Nick Minchin (SA, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source

‘Incentivation’ was pretty good. It will be remembered, but it was probably not quite as effective. It is fair to say that slogan has encapsulated the approach that the Democrats have brought to their role in the Senate, and I commend them on that. They have generally taken their balance of power role very seriously and have practised to great effect one of the great arts of politics: the art of compromise, which is required of us all and much more so of us senators than our colleagues in the House of Representatives, who do not know what it means.

As a former coalition cabinet minister, I want to place on record my thanks to at least some of the Democrats—with the notable exception of a couple who are here tonight—for their ultimate support for our modified new tax system including the goods and services tax. I acknowledge the enormous damage that issue did to the Democrats as a political force. But I think history will prove that those who did vote for the GST did absolutely the right thing. And as I said before, I think it is hard to imagine Australia not having that new tax system in place. I guess you can all blame Brian Harradine for the fact that the weights were put on the Democrats to decide the fate of that legislation. I think I was acting government leader in the Senate on the day that Brian Harradine finally decided he could not support our legislation, which put the fear of God into us thinking, ‘My God. The Democrats are going to decide the fate of this legislation.’ I openly acknowledge how very difficult that was for you as a party but I believe history will judge that those who voted for it did absolutely the right thing.

Tonight, as Senator Evans said, we acknowledge the service of what I think will be the last four Democrat senators ever to serve in this chamber: Lyn Allison, Andrew Bartlett, Natasha Stott Despoja and Andrew Murray. I was very pleased to have the opportunity yesterday to pay tribute to the service of Andrew Murray. Tonight, as a South Australian, I particularly want to pay tribute to the service of Natasha Stott Despoja, who has been a state colleague and a Senate colleague of mine for 12½ years of the 15 years that I have been in this place. It is a great privilege for both of us to represent the great state of South Australia. Natasha is the wife of my very good friend Ian Smith and the mother of his two children, CO1 and CO2, who are an absolute delight.

Natasha has been a remarkably and extraordinarily successful politician, one who has marked her career with a number of great milestones that may never be beaten—including her being the youngest woman to enter federal parliament, the youngest person ever elected to the Senate and the youngest person ever elected as leader of a federal parliamentary party. She has a great capacity for diligence and hard work in the Senate. We in the major parties do actually understand that those in the small parties have to do a lot more work than us, who have so many other colleagues around us. As Senator Evans properly said, she has a public profile to match that level of work ethic. As I said about Andrew Murray, Natasha has been an assiduous legislator—again, someone denied the opportunity to serve in the executive but someone who has taken her legislative role so seriously.

The other thing about Natasha that I think we can all learn from is the way in which she has established herself as one of the most persuasive and influential communicators that we have seen. That capacity to influence young people has always struck me. I felt it firsthand when I did a debate at an Adelaide high school with Natasha some years ago on a subject dear to my heart, which is that, as many of you know, I strongly believe that it is immoral to force people to vote and that people should have the right to choose whether or not to vote. I do detect in Natasha a little inconsistency in this. I respect her championing of civil liberties, but for some reason she does not think that citizens of this country should have the right to choose whether or not to vote. So we were invited to argue the two sides of this case. I was staggered by the way in which she absolutely creamed me in that debate by persuading these young people that indeed they should be forced to vote. I felt shamed by my incapacity to establish in their own minds that that was indeed quite contrary to any notion of civil liberties in this country.

About Natasha I could not agree more with her husband, Ian Smith, when he wrote of her in the Advertiser yesterday: ‘If only she had Maggie Thatcher’s politics.’ It is one of the great tragedies that all that talent has gone to waste on all that left-wing agenda! But, seriously, one of the great questions I think for political aficionados to ponder in the future will be whether in fact Natasha could have been re-elected in our state of South Australia had she actually stood at the last election. That was a subject that was considered at the time. I suspect on balance that she probably would have won, from my analysis of South Australian voting, but she then would have faced the ghastly prospect of being the only Australian Democrat in this place for the next six years. So I have no doubt whatsoever that she made the right decision. I do wish her, her husband and her family all the very best for the future.

Can I also congratulate Senators Allison and Bartlett on their very significant contributions to this Senate and on their achievements as leaders of their party. On behalf of coalition senators, I endorse the remarks that Senator Evans properly made, and I extend my commiserations on the fact that both Andrew Bartlett and Lyn Allison were actually defeated—Andrew Murray and Natasha of course having elected not to run; the others were defeated. I am not quite sure but I think both of you have handed your seats to the Labor Party, which is most regrettable and very unfair of you.

Senator Allison, it should be noted, is the third-longest serving Leader of the Australian Democrats, after those two great figures in Australian politics, Don Chipp and Cheryl Kernot. It is a fact that Senator Allison’s 3½ years of leadership did coincide with the three years in which the coalition had a bare one-seat majority on a good day in this place—and, believe me, as their leader, I could not always be sure, because of our great and proud tradition of allowing people to cross the floor. We made it through, but of course that reality deprived the Australian Democrats of their historic role as the centre of attention in this place. It deprived them of the influence in the balance of power position they had. It was a very regrettable reality for Senator Allison, inheriting the leadership at that time, when, by dint of the outcome of the 2001 and 2004 Senate elections, the Democrats had essentially no influence in this chamber. I do not think that diminished Senator Allison’s great passion and great conviction, and I regard her as a real conviction politician. While we disagree on just about everything, I do want to record, Senator Allison, my acknowledgement of that sense of conviction and passion that you have brought to this place.

Again, I would endorse what Senator Evans said about Senator Andrew Bartlett. We were all touched by the emotion again that Senator Bartlett brought to bear tonight, and the difficulties that he raised with the issue of asylum seekers and their treatment. I know many of you might think that we Liberals are heartless bastards. But these are the issues you wrestle with in government, knowing that the decisions you make and the decisions you have to make in government have enormous personal and individual consequences, and none of them are easy. I think Senator Bartlett tonight brought that home. I am not about to retract anything we did in government, but you do bring home, Senator Bartlett, the great difficulty that executive governments always face in making decisions which they genuinely believe to be in the best interests of the nation and its future, balanced against what we all know to be often the personal hardships that some of those decisions can mean.

I hope I do not embarrass him by noting that Senator Bartlett did achieve some notoriety a few years ago after his little altercation with our dear departed friend and colleague Jeannie Ferris. That incident certainly attested to the fact that the adage that all publicity is good publicity is not necessarily true. But I did want to take this opportunity tonight to say to Senator Bartlett on the eve of his departure from this place that, in the best Christian tradition—and most of us on this side really are quite strong Christians—all is forgiven. I genuinely mean that. I know that was a very difficult time for you. I did feel for you at that time. I want to genuinely place on record that we forgive you and wish you all the very best for your future and for your future with your family. I know that both Lyn and Andrew will be extremely active in Australian politics and add to the great vibrancy that this polity does demonstrate as much as any in the world.

It is an historic week in Australian politics. A significant force in this great parliament of ours, the Australian Democrats, expires on 30 June and, as I said, I suspect will not be revived. We may have a like party emerge in the future, but not this party, so that does mean our four friends and colleagues on the cross benches are leaving us. On behalf of the coalition, I express my commiserations to the Democrats on their demise, but I congratulate our four colleagues on the Democrat benches on their great contribution to the Australian Senate and wish them well in their return to real life.

I conclude by again endorsing Senator Evans’s generous and proper remarks with respect to Senator Kerry Nettle. Again, I always feel sorry for those defeated at elections. It is unusual to have a Greens senator defeated in an election in which we certainly thought the Greens would prosper at the expense of the Democrats. While those on our side regard most Greens as somewhat left-wing and ideological, I think that Senator Nettle has brought great seriousness of purpose and a sense of conviction to this chamber and has argued her case with great passion, seriousness and sense of purpose. I am married to a Kerry, so I always feel very fond of Kerrys—although mine is even more right-wing than I; she is very different to Senator Kerry Nettle. Again I express my commiserations on behalf of all coalition senators on your loss. I wish you well and, if you wish to return here, I hope that your dreams come true.