George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Hansard source

I rise tonight to join with the remarks of my leader, Senator Abetz, and others who have spoken to make my tribute to Senator Gary Humphries and to Senator Barnaby Joyce—two very, very different men and two very, very different senators, but both of whom have made a conspicuous contribution to this place and with both of whom I have worked closely in different capacities, and I have come to regard them as friends.

Let me start with Gary Humphries. And let me say at once, Gary, that the fact that you are leaving this place when you are is a matter of not just regret but grief to your colleagues. As Senator Boswell said a moment ago, politics can be cruel. But the cruel blow that you suffered in the preselect­ion in the ACT division recently passed was a particularly unfair and unjustified one.

I have worked with Gary most particularly since he became my parliamentary secretary after the 2010 election, and I must say I was rather flattered as a shadow attorney-general to have as my parliamentary secretary somebody who had actually been an attorney-general! I remember, when Tony Abbott was elected as the Leader of the Liberal Party in December 2009, at the first full shadow ministry meeting that we had in Sydney, Tony, who had promoted Gary to the front bench, made a few remarks about each of the colleagues and, when he came to Gary, he said: 'Well, thank goodness we have Gary Humphries here, because he is the only person in this room who has actually run a government!' And that is true. It is not to be forgotten that Gary is the only person in the Liberal Party room who has been a head of an Australian government.

In the Attorney-General's portfolio, we have had to deal with a lot of very difficult issues in the last three years. One of the most difficult issues we have had to deal with has been the question of marriage. The Labor Party has sought to, on occasions, place a wedge, as they say, in the coalition so as to divide us on the question of the definition of marriage. The way they chose to do that was, in the ACT assembly, to attempt to change the definition of marriage there. That was, obviously, designed to create a situation in which Gary's obligations, as a senator for the ACT who had always been an advocate of the autonomy of the ACT to legislate within its appropriate jurisdiction, were placed in tension with his support for the coalition's definition of marriage. Gary handled that particular difficulty with enormous integrity, and with calmness and wisdom the like of which I have seldom seen in this place.

Gary has been a colleague you could absolutely trust—one whom you could trust with your life. He has shown, if I may say so, that in politics courage is one of the quiet virtues. It is not a virtue that is bombastic. It is a virtue that he has displayed with quiet and firm deliberation and commitment to principle.

So, Gary, thank you very much, not only on my behalf but also on behalf of my staff with whom you have worked so closely as well, for what you have done for me. Thank you for what you have done for the Liberal Party over all of these years. You have been an exemplary colleague. I cannot speak highly enough of you. Thank you.

Let me turn now to Barnaby Joyce, with whom I have had a relationship different from my relationship with Gary Humphries. The relationship began in a slightly inauspicious way, I am bound to say, because, the first time I ever heard the name Barnaby Joyce, to be blunt I was trying to keep him out of this place, in the 2004 election for the Senate in Queensland—where the Liberal Party had, since as long ago as 1980, run a ticket separate from the National Party; there was always competition between the Liberal Party and the National Party for the second and third positions on the ticket. In the early days, when the National Party was ascendant, the Liberal Party got one senator and the National Party got two. Then, throughout the 1990s, the positions and the respective political strength of the parties reversed themselves and the Liberal Party got two senators and the National Party got one. But it was always one of the holy grails of the Queensland Liberal Party to win three senators on one cycle. I think it is fair to say that, going into the 2004 election, nobody predicted—certainly I did not and I do not know anybody who did predict—that we would win four senators. So it was a choice between, at least as I assessed it, a race for the third non-Labor spot between Barnaby for the National Party and our esteemed former colleague Russell Trood for the Liberal Party. Of course Senator Mason and I, who were on that ticket, were doing everything we could to get Russell Trood elected. There was of course—and you know this, Barnaby—no malice in it. In fact, we had not even met. The first time you and I met was at the declaration of the poll. We were backing our man and you were backing yourself in. It was a very spirited campaign. There was a particular brochure circulated during the course of that campaign, at which Barnaby took some umbrage, which constituted an endorsement by the then Prime Minister John Howard of Senator Mason and me as the two incumbent senators but left Barnaby off because he was not an incumbent, and I know that wounded you, Barnaby. But, in any event, it was a win-win situation. Barnaby was elected and Russell Trood was elected. It was the best Senate result the coalition had ever had in any Australian state ever. And had Barnaby not been competing as hard for that spot as he was, and had Brett Mason and Russell Trood and I not been competing for the Liberal ticket as hard as we were competing, then it would not have happened. So, Barnaby, I suppose that is an example of the benefits of competition.

Once you arrived in this place it did not take very long, I think it is fair to say, for our relationship to settle down. We did not see eye to eye on some issues but we saw eye to eye on most, and when we disagreed we disagreed as friends. In the spectacular events of December 2009 when the coalition came to the brink on the issue of emissions trading, Barnaby and I travelled down from Brisbane on the plane the night before that famous week, and we decided that, even though we were on opposite sides of the argument, we would enjoy a Christmas drink together, regardless of the outcome. I certainly did not anticipate quite how spectacular the outcome would be, but we did so.

Let me wind up because others want to speak. I finally say this about you, Barnaby: it has been an absolute pleasure to serve with you in the shadow cabinet. You have always brought to the shadow cabinet a very, very individual voice, a very individual point of view. One of the great things that one can say about a colleague in this place is that nobody has ever doubted your good faith. While they may have disagreed with your views or your conclusions, as on occasions we have, nobody has ever doubted your good faith. I thank you for your contribution in the Senate. I thank you for your contribution to our Senate leadership team. I wish you great success in New England and, when you are in the other place and you have descended from the empyrean heights of the Senate to the lower house, I look forward to working with you in whatever capacity is vouched safe by the electorate upon us to work together in the future.