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

For those of us on the Labor side of the House, when we think about South Australian politics so often we think about Don Dunstan, that great social reformer who brought South Australia out of the 1950s and 1960s with a splash of sartorial flair and with an openness to social reforms that reflected the social change of the 1960s. Don Dunstan was a unique political figure and the social reforms he put in place in South Australia presaged much of what the Whitlam government did.

Yet often sitting in Dunstan's shadows is John Bannon, who did for the economic side of South Australia what Don Dunstan did for the social side. He was the longest-serving Labor Premier of South Australia, and during the entirety of his 10 years as Premier he also held the position of Treasurer—an extraordinary feat. Some of his more notable achievements in expanding the economic potential of South Australia include winning the Grand Prix for Adelaide, establishing Australia's submarine industry, developing the River Torrens bank as an events and tourism precinct, converting part of the Adelaide railway station into a convention centre and facilitating the establishment of the Olympic Dam copper and uranium mine in 1988—I should say after a not inconsiderable effort on John's part to change Labor Party policy.

Those achievements meant that he was responsible for a substantial increase in the economic base of South Australia and for a significant rebound in its economy after the moribund economic situation it had been in in the early 1980s. He also recognised the importance of reducing the state's debt. But sadly, his important economic legacy was tarnished by the State Bank of South Australia crisis, something that would be indelibly associated with the Bannon government but events over which the Bannon government had little control. He again displayed the perseverance for which he was so well known. Despite knowing that it would damage his own political career, John Bannon acted with diligence and integrity during the host of inquiries which would eventually exonerate him.

He might, as a Shakespeare enthusiast, have been tempted to languish in tragedy following his resignation, but instead he remained an enthusiastic, active and productive member of Australian society. He became a director of the ABC, completed a PhD in Australian political history at Flinders University, received an honorary doctorate in law and research and lectured as an academic. He contributed until the very last, briefing the Prime Minister on federalism and attending the Australia day-night cricket match at the new Adelaide Oval just days before his passing.

As a fellow political runner, it would be remiss of me not to acknowledge John Bannon's extraordinary ability to combine marathon running with politics. He ran 28 Adelaide marathons, 11 of them in under three hours. I have got under three hours a couple of times but I will never get to John Bannon's pace. John's fastest marathon was two hours 44 minutes. That is a marathon pace which for part of the 20th century would have been the Australian record. He managed to maintain that personal discipline of getting out for a run whenever he could, and the grit and perseverance which is required to complete so many marathons at such a pace defined his political career. In a beautiful obituary in The Sydney Morning Herald, Mark Kenny wrote:

Even now when I'm grinding out the kilometres in Canberra, I often rely on something John Bannon once confided about distance training. He said when your body wants to stop, you can always go a bit further, and you will be glad you made that choice.

This was a choice that John Bannon made in his running but also a choice that he made in his economic reforms. He always chose to go that extra kilometre, to put in that extra bit of effort. South Australia and Australia as a whole are better for his policy achievements, and all of us as parliamentarians can learn from his example of tenacity, effort and individual perseverance. I express my condolences to his family and acknowledge a fallen giant of Australian politics. John Bannon, rest in peace.

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

I rise to speak on this statement in respect of the life of John Bannon, the Premier of South Australia, a personal friend, a long-term Labor staffer in the Whitlam government, President of the Labor Party and great force for political stability in my home state of South Australia. I first met John before the 1982 South Australian election, when he became Premier. I first met him at The Workers Club in Whyalla, where he was campaigning in favour of our new local candidate, Frank Blevins, who went on to become Deputy Premier of South Australia and one of that state's most significant treasurers in the terrible and difficult days following the collapse of the State Bank of South Australia.

John was a deeply pragmatic man. He was thoughtful, caring and kind. He had a cheeky sense of humour and a voracious appetite for work. He led the debate at our national conference in 1982 to reform a substantial area of our party platform and then took that debate up again at the 1984 national conference here in Canberra, at what we then called the Lakeside Hotel, when the Labor Party adopted its three-mines uranium policy. John's speech at that conference centred on the importance of nuclear power, the role that South Australia could play in the nuclear cycle and, importantly, the damage done by acid rain in northern Europe and in northern America and the importance therefore of a technology-based energy-generation shift to deal with the climatic catastrophe that was being created by acid rain fallout. John engaged in that uranium debate with a fullness of spirit, an openness and a deep democratic belief that the party could make the hardest judgements in the best way.

The decision in South Australia to progress Roxby Downs was a massive decision. The decision in South Australia by the Bannon government to support the development of Roxby Downs continues to have very important implications. The reality is that Roxby remains the heart of the economic growth opportunity for South Australia, producing copper, gold, silver and uranium. John Bannon was also Premier at the time of the approval of the Cooper Basin liquids project to pipe liquids from the Cooper Basin into the northern Spencer Gulf and then for those liquids to meet international markets. It was an insightful, difficult set of decisions inherited from a very capable former government and implemented with great skill by the Bannon government.

The development of the Grand Prix in Adelaide brought to Adelaide a highly uncharacteristic sense of excitement and fizz. It took South Australia into a world that I do not believe South Australians had ever believed could be theirs, and that was a world of being popular, of being energetic and of having a bit of a difference about you. South Australia had become somewhat a bit staid and a bit stale, and the Bannon government gave it new life.

The transition in the Labor Party from the deeply reformist and flamboyant leadership of Dunstan to the more cautious, careful and suited Bannon government was something that we all noted. On occasions, as much as Young Labor people like me adored Don Dunstan, the transition to Bannon was something that we watched carefully and thoughtfully. And Bannon becomes one of those significant economic leaders on the Labor side of politics balancing fairness and economic responsibility in an energetic way providing the foundation stone for a long-term government.

Bannon was also, of course, the chief of staff for Clyde Cameron, who was Whitlam's Labour minister. Bannon was on deck the day when Gough Whitlam sacked Clyde Cameron. I had cause to reflect late last year, with Bannon, on that event. Bannon did not tell me how sick he was, and indeed just on the eve of Christmas I received my annual Christmas card from John and Angela.

He wrote his Christmas cards even though he knew how deeply sick he was. He prioritised his friendships, his relationships and a simple gesture such as a Christmas card at that time becomes a towering gesture from a man who was saying goodbye to those of us who were important to him.

John continued to carry a major role nationally until his death. The Prime Minister remarked on that and, I think, at John's funeral the wonderful comments from Ian McLachlan on John's role in the South Australian Cricket Association and the formation of a sensible arrangement around the magnificent rebuild of the Adelaide Oval is something that should inform sports administrators in all states—cricket administrators, in particular—and the Australian Football League and the government of Western Australia in their consideration of the football stadium in Western Australia.

One of the really interesting things that Ian McLachlan said was that he had met with John in the days prior to John's death and that John had spoken to him about the nature of the funeral and the arrangements and the celebration of his life. John had requested that both his cricket bat and cricket ball be on the stage during the eulogies at the wake for the former Premier. Ian agreed that it was entirely appropriate that John's cricket ball should be on the stage.

His cricket ball had been John's favoured weapon in cricket—although, as one would expect of John Bannon, he was not a fast bowler; he was a very good slow bowler and a highly successful slow bowler. Ian McLachlan, a former minister in the Howard government, made mention of the very spectacular bowling figures that John had continued to obtain as an experienced cricketer in the older leagues in South Australia. However, Ian was mystified by John's desire to have his cricket bat on the stage. Ian had gone back and done the calculations with the ball and realised that John's average at taking a wicket was extremely respectable—about a wicket every 17 runs. But, with the bat, John had scored—over the course of the previous 30 years—only two runs, on average, at each outing. Ian made the observation to John that he was not much of a batsman. John took umbrage at the fact that Ian had done the calculation and concluded that it wasn't two runs per innings that he had made with the bat; it was actually 2.05. I believe that correction should be on the record.

John was a terrific man—a man of humour, a man of passion, a man of great differences. He was a man who brought to my party a deep sense of obligation and a deep sense of accountability. When the State Bank of South Australia collapsed, John took it all on himself. It was not John's fault, but it was appropriate that the head of a government should act like a head of a government and take all of the accountabilities for the decisions that could be anchored back to that government. John was both very old-fashioned, proper and very principled but he did take it on himself to take more responsibility for those decisions than ever any head of government should have had to have done.

John was a terrific man, a wonderful friend, an outstanding president of my party and an enduring Premier of South Australia, whose institutions will last and whose legacy to that state will be greatly appreciated for generations to come, if only because of the great decision that he made to ensure that Roxby Downs has a terrific future.

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

I believe it is important in this place that we pause and take time to acknowledge those who have made a tremendous contribution to our nation and our political movement, and I firmly believe that Hon. Dr John Charles Bannon AO was one such man.

It was clear from an early age that John Bannon was going to make a significant contribution to public life. At university he was an active student, co-editor of the student university newspaper and president of the student's council as well as the Australian Union of Students. He plunged himself into student and university life.

He was, as the member for Brand has observed, an adviser during the tumultuous Whitlam years—he was the chief of staff to Whitlam minister Clyde Cameron. I had the opportunity of talking to Rodney Cavalier who, in a very Rodney way, had taken copious notes, only Hansard could be envious of, of John's funeral and wake on 21 December—I will have more to say about those notes and observations of Rodney during my contribution. Rodney observed, when I spoke to him earlier, that John was a committed Christian. However, he was never certain whether he loved Christ more than he loved cricket. He loved both of them with a deep, deep passion.

He cut his teeth as an adviser during the Whitlam years and, no doubt, that influenced his approach to government when he received the honour of being elected the Premier of South Australia. At the end of the South Australian parliament in 1977, he was a cabinet member within just one year. Only four years after that, he had returned to Labor, Labor to government, as their leader. It was, in anyone's language, a meteoric rise.

He remains South Australia's longest-serving premier and his achievements profoundly and continue to affect the state that he loved so much. During his leadership, we saw the introduction of submarine building in South Australia, a legacy that Labor—state and federal—remains committed to preserving. As the Prime Minister and the member for Maribyrnong said yesterday: he was the father of the nation's submarine industry. His primary concern was always to build a solid economic base for the state of South Australia, because he understood that, with a strong economic base, it could provide economic opportunities for those who were not born with them. He focused heavily on economic development of the state, opening up new opportunities and new investment.

Many years later, as a young man, I travelled throughout the country, including to South Australia, and worked at the grand prix, a fixture that was brought to Adelaide and truly put that international event and that city on the map. He saw the creation of the Adelaide Convention Centre and he established the Olympic Dam copper and uranium mine. He promoted the arts and tourism within those sectors and within South Australia.

In relation to the Olympic Dam uranium mine, it probably may not be obvious to many of us today but, at the time, these were incredibly controversial issues, including incredibly controversial issues within the Australian Labor Party. I think, whichever side of the argument you were on—I happened to have been on a different side of the argument to John Bannon—everyone has to stand back and admire the way he managed the difficult politics, both internal and public politics, of that particular issue.

This was all a part of his determination to make Adelaide a modern city that could lure international and national investments, and big events. His urban renewal projects reinvigorated Adelaide's inner suburbs and, under his reign, South Australia became, I think everyone would agree, more bolder, more interesting and innovative, more energetic and willing to seize opportunities.

He understood the state needed to diversify and become open to new ideas. The state is richer and the country is richer for his legacy. He was a strong and convincing leader, as the member for Brand has observed, and the Prime Minister and Leader of the Opposition observed in their eulogies yesterday.

He was, to both friends and critics, one of the most influential South Australian political figures of the post-Playford era. He never shied away from responsibility. After the collapse of the state bank—as the member for Brand has observed, he was not responsible for—he maintained, that as the Premier of the state, the buck stopped with him—even though others certainly played a more significant part in its crisis.

His friend Michael Jacobs has said that he 'absorbed all the blame, all the shame and the humiliation, all the pain and the anguish of this catastrophe' that took so long for the state to recover from. Hardly anyone else put their hand up to admit their responsibility, but John never shied away from his public responsibility. He never complained about the injustice of it all.

I am indebted to Rodney Cavalier and his notes from the funeral and the wake. He writes of a very moving story that was relayed at the wake by a former minister in this place, Ian McLachlan, and a long-time friend of John Bannon and his family. And he wonders about whether the story of John's young brother Nicholas—who tragically died at the age of 16 during a family bushwalking catastrophe in the Flinders Ranges—was a motivating force for John's sense of responsibility, both public and private. Ian McLachlan was part of the search party that was looking for John's younger brother at the time. And he says:

We failed because we looked in the wrong places and we didn't look high enough. The search involved one of the largest deployments of volunteer and professional rescue staff that Australia has ever known.

It was a couple of years later before the remains of John's brother were found. Many people have retold this story. John himself did not talk about it—even to those who were closest to him—but many who knew John and knew the story often thought that this was a part of the motivating force that moved the man.

Following his career in politics, John dived into the world of academia. He did not want to leave the state that he loved, and it is a sign of his dedication and humility that he opted to stay in South Australia and continue to contribute. He gained a PhD in political history at Flinders University where he studied his beloved state's transition from a colony to a state.

He accepted an appointment to the ABC Board in 1994, which was his first foray into any form of office after his term as Premier. Following that, he was appointed by Ian McLachlan to the South Australian Cricket Association Board and the board of Cricket of Australia. He was active in this role until the end. He saw through a number of milestones in his final weeks that would have made him tremendously proud of his state. He was there to see the first Australian day-night test cricket at the new Adelaide Oval—a spectacle that South Australians were incredibly proud of.

John's ongoing battle with illness did not prevent him from continuing to speak publicly. On 3 November—only weeks before he passed away—he addressed the 30-year anniversary lunch of Adelaide's first grand prix. And just before his death he spoke passionately about his father, an artist, Charles Bannon, while opening a public exhibition of his works in St Peters Town Hall.

He will be remembered—in this place and elsewhere throughout the nation—as an honourable man, a caring father, a leader of integrity, a visionary intent on progress and a decent individual who refused to shy away from responsibility when things got tough. I pay my condolences to the family of John Bannon. His friends, and his memories and his deeds will live long after him.

Tony Zappia (Makin, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Manufacturing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is a privilege to be able to speak on this condolence motion with respect to John Bannon. I knew John Bannon and I can well recall his ascendancy into politics in South Australia and ultimately becoming Premier. He was not only a good Premier, but he was a thoroughly decent man who, regrettably, will be remembered more so for the collapse of the State Bank of South Australia than for the many good deeds that he led South Australia through and, indeed, for the many good deeds he did for all Australians. Much has been said about John since his passing. Stories have been written in the media, words have been said in the parliament and at his funeral service. And, to some extent, through those words there has been some balance—and I believe some rightful justice—brought to the legacy that he left as a national leader.

John Bannon won government back for Labor in 1982, after a bad election in 1979 when Don Dunstan stepped down and then handed the reins to Des Corcoran. I want to come back to that a bit later. But I want to talk about another aspect of the 1993 state election disaster for Labor. It was indeed a landslide election against Labor, with Labor losing some 12 seats at the time and Labor's vote dropping to, I think on a two-party preferred basis, less than 40 per cent. Indeed, given that at the previous election in 1989, Labor only secured 22 out of 47 seats and was governing with the assistance of two independents, it was always going to be a tough call for Labor to win the 1993 election. I would suggest that the additional fact of having been in office for 11 years would have contributed to that; it was much the case that, after 11 years, the community was inevitably calling for a change of government. But putting that to one side, the State Bank disaster was itself a tragedy, not just for John Bannon and the state government at the time but also, I believe, for South Australia for many years to come; and indeed, perhaps even for the nation. I will explain why.

When John Bannon saw that the State Bank was in financial crisis, he took responsibility as Premier and as Treasurer. He said the buck stopped with him, and quite rightly not only took responsibility; he was prepared to stand down as Premier of South Australia.—that in itself showed the integrity of the man. But it went further than that: he then subsequently stepped down as the member for Ross Smith, the seat he had held since 1977. So the State Bank issue ended John Bannon's political career. He was only 50 years of age at the time, and certainly had a lot more that he could have contributed to the state, had he remained in politics. The next step was that, stepping down as leader, he handed over the leadership to Lynn Arnold, who was another thoroughly decent South Australian. He was a great orator, he was an honest parliamentarian, and he had outstanding political talent. Lynn accepted the leadership, in my view, knowing full well that he could not win the 1993 election, but in the hope that through his leadership he would contain the losses of the South Australian Labor Party. I suspect he knew that if he lost the 1993 election it could also spell the end of his political career.

The 1993 election was a disaster for Labor. It lost the election. It lost badly, and Lynn Arnold did step down as Premier, and ultimately resigned his seat in parliament as well. So the State Bank affair not only cost John Bannon his political leadership in South Australia but it also cost us Lynn Arnold, who in my view was an equally competent leader that never ever got the opportunity to serve out a term as Premier and to deliver what I think he could have delivered for South Australia. I knew Lynn very well, and so I can speak about him very much from my own knowledge of his personal characteristics. I know that Lynn would have also made a great South Australian premier, had he been given a better opportunity to lead the people of South Australia. Lynn indeed went on to serve this country and South Australia. He took up an international regional leadership role with World Vision straight afterwards, and then came back to South Australia and for years was chief executive at Anglicare SA where, again, he did a terrific job, particularly in the social justice area. Finally, he studied theology and now serves as a minister of religion with the Anglican Church. In fact, he participated in the funeral service for John Bannon at St Peter's Cathedral. And so Lynn did continue to serve South Australia, but in a different capacity.

But there is another aspect to the State Bank disaster about which little has been said. It not only cost South Australia two great statesmen, but it also changed public policy in South Australia—public policy changes that still resonate today and are still relevant. What we saw was that the State Bank disaster caused governments to get out of government-owned banking in this country. That in turn left the banking sector to the private banks. Since that happened, we have seen that private bank profits have skyrocketed. Indeed, the Commonwealth Bank, which was sold a few years later as well—in the late nineties or at some stage in the nineties—from memory was sold for around $8 billion. The bank makes about $8 billion or more now each year. In other words, the bank was sold for about a year's profit in today's terms. But there were other assets sold. The point I make about that is that the government banks, in my view, were the best form of regulation in the marketplace. They controlled the excessive greed of today's big banks. Right now, there is a bill before parliament that we are debating about credit card fees—most credit cards being owned by the banks—where people are being gouged. That was not happening when government banks were also in the marketplace, because they acted as the honest broker in the market. And yes, they had to compete with the private banks; they did not have a monopoly. But they acted as the honest broker. That has all been lost.

We also saw a whole range of other government utilities and assets being sold and privatised. It became a public policy trend. Those who pointed to governments being in the business of managing assets that were in themselves business assets argued that the governments had no place in the marketplace in managing those assets, and that governments were poor business managers. That argument has never been truly sustained. In South Australia, I know that when those who argued that governments were poor business managers were doing so, they were simultaneously eyeing off the very assets that they wanted the government to sell so that they could get their own hands on them. Assets like the electricity assets in South Australia, SA water, the Lotteries Commission, TAB, and so many others, were all sold off—all assets that were actually returning money to the government and to the people of South Australia. The same applied across the border in other states and at the national level.

So the State Bank collapse gave rise, momentum and argument to all those people who would argue that governments should be selling off business assets that they did not need to be in control of. The sale of those assets was, in my view, short-term gain for long-term pain. Today, state and federal governments are cash-strapped, and I believe that is partly because their previous revenue-raising streams have all been sold off. Imagine what the federal government's position would be today, if the billions of dollars that the Commonwealth Bank is making were going into Treasury instead. It would make a huge difference. But none of those assets are owned by governments any more, and so the very revenue streams that kept many of the state governments afloat in years gone by have now been lost. I believe that that is a contributing factor to the difficulties that state governments all find themselves in right now.

Whilst the State Bank stuck to its core business of housing lending, it actually did very well. It was only when the board members pushed the bank into risky commercial ventures that the bank got into difficulties. And that fallout continued—as we saw at the heart of the global financial crisis, when the Rudd government wanted to establish a building and construction bank. We heard the howls of another State Bank disaster coming loud and clear from coalition members opposite. The other point I want to make about the State Bank disaster is this: the State Bank was being overseen by a board of directors. On that board were people who had been appointed because of their so-called business expertise and experience. Those very people were, in my view, the ones that pushed the bank into the risky commercial ventures that ultimately got the bank into trouble. Yet those same board members seem to have slipped out of the limelight scot-free. In other words, we entrusted the management of the bank to a board; on the board there were people with the so-called commercial experience; and they were the ones who let us down. And yet nothing was ever said about them. John Bannon wore it all.

It is for those reasons that the John Bannon story is about more than just his contribution to South Australia—and perhaps to the nation—as a premier. His contribution, and what happened with the State Bank issue, had ramifications which extended right across the country and which still affect us today. I come back to John Bannon's own personal legacy. John was elected in 1977 for the seat of Ross Smith. It was a relatively safe seat in the inner northern suburbs—

Jane Prentice (Ryan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Member for Makin, could you try and wrap this up please? You are a bit over time.

Tony Zappia (Makin, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Manufacturing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will wrap up; thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. John Bannon became opposition leader in 1979, Premier and Treasurer in 1982, and then became South Australia's longest-serving premier. His most notable achievements were the Olympic Dam; the submarine project, which others have talked about; the Adelaide Convention Centre; the Adelaide Casino development; and the Formula One. He was indeed a person who shaped and changed South Australia. He was farewelled on 21 December at Saint Peter's Cathedral in a very fitting farewell service, and I pay my condolences to his family and friends.