Chris Evans (WA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source

Yes, you get less for murder. It is a tribute to your contribution. Without hyperbole, George has been one of the most significant labour movement figures of the last 20 years. He has been a very significant figure. He has held the highest elected offices in the trade union movement. He has provided national leadership inside the Australian Labor Party. Although we do not talk of such things anymore, he has been a leader of the Left of the Labor Party and the Left inside the labour movement for a very long time and a dominant figure in that movement.

As George pointed out, he has done it tough through the dark years in opposition. I hasten to add that he did not do it as tough as some of us but it is a shame that he has not enjoyed longer in government. He played a very critical role in opposition. I say this as a former whip, but it actually is a very key function in opposition in terms of maintaining morale and organisation through what were very dark days for us. I think the current opposition are going through some of those days themselves and learning that they are not pleasant. It can be a very tough time. The role of the whip and the role of providing leadership in the Labor Party are very important. George provided that leadership. I know that when I became Leader of the Opposition in the Senate I very much appreciated the role he played—his good-heartedness, his willingness to provide support and his willingness to jolly the troops along when sometimes they were being a little on the fractious side or needed counsel. While George talks of golf and travel, I think he has more to contribute. I think the labour movement and public life would benefit from his continuing to make some contribution.

He made a correct decision when he married a Western Australia girl, Kerrie, and we wish her all the best with George. George, your contribution to the parliament has been a significant one and your contribution to the labour movement has been an even more significant one over a very long period of time. It is something which you should be very proud of. I know your colleagues are very proud of you and your contribution. We hope that your post-Senate career is rewarding and your lifestyle is also rewarding. I understand that your golf handicap does need a lot of work! All the best.

I would like to also acknowledge Senator Linda Kirk, from South Australia. Linda, as she indicated, has only had one term with us in the Senate, but it has been an impressive one. Just listening to Linda tonight reinforced the view I had of her. Linda had a strong background as a constitutional lawyer and a legal academic, and she has applied those skills in her contributions in the Senate in a very consistent way. She is one of those members of parliament who have used every opportunity to advance her policy interests and the things she believed in. Some of us can be a bit erratic, particularly when we have been made shadow minister for various things, but Linda is one of those people whose contribution, if you look back over her six years in the Senate, has been consistent, principled and effective. I think she can be very proud of that.

Linda referred to her time on the Senate Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs. I also served on that committee for a while, but I did not have nearly the interest that Linda had in those issues. Her capacity to get into those issues has been very important. She also served as deputy opposition whip, which is more of a punishment, but we do appreciate the contribution she made in that role.

I was just thinking today about Linda’s contribution to the campaign for justice for David Hicks. Her support for refugees when it was politically unpopular and unwise, for victims of child abuse, for the rights of women, for a republic, for legal reform more generally and her support for quite controversial social issues like stem cell research showed consistency, commitment and a set of principles that do her great credit. She referred to the fact that her political career was impacted by the stands she took. I think what most impressed me and her colleagues, whether they agreed with those stands or not, was the strength of character that she showed through them and how she never looked like flinching. People had very strong views either way, but they did appreciate that strength of character.

I think that is not widely understood outside the parliament because there are lots of loud, boofy blokes like me in the parliament and people do not necessarily recognise that some of the quieter members of parliament, some of whom are not very good at personal promotion, bring strength of character and a way of handling themselves to the place. Linda has certainly been one of those quiet, effective, hardworking members of parliament. One only thinks of the contribution she has made when reviewing all the things she has been involved with over that time and the principles that she has brought to bear. I think those admirable personal qualities and a tremendous intellectual capacity will serve her well in post-Senate life. She very much has a further contribution to make. I hope it is one which she enjoys and I wish her well for the future. She made the point that she appreciated the respect of her peers. I think I speak for all of her peers when I say that she does enjoy our respect and we do wish her all the best for the future. We know she will have a strong contribution to make in whatever else she does.

I want to make a couple of remarks about Senator Ruth Webber, who is also retiring but has not spoken tonight because she will be doing that next week when her parents are here. There is no show without Judy and Daryl, and I look forward to them joining us. It gives me the opportunity to get in first, but as always Ruth will get the last word, which is the way she likes it. During her time here, Ruth has not only been opposition deputy whip but also been tremendously engaged with committee work and the causes about which she is passionate. I have to be careful about what I say, because Ruth has more dirt on me than I have on her, but that comes from Ruth being a former employee of mine. Ruth actually worked as a whip’s clerk in this place. It was a tremendous thing that she came back into this place as a senator. I do not know why she chose to come back after that experience. She did not develop much respect for other senators while she was working as a whip’s clerk, but she managed to work on that.

I have known Ruth for a very long period of time, so I guess I have a good perspective on her career. I am very proud of the way that she has worked her way up, if you like, through what was at the time a very male-dominated system that did not necessarily like women with attitude—and Ruth has always been a woman with attitude and strength of conviction. I think the Labor Party is better at coping with that now, but it is still not great. Ruth’s career has included working as an electorate officer, as a party official, as a ministerial adviser to a state government and as a senator, so she has a huge breadth of experience in the labour movement and in politics. That will serve her well in whatever she chooses to do in the future. It is a great training ground.

I remember the first time Ruth came to my notice. It was at a state conference. I think it was prewar; it was a very long time ago.