Grant Chapman (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Exactly, Senator Minchin. Today’s Holden Calais compares favourably with any vehicle in the world, and it is a car which I am proud to drive. Such are the benefits of the practical application of the Liberal philosophy. Such are the massive changes that I have been privileged to play a role in over more than three decades since I first had the honour of serving in this parliament. I certainly hope that the Rudd Labor government will not halt the process of tariff reform.

It was a great privilege to retain the confidence and represent the people of Kingston for three terms. Being a member in a marginal seat demands strong local community engagement and an enormous amount of one-on-one assistance to constituents. I loved that work. The residents of Kingston rewarded that diligence with strong personal support, which enabled me to retain that seat despite swings in South Australia against the Fraser government in 1977 and especially in 1980. Even when I lost the seat in 1983, a strong personal vote was evident. According to figures from the Parliamentary Library, there was a net improvement of 4.9 per cent in the Liberal vote in Kingston compared with the state-wide Liberal vote over the period of my stewardship.

While politicians may be subject to some cynicism in the media, at the local level hard work and attention to constituents has its measurable rewards. Being part of restoring good government in 1975 after the Whitlam disaster was extremely satisfying. May I say to young political aspirants: the apparent longer term security of a relatively safe seat might beckon, but it will never give the satisfaction and the adrenaline rush of ripping a seat off your political opponents and holding it for a period. Indeed, I would say it is in the interests of our political system to direct young aspirants to marginal seats, where they can learn diligently to serve their constituents and prove their mettle before perhaps later moving to a safer seat.

There have been three great eras of the federal Liberal Party, originating with the overwhelming election victories, respectively, of 1949, 1975 and 1996. It has been a privilege for me to be part of two of those, with links to the third. When I was first elected, in 1975, the likes of Reg Wright, Sir William McMahon, Bruce Graham and one or two others, all veterans of the 1949 Liberal victory, were still here in the parliament. Like those 49ers, I suppose, by retiring in 2008 I am the last of the veterans of 1975, along with David Jull, who retired at the 2007 election, six or seven months ago. I am the last survivor of the ‘oncers’—that epithet hurled across the chamber from 1975 to 1977 by our Labor opponents. We proved them wrong. A couple of my Liberal-National colleagues lost their seats through major boundary changes but the rest of us returned in 1977 and enough of us again in 1980 to retain government. Being a oncer is a liberating experience. I commend it wholeheartedly to the Rudd government!

I was already a senator when our third great era began with the 1996 election. My work in the Senate for the last 21 years has been very fulfilling, especially the nearly 12 years in government. I believe my marginal seat lower house experience has helped me as a senator. It has reinforced the importance of staying in touch and engaging with constituents. That has remained a very satisfying part of my job, supplemented by detailed attention to issues and legislation through my work on committees. For the whole of my time in the Senate, until the last few months as a participating member, I have been a full member of the Senate Standing Committee on Economics or its predecessors and have tried to enhance my knowledge of some of the quite technical areas of tax and industry policy, in particular, coming under the jurisdiction of that committee.

Chairing the government members industry and resources committee, which at various stages also included small business, for the whole life of the Howard government provided the chance to make a practical difference by contributing to policy and legislation on these key sectors of the Australian economy. However, my most rewarding work has been as Chairman of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Corporations and Financial Services—again, for the whole period of the Howard government. The work of this committee has been in the quite technical area of Corporations Law and the regulatory framework for the provision of financial services. This is not glamorous stuff. The media does not find it sexy—except, on occasions perhaps, the Australian Financial Review. However, it was a privilege to work with Peter Costello on our reforms to give the Corporations Law stronger economic focus. Consistent with our Liberal philosophy, we introduced principles based, light-touch regulation of financial services while ensuring proper consumer protection. Even then it involved periodic battles, not always successful, to thwart the bureaucratic penchant for overregulation.

Our reforms have been of great importance in providing the regulatory framework which has undergirded Australia’s economic growth. A strong economy requires a robust but not excessively intrusive and bureaucratic regulatory framework for business, and that is what we have provided—a world-leading regulatory framework for corporations and financial services. It is far superior to those of the United Kingdom, the USA or other countries.

May I thank the several secretaries of the joint committee and its other staff for the support they gave me through this era. I also valued the input into and, except near election times, the multiparty cooperation on the work of this committee. Democrat Senator Andrew Murray was always helpful, while a number of ministers in the new Labor government contributed to the committee’s work: Senator Conroy, Senator Wong, Senator Sherry and Mr Bowen, to name a few—even Prime Minister Rudd for a time. Obviously, I trained them well.

Another example of the effective behind the scenes work which a backbench parliamentarian can do was my work in persuading my good friend, the then chairman of the United States Senate Committee on Finance, Senator Chuck Grassley, to give timely approval to the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement. The agreement had to be approved by his committee to come into force but was stalled in joint consideration with several other free trade agreements. Although it had support for approval, it was Senator Grassley’s intent that this should not happen until 2005, in concert with the several other free trade agreements. It was as a direct result of my discussions with him in mid-2004 that he agreed to separate the Australian free trade agreement and have it approved and in place before our 2004 election—a direct benefit to Australia from a longstanding personal friendship, which demonstrates the importance of relationships in politics, even at the international level.

My other great satisfaction as a senator has been the opportunity that it has given me as a city resident—but the son of generations of farmers and with continuing involvement as a farm owner—to represent the rural and regional people of South Australia as well as representing metropolitan people. My empathy has always been with rural communities. I have always had rural issues front of mind. I hope I have been effective in speaking up for the bush. From July I look forward to spending at least part of my time re-engaging more practically with my rural roots. I hope I do not cause my sharefarmer Glen Wandel too many ulcers.

I owe a debt of gratitude to the Liberal Party for regularly re-endorsing me as one of its federal parliamentary candidates over the last 33 years. In particular, my thanks go to present and past members of the South Australian Liberal Party State Council for endorsing me for the Senate on six successive occasions, including twice for my first election—for the half Senate team in 1986, and then in 1987, when the double dissolution intervened and I had to go through the preselection process all over again before being first elected.

I thank my early mentors and many friends and supporters over the years—those both inside and outside the party. I will not name them because there is always the danger of leaving someone significant out. They know who they are. Nevertheless, I must mention my father’s friend the late, great Bert Kelly, the ‘Modest Member’, who for years fought a lone battle against the idiocy of tariff protection. He was a great mentor during my school and university days and in my early years in this parliament, seeking to keep me—mostly successfully—on the path of economic rectitude.

However, he might be sceptical about one of my as yet unachieved goals during the past 15 years, which has been to see a viable space industry develop here in Australia with some limited but targeted government support which recognises that this is one of the few areas where market forces alone will not achieve lift-off. Nowhere in the world is there a viable space industry without government support. Earlier this year I was successful in initiating a Senate economics committee inquiry on space, which is currently underway. I trust it will result in positive government initiatives for this key sector on which Australia is so dependent.

I am indebted to my extended family for the love and support they have given me over this long period of time and to my late parents, Hedley and Edith, for the start in life they gave me. My father was national President of the Australian Wheat Growers Federation in the late 1940s, at the time of the establishment of the Australian Wheat Board and postwar orderly marketing. Undoubtedly, it was his involvement in agripolitics which stimulated my initial interest in politics. I trust he would have accepted the reforms to wheat marketing being debated this week. During one of my early Kingston campaigns, Dad was the designated driver of my campaign truck. He drove so many miles we thought the Transport Workers Union might tap him on the shoulder for a membership fee, under the bad old days of compulsory union membership.

My sister and brother-in-law, Lyn and Roger Goldsworthy, have also been a great support, along with their children—and it is great to see Lyn here in the gallery tonight. Without more than a quarter of a century of love and support from Sally and our children, Alexander and Jane, fulfilling this vocation would have been much more difficult. It is sad that Sally is not here tonight, but she was always with me, side by side and step by step. It is a real thrill to have Alex and Jane here tonight.

Politics demands enormous sacrifices from families. One example I recall is when Alexander came home from school as a little tacker, saying his mates had taken his cricket bat because their families’ taxes had paid for it. And I know Sally suffered barbs from some people regarding my views on certain issues. Despite all that, and my absences from home that federal politics inevitably requires, Alex and Jane have grown into trouble-free, well-educated, well-adjusted, sensible young adults in the early stages of their careers and adult life experiences, with bright futures. It is a great credit to Sally, who was mother and father during my many absences.

I hope my initiatives in a couple of what I might call ‘extracurricular activities’ have helped to make this place more tolerable by improving relations between individuals across party lines. The first of those is the more active role played by the federal Parliamentary Christian Fellowship. Although it was established in 1966, when I first came here in 1975 the fellowship was only occasionally active, organising the annual church service to commence the parliamentary year and an occasional lunch or dinner. After attending, and being inspired by, the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington DC in early 1981 and also the regular weekly fellowship breakfasts shared by American senators and congressmen, I was appointed secretary of the fellowship here and immediately proposed that we meet regularly for breakfast. This was welcomed by colleagues from all sides and has been maintained ever since.

Apart from providing a regular opportunity for colleagues to share their faith, I believe this more active fellowship has become a civilising influence in this hothouse. I know it has made me more forgiving of those opposite. I am sure the new president, Senator Ursula Stephens, who was in the chamber earlier, will continue the good work of the fellowship.

The other more civilising influence in more recent years has been the establishment of the parliamentary sports club. This took longer to get going. I was first contacted by a gentleman by the name of Andy Turnbull in about 1993, seeking participation by the Australian parliament in the Parliamentary Rugby World Cup, accompanying the real World Cup in 1995. Andy was a businessman associated with sporting activity in the United Kingdom parliament and was referred to me as the convenor of the parliamentary cricket team by then Speaker Steve Martin. Although my background was not rugby but the far superior code of Aussie Rules, I sought to establish a team among my colleagues but failed to do so for both the 1995 and 1999 world cups.

Persistent and enthusiastic, Andy Turnbull contacted me again in early 2001, and I was successful in organising a parliamentary team to play against a touring United Kingdom and Ireland Parliamentary Lions rugby team here in Canberra. Then he followed up in early 2003 with the message: ‘Do you know the Rugby World Cup is to be held in Australia later this year?’ I said, ‘I’m vaguely aware of it, but I am not a real rugby fan.’ But he insisted that not only did the Australian parliament have to enter a team in the Parliamentary Rugby World Cup but we actually had to host that particular event.

At last I was able to enthuse sufficient of my colleagues to put a team together, which at its first involvement in that event, which had been going on for several previous world cups, won the Parliamentary Rugby World Cup. In the meantime, Andy Turnbull and his family have made their home in Australia as very welcome business migrants. And, at my suggestion that colleagues may be interested in interparliamentary contest across a wider range of sports than rugby, he has become the driving force in organising contests, at this stage between the Australian, UK, New Zealand and state parliaments across a wide range of sports—even a revival of the long-dead snooker competition in recent weeks. In the process we have raised more than $150,000 for charity.

I take some pride in my persistence in earlier years, among less than eager colleagues, but all of us who now can participate owe a real debt of gratitude to Andy Turnbull for the enormous effort he has put in in this regard. I have no doubt that, apart from greater fitness, we are all benefiting from the more cordial cross-party atmosphere created by participation in parliamentary sport—not to mention the benefit of another angle to our relationships with several foreign parliaments. Parliamentarians do work hard, and we are entitled to a reasonable quality of life. For those who enjoy it, parliamentary sport assists in that. I look forward to seeing Julie Bishop and Julia Gillard on the same netball team!

I came to politics from a background in the corporate world, although it was many years ago. I understand systems. But after going through my party’s preselection process on a number of occasions, I have remained mystified by the relatively amateurish way all parties go about selecting candidates. Even as long ago as 1970, when I was selected by the Shell Company as a graduate junior executive, I went through a rigorous interview process with senior company executives. There was detailed psychological, aptitude and IQ testing and a further interview, conducted by a professional psychologist. And, yes, I still got the job! This is standard practice today for most executive appointments, usually conducted by specialist human resource consultants. Surely, selecting those to be entrusted with setting the framework for our whole society as members of parliament is at least as important as selecting company executives? You would never guess it.

Gaining preselection can be as simple as meeting the relevant voting delegates, one on one or in groups, having a chat over a cup of tea, making a speech and answering questions at a preselection meeting. Certainly, that is an important part of the democratic process. However, I believe it would be highly beneficial in ensuring the preselection of talented candidates from all parties if those voting delegates were also equipped with independent professional appraisals of each candidate. It might even identify candidates with anger management problems. No longer having a vested interest in preselections, I now advocate this enhancement of the selection process to choose parliamentarians! What applies to candidate selection should apply in even greater measure to ministerial appointments. A Prime Minister should have available this sort of professional advice about prospective members of his ministry.

The other mystifying thing about parliaments is the lack of professional development training once we are here. Again, parliaments could take a lead from the corporate world. It would be rare for corporate executives, particularly early on, to go through a year without undertaking some type of professional development or skill training. Yet in our parliaments this simply does not happen—perhaps with the exception of very occasional party-provided training in media spin. Parliament should take the responsibility for providing a range of continuing professional development courses to enhance the capacity of its members.

Earlier I thanked my family, friends and supporters. Over the years I have also benefited from the support of a number of loyal and competent staff. I thank all who have worked as my staff during this long journey. Some of them I must have trained well—they have gone on to bigger and better things as ministerial staff, in the private sector and, in the case of one, Di Laidlaw, as a minister in a state Liberal government. I pay particular tribute to my two longest serving loyal staff in Di Hocking, who has been my electorate secretary for the past 18 years and is sitting in the adviser’s booth, and Andrea Bell, now Bennett, an early electorate secretary who later returned for an extended period as an able research assistant. May I also thank all of the parliamentary staff, transport officers, Comcar drivers and departmental staff who have helped to make my task as a parliamentarian so much easier over the years.

It has, as I said, been a fulfilling period in my life, with a number of highlights to which I have referred. I will mention just a couple of others: my three years as the government party’s representative at the Inter-Parliamentary Union Council, being appointed by the United Nations to its panel of eminent persons to combat desertification and being recognised by the Chilean government with the highest honour that it bestows on foreigners. It has been a long but fulfilling journey—standing here tonight after 21 years in the Senate, the journey of a generation. It leaves me behind Senator Watson, who spoke earlier and is also retiring, and that living legend, Ron Boswell, as the third-longest serving among current senators. Added to my 7¼ years in the House of Representatives, this makes me the third longest in service amongst all current parliamentarians, behind my long-time friend Philip Ruddock and, again, Senator Watson. Indeed, the Parliamentary Library tells me that I retire as the longest serving non-Labor federal parliamentarian ever elected from South Australia since Federation. Senator Patterson said she had spent, I think, a third of her life in politics. I think I have spent about half of my life in politics, or in this parliament, and virtually all of my adult life. So it has been a long but a great journey. Not many people have the chance to live the dreams of their youth. I missed out on the one to play test cricket for Australia, but thanks to the Liberal Party and the people of South Australia I have been able to live this one. I trust I have given them some service.

I wish my continuing colleagues all the best for their individual and collective futures and, particularly those on this side, success in returning to government at the next election. I will be there to help.