—or perhaps a few ducks have come up from Lake Burley Griffin and are quacking down there—would disassociate herself from those comments. Otherwise,. I am not sure. They were shameful comments, they demean this parliament and they have no place whatsoever in a condolence motion.

In concluding my contribution to the condolence motion on Malcolm Fraser, he was the leader of this country during a very, very difficult time. One of his quotes when he came to politics goes back to 1953 when he was asked what persuaded him to run as a Liberal in parliament and he said that 'every man has a right to go his own way unhampered as long as he does not interfere with the rights of anyone else'. That is how Malcolm Fraser led his life. We may have disagreed with him and some of the decisions that he made later in life, such as support for Mugabe in Zimbabwe and criticising the immigration policies and border protection policies of the coalition government—he may have been on the wrong side of history on those—but look at his life in full. We and every Australian can be thankful that we had a man like Malcolm Fraser to lead this country at a most difficult time.

Russell Broadbent (McMillan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The first thing I would like to say on this condolence motion on John Malcolm Fraser, the Right Honourable former Prime Minister, is that this is a sad occasion. He was, after all, a father, a husband, a friend, a counsellor to many and a foe to some. But he was a human being, and it was a shock. He had not been ill, to our knowledge. He may not have been as well as he was, but he had not been ill. I was fixing a syphon in a dam—which he has probably done many times himself—when I had a call to say that Malcolm had passed away. The person who rang me was Petro, and he was clearly very upset—clearly very upset—because of the shock and the fact that Malcolm had only tweeted to the nation a few days before on the issue around China and South East Asia.

I recognise in this condolence motion that members have spoken of the political activity of the former Prime Minister, but I put to you the sadness of the occasion that this individual has passed away. As one journalist put it to me the other day over a cup of coffee, 'Malcolm does not pass away.' It was Laura Tingle and she said, 'No. I had an association with him. We have spoken on the same platform together. We have had cups of coffee afterwards.' It always surprised her the number of people who just walked straight up to Malcolm Fraser and interrupted him at the table, and that he never ever minded being interrupted. She actually told me the story that at Gough Whitlam's funeral, she looked up to the top of the stairs and there were Malcolm and Tamie being mobbed by a whole lot of people for a conversation around that time.

All of us, as you have heard in the condolence motion, have our memories of Malcolm Fraser. To many, now they are cherished memories. When we were celebrating, or recognising, Petro's gong of recent times, Malcolm and Tamie were there and Ted Baillieu and his wife Robyn were there, if I had known that the conversation I had with Malcolm that night was my last conversation perhaps it would have been a different conversation. There are probably many in my place today saying, 'If I had known that was my last conversation with Malcolm it might have been more extensive.' Each of us feels like this when we lose our own parents, don't we? It is a sad time. It is a heart-breaking time. It must be a heart-breaking time for Tamie and the children at this time. That is why it is important that we recognise the humanity of the man and the fact that he was human, the same as the rest of us.

In Petro Georgiou's article in The Age he reminds us that Malcolm Fraser, on hearing of Gough Whitlam's passing, observed, 'The line's broken'. In this world anyway, it is broken forever.' Petro Georgiou comments:

… the unique fusion of political strength, compassion and social conscience has also been broken. It is quite true that our link back to that time through Malcolm Fraser is now broken. Because of his death and Gough's death, the direct link is broken to that momentous time in Australia that too few remember. For those that have not forgiven Malcolm for the role that he played at that time and their view of it, it is on you now because, if you cannot forgive, Malcolm is not going to be affected by it. It is only you who will be affected, because Gough Whitlam reconciled with Malcolm and they became friends. Two men of great intellect became friends and actually stood on platforms together.

It was a different time during which Malcolm Fraser was Prime Minister. For me, it was the time of Malcolm Fraser and the Liberals like Ian Macphee, 'Dick' Hamer, Senator David Hamer, my local member Barry Simon, Premier Lindsay Thompson, Fred Chaney, Alan Missen, a young Ted Baillieu and, in head office, Frank Hangan. It was a time of wisdom and the carriage of young members of the party like me. If you want to read about my direct responses to Malcolm Fraser's death and my interaction with it in those early days, you can read it in the Pakenham Gazette. I wrote a little piece in there about my direct action. But that is not the point for today.

I believe that Malcolm Fraser saw his responsibility and his charge to be to put the House back in order—to put the farm back in order—and to deliver confidence not only to this parliament and the people of Australia but to its institutions and everything that hangs off the parliament and the institutions. Now, he may have been shy and aloof to the world, but he certainly was not so to his family and friends. To the nation he was the stability that the nation needed at that time, and he did his job. He put the nation back on its feet, and then, in turn, I believe that he was the man for the time. He rose to be the head of his party. He did that by his ruthless political nature. He then became Prime Minister of this country at a time of difficult circumstances and then managed the country to the best of his ability with the cards that he was delivered until the new reformist government of the Hawke-Keating years came in when he was defeated. Petro once said to me, 'There's one thing you should learn about or prime ministers, Russell,' and I said, 'What's that?' He said, 'It always ends in tears. No Prime Minister wants to go. I don't think any member of this parliament wants to go, but one day or another we will.'

To this parliament I say this day in regard to Malcolm Fraser that he was a man of exceptional ability, he was a man for his time, he was a Prime Minister of his time, and my sincere condolences go to his friends and his family. But he left one very important legacy, for me. Two or three years ago in this House multiculturalism did not have a friend. That is why Maria Vamvakinou, the member for Calwell, and I got together and created the Parliamentary Friends of Multiculturalism. There were not many that turned up at the meeting, except for ambassadors and the like because they actually looked into Australia and saw how multiculturalism had been of great benefit to us. The member for Watson described how Malcolm Fraser had described multiculturalism thus:

Multiculturalism is about diversity, not division—it is about interaction not isolation. It is about cultural and ethnic differences set within a framework of shared fundamental values which enables them to co-exist on a complementary rather than competitive basis. It involves respect for the law and for our democratic institutions and processes.

Petro headed it. Malcolm Fraser stayed true to his principles, whether it be on the environment, Indigenous land rights or multiculturalism, even in the face of party room dissent. Vale John Malcolm Fraser.

Scott Buchholz (Wright, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I acknowledge the contribution from the member for McMillan and the heartfelt thoughts that he has offered in his contribution to this condolence debate. Losing a husband or losing a father is a traumatic experience for anyone, so I would like to dedicate the early parts of this speech to offering my heartfelt condolences to those who are left behind. I lost my father when I was eight years old and I understand wholeheartedly the pain that you go through and that you suffer for the many years when you lose someone who is such a significant part of your life.

I encourage the children of the Fraser family to look back on the wonderful contribution that your father made to this country and to stand proud, knowing not only that your father made a valuable, heartfelt contribution on an economic perspective and on a political perspective but also that he was a good, decent man. To Mrs Fraser, my heart goes out to you in the loss of a lifelong partner. There will be, into the future, moments of enormous grief and enormous loss in losing someone who you have committed your life. I wish you, on those lonely nights, all the best, knowing that you are in the thoughts of many members of both sides of this House and you are in their hearts.

The passing of the Rt Hon. Malcolm Fraser is deeply saddening news that has left all of us reflecting on his legacy and the important changes he enacted. Much of Malcolm Fraser's legacy lies outside the economic sphere; however, as a young man, I always admired the economic struggle he must have faced during his term as Prime Minister. During his time as our 22nd Prime Minister, between 1975 and 1983, Fraser set down a path of economic responsibility following the demise of the previous government after a time known as the Whitlam years. Fraser came to power and met a shocking economic occurrence: that of 'stagflation'. Until the early 1970s it was thought by most economists that high inflation and high unemployment could not occur at the same time. Keynesian economics at the time believed that if you revved the economy a bit faster, you would get more employment and output but stoke inflation; take the foot off the pedal and the opposite occurs. In 1975 inflation hit an alarming peak of 16 per cent. That is an enormous number given that the current fiscal settings of the Reserve Bank, which has carriage of monetary policy, have the inflation rate at between two and three per cent. When you consider 16 per cent was the peak during his reign, it would have been a task in itself to manage it.

In the decades that followed, Australia's unemployment grew fivefold, spiking in 1982 to as high as 10 per cent. But at the same time wages shot up, putting pressure on prices, which in turn put pressure on wages; and this so-called wage-price spiral was hard to break. The Fraser government, dealing with this phenomenon for the first time, took a pragmatic, if not principled, approach; that was the genesis of the then 'razor gang' which cut back on Commonwealth spending in a serious way. Spending was completely out of control under Whitlam; despite that, Fraser faced ardent pushback from members of his government who wanted to see more severe cuts and a more significant downsizing of government. Members at the time wanted a much more Thatcherite approach to the problems facing the Australian economy, yet Fraser resisted. He pushed for a more free-market direction. Government spending was cut, trade became more free and huge wage claims were curtailed, but he did not go all the way to Reaganism—the principle of which was that government was the problem—nor to Thatcher's radical individualism.

In many ways Malcolm Fraser approached the economy like a wise family doctor advising on dieting and weight loss: enjoy a little of everything in moderation. Without developed economic policy options available and with the new age of economic theory still on the desks of academics in overseas countries, Fraser did a truly remarkable job of steering a middle course. The gift of hindsight allows us to realise that there were areas in which Fraser could have improved; John Howard made the high-profile admission that he believed there could have been a 'bit more Lucas and a lot less Keynes'. But at that time Fraser was creating economic policy on the run and addressing emerging problems without the sophisticated number-crunching that policy makers adopt today.

Others will no doubt point to his variety of principled and moral stands. We have heard in this House from a range of speakers on both sides of the House about the Prime Minister's stand against apartheid. We have heard at length of his fight for Indigenous land rights and, in his post prime ministerial years, for a range of humanitarian causes. Malcolm Fraser was clearly a very decent human being. But it would be wrong to think that he was not also a good economic manager. In many ways he laid the groundwork for the Hawke-Keating years. He certainly was not a visionary like Keating, nor did major reforms take place on his watch. But he steadied the ship and the Australian economy is the beneficiary of a lot of his cost-cutting in that sector.

Australia can be justifiably proud of an approach to economics that sat us squarely between Europe and the United States. In the US, the champions of free enterprise toke a position of free enterprise at the cost of social values; however in Europe we see a much larger role for the state, even if that inhibits free enterprise. In Australia, under Fraser, we found the middle ground. When Malcolm Fraser became Prime Minister, that was all up for grabs. We could have become 'old Europe', or we could have become the United States and veered onto the path of radical individualism responsible for the debacle that came to both of those nations. Fraser helped us chart the middle course, and we should be very grateful for that.

In conclusion, I want to acknowledge Malcolm Fraser—and I believe this is the first time this has been raised in this House—for a contribution he made to Queensland. In my office, I have in my employ a lady by the name of Ruth Doyle. Ruth Doyle, before coming to work for me, had a small business in the small township of Birdsville. She is very complimentary about the Rt Hon. Malcolm Fraser. In 1978 he attended the Birdsville Races, where attendance was normally around 250 to 300 people. Malcolm Fraser, when he was the Prime Minister, went to the Birdsville Races, and he ran the country from a bush camp outside the township of Birdsville, still known today as 'the eight mile'. The Birdsville Races in Queensland are now a rite of passage for campers and those looking to have the regional experience of bush picnic races. Malcolm Fraser made a contribution and forever after, from that day when he was present at that race meeting, crowds have swollen to in excess of two and three thousand and, on occasion, five thousand.

Malcolm Fraser, for your contribution to our nation, I am truly humbled and grateful. To your family members who are left behind, the Buchholz family offers our deepest condolences. The people I represent in the electorate of Wright will, I know, join with me in offering our deepest condolences to a great Prime Minister. May he rest in peace.

Angus Taylor (Hume, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am very pleased to be able to speak on this condolence motion here today. The year 1975 was my political awakening. At the age of nine I was old enough to understand something of what was happening and young enough to have lots of questions—questions I have since taken half a lifetime to begin to answer.

Like many others in this place I handed out how-to-vote cards in the 'turn on the lights' election campaign. It was an absolutely extraordinary time, with extraordinary leaders. The loss of Malcolm Fraser has given us a chance to paint a portrait of the man as he was, not simply accept the portraits that more recent commentators have painted. There are myths to explode, alongside accepted beliefs to celebrate. I want to focus on two great legacies which are close to my heart and are not widely known—first, the depth of his fiscal conservatism, and, second, his deep commitment to rural and regional Australia.

He was an extraordinary fiscal conservative. In so many ways, as Prime Minister, he faced challenges similar to ours today. The Whitlam government had raised spending from around $65 billion to over $100 billion in today's dollars, in three short years. Whitlam had convinced himself and the rest of Australia that there was a magic pudding of government money, and all you had to do was help yourself.

Fraser knew this was a recipe for disaster. Between 1975 and 1983 spending hardly grew in real terms. The scale of that achievement is better understood now than 10 years ago. Fraser's ability to stop spending-growth in its tracks should be seen as a monumental achievement, and one that kept Australia from becoming Paul Keating's famous banana republic. Central to this was the need to ask government to be innovative and productive, wisely using the public purse as though it was its own.

But perhaps less well understood was Fraser's commitment to, and belief in, rural and regional Australia and agriculture. Many of his insights were well ahead of his time. In his maiden speech, Fraser anticipated the agricultural opportunity in northern Australia. He said:

I wish to direct my attention now to the north of Australia where large areas are, as yet, hardly touched. In the Kimberleys area there are two river valleys, those of the Ord and the Fitzroy rivers … When those rivers are dammed, and I say "when" sure in the knowledge that this project must eventually receive the attention of the Australian Government, it will be possible to develop irrigation farms in the areas below the dams. I believe that is a national project which must be tackled by the Australian Government before long. When the work is done, new communities of Australians will spring up where now there are a few sparsely peopled and extensive cattle stations.

I remind the House that Malcolm Fraser made that speech well before the Argyle dam was built.

He also had a keen sense of the extraordinary potential from agricultural innovation—a potential that we continue to see today. Referring, in his maiden speech, to innovation, he said:

In my own part of the world, I have seen great examples of this in the agricultural and pastoral spheres. Three blades of grass have been made to grow where formerly there was only one. Three and four sheep are being carried to the acre on land that formerly carried only half a sheep. Private people are doing this throughout the whole country and it is adding to the national wealth of Australia …

Fraser saw the formation of the National Farmers' Federation. His observations are as relevant today as they were back then. In a speech at the formation of the National Farmers' Federation, he said:

I have always believed, both as farmer and as a politician, that farmers and pastoralists need to speak with a strong voice. You can deal with government much better if that is so. You can do it much better if you are speaking with one voice rather than with the two or three or four divided voices.

He went on to talk about the importance of competitiveness and the need for market access and low tariffs into key markets. Indeed, he focused a significant part of his speech at the inauguration of the NFF on the importance of getting access to markets in the European Community and the United States and the reduction of tariffs into those countries.

Like most farmers, Fraser also had a very keen sense of the land. Not surprisingly, he had great sympathy for Indigenous people and the land rights movement. Indeed, in 1976 he introduced a breakthrough land rights bill to the parliament.

Before heading off to Oxford to study, he travelled around rural Victoria and New South Wales and he kept a journal. His feelings and observations were extraordinarily close to my feelings and observations at a similar time in my life. I too, travelled to Oxford to study before I had travelled anywhere in the world and, like Fraser, on arriving in Oxford I felt small, and aware of how little my education and background had prepared me for the big and urgent ideas of the time. In his journal, Fraser talked about his connection to the Australian landscape in graphic terms. He said:

All my life I will have memories of calm nights beneath the sky, of waking before dawn to see the sun rise in the east, and of driving over the lonely bush roads with dust eddying all around. The deformed Mallee scrub and the ghost farms, the great plains and endless sand hills, the majestic mountains, the beautiful valleys and pleasant hills. All these are part of Australia and part of my memories. Among them I will find my home.

Rest in peace, Malcolm Fraser.

Andrew Nikolic (Bass, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to associate myself with the eloquent contributions of colleagues on both sides of this House, following the death of former Prime Minister, the Rt Hon. Malcolm Fraser on 20 March 2015.

It is fitting that we reflect on the life and legacy of a man who was at the centre of political decision-making as leader of this great country.    It is also fitting to begin my reflection on Malcolm's life and legacy by talking of his family, which sustained him during his years as Prime Minister and beyond. He and his wife Tamie had four children—and, later in life, they had grandchildren—who will no doubt miss him terribly.

I only met Tamie Fraser a few months ago on a domestic flight—a common meeting place for politicians and former politicians—as she and Malcolm travelled to yet another engagement. As is often the case with strong-willed people who inhabit this place, it is our partners—our families—who soften our sharper edges. And so I believe it was with Tamie, who brought gentleness and humour to balance what some saw as Malcolm's gruffness, and who made such a wonderful contribution as Australia's first lady, and as mother to the couple's children. I express my sincere condolences to Tamie and the broader Fraser family. It is fair to say that, although I had met Malcolm previously, I did not know him well. As we sat across the aircraft aisle from each other, I welcomed the opportunity to hear his views on topical issues. He was certainly definitive in his perspectives and beliefs. It gave me cause to reflect on Malcolm's leadership of our country and his contribution to some of the big issues in our history as a dominant figure of Australian politics during the 1970s and 80s. We have all heard many competing perspectives on what leadership is but, fundamentally, it is an influence relationship—engaging others, explaining what needs to be done, persuading and harnessing their individual contributions towards the attainment of a collective goal. In politics it is often about identifying the big issues confronting our society and determining how to address them.

By any measure, Malcom was at the centre of momentous issues in our nation's history. As politicians, during debate in this House we also often reflect about values as fundamental touchstones and determinants of our action. Many things distinguish how so many of Malcolm's actions will be remembered. For me, the most compelling is his courage. I do not mean courage in a physical sense, but the courage to take on the challenges of the day—often unpopular challenges—and to do what is right, to speak out and to lead with the power of words. At a time of great political uncertainty, Malcolm confronted extraordinary pressures in 1975 and the years that followed. I know many of the contributions made by my colleagues about Malcolm have understandably touched on the Dismissal, and I do not intend to overly re-till that soil beyond saying that the people, who are always the final judges on these matters, gave Malcolm Fraser and his government repeated overwhelming endorsements following the Dismissal.

Inflation at the time was almost 18 per cent, economic growth was stagnant and unemployment rampant. The country faced severe recession and, inexplicably, the Whitlam government sought to spend its way out of trouble and drastically increased government expenditure as a ratio of gross domestic product, which rose by an unprecedented six per cent in just three years. The cumulative impact of high inflation, rapidly rising costs of labour and spiralling government spending was a potent and dangerous economic mix. Overlaid onto this was the political scandal of the Khemlani Loans Affair, with ministers of the crown behaving in ways that were inconsistent with accepted governance and accountability standards. The challenge confronting Fraser was immense, and I laud his courage to do what was necessary to restore Australia's political dignity and credibility. And he won the people's judgement at three successive elections.

There are other things he did: environmentalist, humanitarian—my colleagues have touched on all of those major achievements in his life. By any measure, Malcolm continued to contribute to good causes after retiring from politics, in 1983, spending 15 years as chair of CARE Australia, which encompassed five years as president of CARE International. And so we farewell Malcolm Fraser—courageous, principled, often outspoken and at times misunderstood. He delivered repeatedly on the classical Liberal aspiration that prioritises the right of the individual. He lived a fortunate life defined by a strong commitment to the service of others, and put his shoulder firmly into the endless struggle to make Australia tomorrow a better place than it was today. He made an extraordinary contribution to Australia's political history, which this House quite rightly acknowledges. I again extend my sincere condolences to Malcolm Fraser's wife, Tamie, their children, family and friends.

Vale Malcolm Fraser. We mourn your passing.

Michael Sukkar (Deakin, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I also rise today to place on record my respects on the death of the Right Honourable Malcolm Fraser, and I want to associate myself with the comments very eloquently put by the member for Bass. Before I reflect on some of the areas of achievement that I think Malcolm Fraser should be best known for, I want to offer my condolences to his family. I think that in these situations Malcolm Fraser's roles as a husband, father and grandfather or friend are in many respects more important than reflecting on the great things he did in his life, notwithstanding how important they are. So I do offer my condolences to his family, first and foremost.

There is no doubt that Malcolm Fraser was a great man. You do not become the Prime Minister of Australia unless you have attributes that many of us could just wish for. Malcolm Fraser's determination to do what was right for his country, notwithstanding the personal animosity and quite disgusting treatment he received, must be admired. He was the man who took a lot of very rough treatment, and did so for the sake of the country. That is why I think it is always worthwhile reflecting on his single greatest political achievement: ultimately rescuing Australia from what at the time was the worst government we had ever seen. Let us not forget the profligacy of the Whitlam government, the borderline corruption following the Khemlani Affair and a whole host of other issues. Malcolm Fraser saved Australia from that chaos and division and, for eight years as our 22nd Prime Minister, he was able to unite Australians. Again, I think most people would not be able to withstand the treatment he received, but the fact he did so indicates the love he had for his country. That is what I will remember him most for—the love of Australia and the love of making sure that ours remained the greatest country on earth.

It is clear that he articulated Australia's feelings with the 'Turn on the Lights' campaign in 1975. He went on to win the greatest political victory at a federal level ever. So perhaps over the years we have diminished how important and successful he was as a Prime Minister. He was extraordinarily successful: three election wins and seeing off a very flawed but potent political foe in Gough Whitlam are some things that I think all Liberals admire, and I think Australians should be very thankful.

Another area of his legacy that I want to touch on was his staunch anticommunism. Again, many people in my cohort—in my age group—perhaps do not appreciate the insidious impact that communism may have had on this country were it not for people like Malcolm Fraser, his good friend BA Santamaria and others who valiantly fought against people whose allegiances were more with the Soviet Union than they were with Australia. Many of those were in the upper echelons of the Labor Party. So, again, Malcolm Fraser saving us—with help from many people, but being a key person to save us from that insidious movement is something that all Australians now derive benefits from even though most of us do not know it. Most of us do not appreciate how tough it was and that the inevitable victory that we had over communism was not inevitable at the time. Nobody thought it was inevitable. It was because of people like Malcolm Fraser that we were able to win that war and we have the country that we have got now.

Another area of recognition that I want to highlight is his obvious compassion towards Vietnamese refugees fleeing persecution after the fall of Saigon to the North Vietnamese communists Lots of people in the condolence motion have spoken about his extraordinary generosity and bringing the Australian public with him to help the over 50,000 Vietnamese refugees. But, again, we accept multiculturalism now, and I am a beneficiary of multiculturalism, having a father who was born overseas. We take it for granted that we cherish our society and our multicultural background, but it was not the case for Vietnamese refugees until Malcolm Fraser came along. Again, the former government had quite a callous disregard for Vietnamese refugees and was more interested in being in support of a communist regime in North Vietnam than looking after Vietnamese refugees who had worked with Australian forces and worked with Australian diplomats.

But Malcolm Fraser changed all that. He dispensed with the callous approach of the Whitlam government with regard to South Vietnamese refugees and he opened up Australia. Obviously the over 50,000 Vietnamese refugees and now many hundreds of thousands of their progeny who are living in Australia and striving successfully no doubt appreciate that John Malcolm Fraser who singularly should take the most credit with regard to that.

I also want to highlight that Malcolm Fraser was rightly proud of the government that he led. You are not going to hear from me any apologies for the often cited criticism of Malcolm Fraser's government over eight years that it was a do-nothing government. Nothing could be further from the truth. As has been highlighted earlier in this debate, in three short years the Whitlam government took expenditures in today's terms from $65 billion to $105 billion, profligacy that no government in this country has ever sought to impose on the country. The fact that Malcolm Fraser was able to arrest that trend, was able to bring back fiscal responsibility is a task that we should not again diminish 30 or 40 years later. I understand that it would have been extraordinarily difficult to have done that, particularly in a time when the Australian polity was so divided and the Australian community for a time was quite divided. But his sure hand, his steadfastness, his commitment to Australia and his ability to bear the burden of responsibility, accept the treatment that he received and still plough ahead was something that all of us must be thankful for.

So I agree that, ultimately, when he conceded defeat in his often quoted words that Australia was in a better condition when he handed it over than when he received it, it is the most important thing that I think we can remember. So again I would like to pass on my deepest condolences to Malcolm Fraser's family. I want to reaffirm that there is no doubt he was a great man and a great Liberal Prime Minister.

Ewen Jones (Herbert, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am going to break the confidence and the seal of the party room. There are a bunch of kids up there in the gallery listening to us. In the party room Senator Brett Mason announced it was his last party room. He went to how blessed we are to be in this place, how lucky we are to be in this place He raised an amazing thing. We still have Philip Ruddock, the member for Berowra, in this House, who served with Malcolm Fraser, who served with Robert Menzies, and in the first Menzies government Billy Hughes was there. Billy Hughes was in Australia's very first parliament in 1901, so people like me have only three or four degrees of separation from the birth of our federation. That is one of the coolest things I have ever heard, and it lets you know just how blessed we are to be in this place.

I think, when you go to the life of John Malcolm Fraser, when you do sit down, what a lot of people gloss over here is the toll this place will take on you and the toll it takes on people who sit in that front chair. Malcolm Fraser was two years younger than I am today when he left office after 28 years in this place. I came in with you, Deputy Speaker Griggs, and you are a damn sight younger than me, but I am now 55. I have been here for coming on five years, and Malcolm Fraser had already had his 28-year career and was gone two years ago in my life.

I never met him. I saw him once in a lounge, but I never had the guts to go up and say g'day. I never voted for him. My first election was in 1980. I was a very young 20-year-old and more intent on filling my car, filling my belly and getting the next beer. When he floated the world parity pricing on oil, it hit my hip-pocket and I could not stand the bloke. I did not vote for him in 1980 or 1983. The thing you have to understand, is what he stood for. The man had principles.

A lot of people here have spoken about the dismissal and the way that it seemed to be more collegiate in those days. I disagree. When you look at principle and that sort of thing, I do not think anyone would have played a harder hand than him in the dismissal. To compare parliaments and eras is like trying to compare cricketers and footballers or different styles of football, and who would be good today and who would not be good. All you can do is play the ball that is in front of you. All you can do is play by the rules that are applied now. There is no way in the world that a man today could have a 28-year career or be in the parliament for over 12 years and not get a promotion to develop his craft.

A lot has been said about the friendship between Gough Whitlam and Malcolm Fraser, but the friendship stretches across the parliament. There are friendships here, now—and the member for McMillan bears it for everyone, and I see the member for Melbourne Ports there. He used to sit next to the previous member for Banks, Daryl Melham, and Russell Broadbent. The member for McMillan came in at the same time. They have regular dinners. They get on very well. In this place you can get on with people across the board. I played a little bit of football in my day—not very well—but the thing is you have to leave it on the pitch. We come in here for an hour-and-a-half each day. At two o'clock we go on and belt the living daylights out of each other, and we go off afterwards and get back on with the work.

Whether I agree with what Malcolm Fraser did, whether I agree with his economic policies, is moot. I cannot do anything about it. What I can do is express my admiration for someone who stuck at it for so long. What I can do is tell people how much the job must take out of the Prime Minister—any Prime Minister—how much stress it adds and how many years it takes off your life. To come through that, to be in here, is very lucky. To get to be Prime Minister—the air is so rare; anyone who can take that step and commit so totally that they can make that office deserves the respect of everybody in this place.

I still have both my parents with me. I do not speak to them often enough. I do not see them anywhere near often enough. As the member for Wright said, to lose your dad is a big thing, no matter what age you are. To lose your mum or your dad is a big thing. So my condolences go to the Fraser family, to Tammy, their children and their extended family. I do wish them all the best and I pass my deep condolences to the family. Vale John Malcolm Fraser. He stood for something. He was a man, and he was a big man—a big man in this country and a big man on a page of this country's history. I thank the House.

Ken Wyatt (Hasluck, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Abraham Lincoln once said: 'Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power.' I believe this sentiment to be true. Indeed, power is truly the test of the character of a man. When I reflect on my own history in politics and the times I saw Malcolm Fraser—like the member for Herbert I did not always agree with him—I respected the fact that he was principled. I believe that Malcolm Fraser, as was reported recently in the media, had an important influence on the changing relations of countries within the British Commonwealth and on shaping Australia's relationships with the countries of the East and South-East Asia to economic rationalisation. Though economic rationalisation was introduced in policy debate during his term of office, his government reflected more traditional principles in financial management and fiscal policy.

Malcolm was truly a statesman. He moved from being a tough, feared leader to someone who took a very principled stance on many issues in his later life. Today it is with great sadness and a sense of honour that I give my condolences in the parliament to a political hero of mine. Malcolm always employed the qualities of integrity, honesty and respect. He always remained true to his principles; I did not see him waver from those. When we recollect those who have passed, we often speak with hypocritical positivity. We vilify them in life but we praise them in death.

The Malcolm I met and knew would never have appreciated that hypocrisy. Malcolm was a straightshooter. What you saw was what you got. I believe it was fostered in him from growing up on the farm. Malcolm truly had the honour of a man from the land. Malcolm was a man of his word. A deal was made on a handshake. There was no pretentiousness. Malcolm never believed the Canberra hype and was a servant of the people, in the true sense of the term.

Another great mark of a leader is their ability to unite the people and nurture the civil state. I will never forget when Malcolm Fraser attended the early rallies in Forrest Place in Perth. The anger was burning within the hearts of protesters. Equally, I attended the rallies that Gough Whitlam held in the same place because I was interested in looking at the contrast between two men who at the time were bitter in their approach to each other, but who later in life became enjoined in the way that they thought on many issues and in the conversations and the friendship that they developed.

Whilst the anger was burning, Malcolm still had the ability to connect to all and to extinguish some of that angry blaze. That day, Malcolm allowed those burning protestors to have their say, to vent and to express their anger at what he had done. But then I saw them quieten down and listen to a leader who was prepared to stand on the steps of the post office in Forrest Place and take it on the chin but who, at the same time, expressed his views about what this country needed in direction. I never saw Malcolm as being the enemy of his countrymen. Sadly, Forrest Place is no longer Australia's favourite political arena, but the memory of this moment will forever feature in Western Australia's history.

I want to emphasise the importance of the character of the man. Malcolm was a leader with a spirit of peace; a man who was of strength in wanting to achieve the things that he believed in for all Australians. And that has been reflected in many of the speeches that have been delivered in this chamber in recognition of the contribution that Malcolm Fraser made in his time as Prime Minister and, equally, in the time he served on many committees and in events, and in the support that he gave those who he believed he should lend his weight to.

What always fascinated me was the relationship between he and Gough Whitlam, given what happened with the dismissal. You often see human behaviour display an anger and a hatred that resides and sits for many years. And they should have hated each other, but Gough Whitlam and Malcolm Fraser shared a bond—a special bond that united them as friends. They may not have agreed with each other with regard to their opposing policies, but these two adversaries shared a fervent will for the good, and that was for the good of their countrymen.

Malcolm pursed this goal for common goodness with his firm principles, his proud integrity and his devoted consistency. Malcolm believed in his doctrine and he stood by it—and he stood by it quite strongly. We saw that in evidence so many times. I hear of the folklore that is associated with the party room and the stances that people took, but he still remained committed to what he believed was best for this country.

When we begin our journeys as politicians and public servants for the good people of Australia, we align ourselves with the principles of our founding ideological fathers: Edmund Burke, if we are libertarians, or Marx and Engels, amongst others, if we are ones who believe in social collectivism. In the portrait of a politician, we are branded by the colours of our tribe. Our policies illustrate in colour who we are in principle.

Malcolm was principally a true-blue liberal. In the pages of history, Malcolm will always stand as an image for us all of what the true meaning of being a libertarian stands for. Teddy Roosevelt said it best:

Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the President or any other public official …

In essence, this is to look at the good of what is needed for the community in which we live and work. This is true liberalism, and this accurately articulates how Malcolm saw his place of privilege in the political arena.

I believe that there are three 'P's in politics: the people, the party and the policy, coupled with a vision as to how you will lead a country forward for the greater good of all—even though your ilk is either Labor or Liberal. Malcolm was a leader for the people, and he demonstrated this so many times in the past. And while towards the end many from his own side of politics no longer loved him, Malcolm continued to lobby for change—especially for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, the issues that reflected the diversity of Australian society and social justice: right until the very end.

Malcolm was the leader who created a constitutional crisis, the Prime Minister who dramatically reformed policy and who, I believe, never forgot that he was a leader for the little guy. He was a true libertarian, who would always fight for the less fortunate in our society. Freedom should uphold no confines of monetary, social or racial preference, and that is what I believe that Malcom did.

I met with Malcolm five times in my life. He congratulated me on being the first Indigenous member of the House of Representatives. But he also spoke to me about the lobbying that was needed to address some of the issues that faced not only Indigenous Australians but those who were refugees and those whose social circumstance did not give them the advantages that many others in our society have the benefit of. He lobbied for change and was unflinching in his pursuit to close the gap for Indigenous Australians. I remember a discussion I had with him and Fred Chaney over some of the vision that they had and the changes that we needed to accomplish bilaterally and in unison with all parties of this parliament. He believed, given the right circumstances and the right driver, that you could effect changes if you included people in the process—particularly the people affected.

Malcolm also believed in multiculturalism, and many have spoken of this. During his time in government, we welcomed the re-settlement of tens of thousands of displaced Vietnamese people in Australia—people who have added a rich and new dimension to our cultural identity as a nation. I have a Vietnamese family that I spend time with. When I first met her, she was the seamstress who always altered the cuffs on my trousers. I have got to know her and her husband and their children. They are a fantastic example of Vietnamese refugees who came to Australia by boat and were held in camps, but who then went on to grasp the opportunity given to them by the Fraser government. She has always said that Australia is her home—it is the home of her children and it is her and her husband's future. But this is only a small representation of the impact that Malcolm has had on Australian society.

In reality, his mark will be everlasting. I extended my sympathies to Malcolm's enormously supportive wife, Tamie, their children and their grandchildren. Today I have said goodbye to a patriot, a leader, an idol and a friend. May we all remember Malcolm, and may his pursuit of the prosperity of our nation and the quality and the recognition of the people who live within it live on within us all. Rest in peace, Malcolm.

Sarah Henderson (Corangamite, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is a great honour to rise and pay tribute to the 22nd Prime Minister of Australia, the Right Honourable Malcolm Fraser. I first met Malcolm Fraser when I was 11 years old, when he was Leader of the Opposition. I was with my mother Ann and nine-year-old sister Jodie at the Geelong racetrack. My sister had broken her arm and was wearing a plaster cast.

Being someone who was in despair over the way in which Australia was being governed at that time, Mum suggested to Jodie that Mr Fraser was going to become Australia's next Prime Minister and that she should ask for his autograph. Mr Fraser signed her plaster cast with grace and good humour.

Of course, within a matter of months, there was the constitutional crisis of November 1975. Within a matter of weeks, Australians had declined to maintain the rage. These were such turbulent political times, but Malcolm Fraser's decision to block supply was entirely endorsed by the Australian people.

On 13 December 1975, the coalition won the federal election with the largest majority in Australia's history, and Malcolm Fraser went on to serve as Australia's Prime Minister until 1983, winning elections in 1977 and 1980.

I last saw Malcolm Fraser some two months ago when I ran into him in Collins Street in Melbourne and we had a really lovely chat. He gave me some wonderful advice as a regional federal MP. He said to me: 'Travel to every corner of your electorate; fight hard for the issues that matter to your constituents; and be tenacious, determined and principled.' These were the values that he held close to his heart, as the member for Wannon for 28 years and as Prime Minister of Australia from 1975 to 1983.

In contrast to his reputation as a shy and reserved man, I was struck by Malcolm Fraser's warmth and passion on this occasion. He spoke about how, if a minister had not responded to correspondence he had written on behalf of a constituent within three weeks, he would literally chase the minister down the corridor seeking an answer. He impressed upon me that the honour of serving one's constituents is central to the honour of serving as a member of parliament.

I met Malcolm Fraser on quite a few occasions but I did spend a memorable few hours with him in the backseat of a Channel 7 helicopter when I was a young reporter. I had flown to Nareen—his property in the Western District that he loved so dearly—to interview him. Mr Fraser was heading to Melbourne to catch an international flight, so we offered him a lift. It was not the most conducive environment in which to have a chat, but I did get the impression that he did not much care for journalists.

Malcolm Fraser rallied against injustice, discrimination and racism and was a champion of the environment. While not reputed as a greater reformer, I consider this to be unfair. He instituted many great reforms: he was fiercely opposed to apartheid and held the South African regime to account with a conviction that won so many hearts and minds during his time as Prime Minister and beyond; he was deeply engaged in the fortunes of Indigenous people, putting in place Aboriginal land rights in the Northern Territory; under his leadership, multiculturalism became national policy—and, for the Vietnamese community, that he welcomed in large numbers as refugees after the Vietnam War, he will forever be their hero; he oversaw the establishment of the Family Court of Australia, the Federal Court of Australia, the Human Rights Commission, the Australian Federal Police, the creation of the Commonwealth Ombudsman and SBS; he blocked sand mining on Fraser Island, proclaimed Kakadu National Park and the first stage of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park; and he enacted the Whale Protection Act, ending whaling in Australian waters.

In many respects, one of Malcolm Fraser's greatest reforms was to restore economically responsible government. He was the steadying ship after a time of great economic upheaval under the Whitlam government. Malcolm Fraser recognised that socially progressive policies must sit hand in hand with good economic management.

In his last term in particular, there were criticisms of Malcolm Fraser's failure to embrace a market based economic reform agenda—and this does need to be acknowledged. But, as we have seen in this 44th Parliament, reform in the national interest is not an easy road.

That Malcolm Fraser and Gough Whitlam were able to forge a lasting friendship after the deep and bitter divide created by the Dismissal is a great credit to both men. As Prime Minister Abbott said in his statement:

The friendship he built in later life with Gough Whitlam spoke volumes about the character of both men at the centre of the crisis: in their own different ways, they were both fierce Australian patriots.

After he left politics, Malcolm Fraser continued to be a warrior for issues about which he cared deeply—human rights, refugees and Indigenous Australians. He established Care Australia and served on a number of international eminent persons bodies.

I recognise also that Malcolm Fraser disagreed with a number of our government's policies, particularly in relation to asylum seekers. When he left the Liberal Party, he explained it was a case of the Liberal Party leaving him, and not the other way around. I respectfully disagree: the Liberal Party never left John Malcolm Fraser. Our party is a broad church, and disagreements about matters of individual liberty and the rights of the individual are integral to our capacity as a party to modernise, grow and adapt to new challenges and new ways of thinking.

It is wonderful to hear the contributions to this condolence motion by members from both sides of the House. How I wish that, during his lifetime, Malcolm Fraser could have heard these many tributes to his achievements in life. How I wish he could have known how proud we are of his legacy. This is perhaps a lesson for us all. I felt the same way during the condolence motion in the Victorian parliament for my mother, Ann, after her death in 2002, when so many members from both sides of the House joined together to celebrate her life and her achievements. I am heartened, however, that Malcolm's widow, Tamie, who was such an important part of Malcolm Fraser's success and such a wonderful asset from the minute he met her, as well as his children, Hugh, Mark, Angela and Phoebe, and their families, have the opportunity to hear about the great and principled man that Malcolm Fraser was—a man who governed with strength and compassion, forever a Liberal giant.

To his family I offer my sincere condolences. Vale John Malcom Fraser. May you rest in peace.

Eric Hutchinson (Lyons, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

History will show that Malcolm Fraser was a friend of Tasmania. This week in the Tasmanian state parliament both Premier Hodgman and Minister for State Growth Matthew Groom expressed their fond memories of their fathers, who had both served as ministers under the man who they described as a political giant.

Will Hodgman's father, Michael, and Matthew's father, Ray, served as ministers under Malcolm Fraser before going on to successful state political careers. Ray Groom, of course, became Tasmanian Premier. Mr Fraser had a soft spot for Tasmania, where he enjoyed his fly fishing. He was very skilled in that area and appreciated the quality of the trout fishing in Tasmania's lakes and rivers, which he regarded as some of the very best in the world for the sport he loved. He and his wife, Tamie, maintained a fishing shack in the Central Highlands, in my electorate, for many years, where they both indulged their fly-fishing passions.

I note the comments this week of Senator Abetz about how Malcolm Fraser, soon after he became Prime Minister, recognised the need for the special treatment of Tasmania to take into account the Tasmanian freight travelling interstate. If nothing else, this is one of Malcolm Fraser's truly great legacies. In recent weeks Prime Minister Abbott has added to that legacy that the Liberal Party has in respect of the Tasmanian Freight Equalisation Scheme. It should never be ignored that it was Malcolm Fraser who introduced that scheme in the first instance, in 1976. I am sure that he would be very, very delighted with Prime Minister Abbott's recent announcement of the extra money for northbound export freight that will be included within the Tasmanian Freight Equalisation Scheme. This is our Hume Highway; this is our Pacific Highway.

In 1980, Malcolm Fraser established the Australian Maritime College at Launceston as a world-class centre for maritime studies and expertise. The legacy of that far-sighted investment is still paying dividends today, as students from all around the world come to my state to study at the Australian Maritime College. As well, in 1981 Malcolm Fraser moved the Australian Antarctic Division from Melbourne, where it was at the time, to Kingston in southern Tasmania, and expanded it, recognising Tasmania's strong scientific and practical links with Antarctica and Macquarie Island. This was, again, a very far sighted decision that has played to one of our state's natural geographic strengths. Clearly, the investment that has continued to be made in the area of Antarctic research spreads the value of that investment right across Tasmania to this day.

As Premier Hodgman said, Malcolm Fraser, who was a family friend of his father's at the time Fraser was Prime Minister, gave Australia a strong sense of direction. That was true also of the state of Tasmania. Ray Groom remembered Malcolm Fraser as a formal person who was fundamentally shy but a great Australian—a statesman who might not have operated so well with the repetition that is sometimes demanded in the roles that we play in the business today, with the way the media covers the business that we are involved in. The former farmer was a thinking person who always had firm views, which he expressed forthrightly up to this death. His farming background meant that he had a great understanding of rural and regional Australia and, as I have highlighted, particularly Tasmania.

One of my predecessors in the federal seat of what was Wilmot, which became the federal seat of Lyons, Max Burr, said that his favourite memory of Malcolm Fraser occurred at a 50th birthday party at Old Parliament House. He said that Michael Hodgman, who was the member for Denison at the time, wrote a song to the tune of Jesus Loves Methe lyrics are 'Jesus loves me, this I know'—but his was entitled Malcolm Loves Me. There were about four verses to the song, which finished with, 'Backbenchers, to him we belong, because we are weak but he is strong.' The parliament, class of 1975—

Debate interrupted.