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

Well, it could be argued, I think, that the Democrats saved the former Labor government from themselves on a number of occasions. Certainly they saved the Howard government from themselves on a range of occasions as well. Anyway, as I say, the historians will debate these issues for years to come. But I did want to note that your colleagues in this place particularly respect the role of the Democrats—both the four retiring senators and those over the time of the party’s participation in the Senate—as very serious legislators and as people who have made a real contribution to getting better outcomes and better legislation.

The other thing that is worth noting is that the Democrats have done a lot for the representation of women in Australian politics, both in terms of the candidate selection over the years and in electing women as leaders on a number of occasions. That has helped change the face of politics; it is something that the major parties have come to adopt and the Democrats did provide a lead in that. That also helped to contribute to the transformation of the Senate so that it is not just made up of middle-aged grey men like me and Senator Minchin but there is some variety of gender, political attitude, experience and ability.

I would like to make a couple of remarks about the individual contributions of each of the senators. Firstly, Senator Natasha Stott Despoja: Natasha is probably the most publicly recognisable senator ever. I am sure that that is a huge benefit and a mighty curse as well. She is probably even more publicly recognisable than John Gorton, Mal Colston or Brian Harradine. When she came in, Natasha made politics interesting, vibrant and sexy. All sorts of people who took no interest in politics suddenly took an interest in politics. Natasha was obviously much more media friendly than most of us. Be it with Doc Marten boots or other media angles, she actually got to then argue serious political points by making herself more interesting and making herself available to the press. Unfortunately, I think Senator Stott Despoja after a while suffered from the sort of tall poppy syndrome that seems to apply in Australian politics. A lot of people went out of their way to try and tear her down. It is unfortunately the case that that seems to be much more prevalent as an attitude towards women in politics. We still have not overcome that particular problem. Nevertheless, Senator Stott Despoja has had a tremendous career.

I first met Natasha when I came into politics. Natasha used to put out her famous calendar of senators and I was very proud when I made the first calendar—I was then a new senator and was a younger, thinner, darker haired bloke—as the August entry. Natasha found out that I used to be in the firefighters union, so I was ‘Hot August Nights’! It is very cute. And the line was, ‘Come on, Chris, light my fire.’ One, she had a sense of humour and, two, it is a very long time since I lit anybody’s fire! But that was a sign that she could be a serious political player and also enjoy politics and make it interesting. That has been one of Natasha’s great strengths. She has a great record of achievement in this place. She is known as passionate and committed, as a serious politician who has made a huge mark and as a very decent person.

I acknowledge that her decision to go in a different direction must have been difficult, but I know how committed she is to her children—although clearly Ian is proof that love is blind. Talk about the Yin and the Yang! His professing of love for Maggie Thatcher I thought was just the last straw! But it is sad to see Natasha leave this place. We will be poorer for her loss. But I also know that she has a lot more to contribute to public life. Getting the work-family balance is difficult, but I am sure that Natasha will continue to make a contribution. It would be a great loss to Australian public life if she did not and I wish Natasha, Ian and the kids all the best.

I have grown fond of Andrew Bartlett. He arrived as a Goth and animal liberationist with DLP roots, and I thought, ‘What the hell do you make of this bloke?’ Then, in his first speech, on the 11th of the 11th—you know, he was always one for making a mark—he spoke of his admiration for Brian Harradine. So you have the Goth, the animal liberationist with DLP roots in his first speech talking about his admiration for Brian Harradine! And, you know, no-one could quite figure him out. I must say that 12 years or so later, or whatever it is, I still have not figured him out. But he has developed into a very, very good senator.

There is no-one more conscientious about his parliamentary work. He spoke often—some would say too often! You could say that he was not always the most inspiring speaker, but he was persistent, consistent and principled and earned the respect of his colleagues as a result. I know he used to be very well prepared with legislation. I did committee stages with him and he is a very serious, well-regarded parliamentarian. As he indicated in his speech tonight, he has an enormous commitment to Indigenous affairs, to immigration and to a range of other matters. I know his commitment in those areas and to those causes when there was not much interest in or public support for them was difficult, and that does him proud.

I was struck when I was in the chamber earlier in the week when he gave a speech on immigration. Again, it was just off a few notes and it struck me how balanced, insightful and positive the speech was. I learnt something from it and I thought it was a sign of the experience that he has and the development and the knowledge that he has gained—and the fact that he was still working right up to the last days. I know that he had a very difficult personal time at one stage in his career, but the way he fought back from that is a great credit to him. He has made a serious contribution to this place. Again, he is someone with a lot more to contribute, I am sure, and we wish him and also his family well.

Senator Lyn Allison is also leaving this place, and I know how committed Lyn is to politics and public affairs. I have always been impressed by her quiet dignity. When all around are screaming and shouting, Lyn sticks to the issues and plays the ball, not the woman. She takes a keen interest in public policy outcomes. Whether it be committee work or work in the parliament, her real interest and commitment to policy and policy outcomes comes through. She is always focused on the underprivileged, those who do not enjoy the same opportunities as others in life, and always in the key areas such as education, the environment, health and the rights of women. Lyn has made a huge contribution to those issues in the parliament and in the broader public debate.

She referred to collaboration over women’s health. I think there was an interesting development in the parliament: the cross-party contribution of bolshie women who came into this place. I know my partner was very pleased with the development. I am not sure some of the blokes in this place were but generally it was, again, a sign of a development in the Senate, an evolution in the Senate, another interesting development in the way the Senate can and may operate.

Lyn, you have been a tremendous advocate for the Democrats. You have been a strong advocate for them in really difficult times. I think the grace with which you have led the Democrats, when you knew things were coming to a bad end—at least temporarily, if not long term—does you great credit. Your contribution has been appreciated and you hold the respect of Labor senators. We wish you well.

Mr President, I hate to keep banging on but, given that Senator Kerry Nettle snuck in at lunchtime to try to avoid people talking about her, I take this opportunity in the last couple of minutes allocated to me to say something about her contribution. I know that doing it in the same speech about the Democrats will cause major offence to either or both parties but—