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

Before I commence I would like to acknowledge the return of Senator Jacinta Collins. It is very good to see her back, and I congratulate her on her election to the Senate. Jacinta Collins was a senator for 10 years up until 2005, then took an extended long service leave break and has now returned. Jacinta was a frontbencher for the Labor Party in opposition and made a huge contribution to the Labor cause during her term. We look forward to her renewing that contribution. It is good to have her back, although I presume her boys are now too old to ride their tricycles around the corridors.

Jacinta Collins (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Jacinta Collins interjecting—

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

I will have to explore that later. I want to make a few remarks about Senator Ray, who announced his retirement from the Senate a week or so ago. I do so knowing that he will hate it and that whatever I say will be held against me by him; nevertheless, I thought it was important that the Senate mark the retirement of Senator Ray after a 27-year career in federal politics. I think that, after Senator Watson, he was the longest serving senator. Senator Watson still holds the title of ‘father of the Senate’ but Senator Ray served a very long time in this Senate. Robert Ray left slightly early and that is why Senator Collins was sworn in today. As always, Senator Ray left at a time of his own choosing, in control of the procedures and of his replacement’s selection. He had it all planned and organised. We are grateful that he ensured as always that the best interests of the Labor Party were served by ensuring that there was no loss of representation, even for a day, with the swearing in of Senator Collins.

Senator Ray indicated in retiring that the timing was driven by the fact that he wanted to be in government for one day more than he had served in opposition. I am assured that it bore no relationship to the Australian cricket side’s tour of the West Indies and that that was just a happy coincidence. But he was very pleased to have served one day more in government than in opposition.

I have to be very clear: this is not a condolence motion. Senator Ray is very much alive and kicking and, as I said, he will take this acknowledgement of his contribution very badly. It is fair to say, though, that Robert Ray was one of the most significant parliamentarians of his era—certainly one of the most significant senators—and I think he would be regarded inside the Labor Party as one of the most—if not the most—influential and important party figures of his era. Robert made a huge contribution not only as a minister and as a parliamentarian but also as a senior figure of the organisation of the Australian Labor Party. Robert was a minister in the Hawke and Keating Labor governments. He was Minister for Home Affairs and the Minister Assisting the Minister for Transport and Communications. From 1988 to 1990 he was Minister for Immigration, Local Government and Ethnic Affairs. He was very much a reforming immigration minister who sought to achieve a rules-based administration to provide certainty in decision making and to remove, as someone quoted, ‘the sleaze from immigration’. Robert was very principled about the way he approached his role and wanted to be assured that the administration of the immigration portfolio was principled, accountable, coherent and transparent. His approach is one that I very much intend to follow in my role now as Minister for Immigration and Citizenship because I think we have moved too far from the sorts of principles that he established when minister.

Senator Robert Ray was also well known for his role as defence minister from 1990 to 1996, where he was a very effective minister and is well remembered for extending and developing Australia’s role in regional cooperation, for working more closely with countries in our region to secure our defence needs and for building relationships that allowed us to ensure the security of Australia through better cooperation with our neighbouring countries.

Senator Robert Ray was also very committed to the parliament and to the Senate. He took the role of a parliamentarian very seriously. He was probably one of the best debaters in this parliament over a number of years. I know that a lot of opposition members would have suffered at his hands and would have realised how effective he was. He also made a huge contribution to the committee roles of the parliament. He chaired the Privileges Committee and other committees.

The thing that I most want to acknowledge with respect to Robert’s view about the parliament was his commitment to ensuring that the Labor Party took the same view to procedures and the role of the Senate whether in opposition or government. His demand that we maintain our consistency in our attitude to our role and the role of the Senate was a defining feature of his contribution—that one should not take advantage of where the numbers were on any particular day, but one should have a consistent approach to the role of the Senate and the accountability functions that it serves. It might be a lesson that the current Liberal opposition learned at the last election—that taking advantage of one’s numbers in the Senate can bring about unintended consequences, as they found out with the industrial relations legislation and the community’s reaction to that. But in terms of the probity issues, the accountability functions, Robert Ray was very much committed to ensuring a consistent view—a view that allowed the parliament to do its job. In opposition he became famous for his role of holding the then Howard government to account at Senate estimates hearings. He put enormous effort into that and he and Senator Faulkner became famous, or notorious, as a tag team in those endeavours. He played a really important role in ensuring the Howard government was held to account during its long period in office.

What is not widely understood is the role that Robert Ray played in opposition inside the Labor Party. Robert stood down from the frontbench when we lost, and people would often suggest that maybe he ought to have retired because he was no longer serving on the frontbench. But Robert was actually a key contributor to the Labor Party’s performance in opposition. He was central to maintaining our effectiveness and keeping us competitive at the elections through the Howard government era, and he made an enormous contribution to the role of the party and its role in the Senate. He served on the tactics committee of the Labor opposition for a number of years, continued his role in estimates and continued his role inside the party. He played a huge role in mentoring new Labor senators, providing advice and supporting the leadership of the parliamentary Labor Party. I know that Senator Faulkner relied on his advice and support a great deal when he was leader, as I have subsequently.

I will not try to cover all of Robert’s career or all the issues. A lot has been said in the press about his hard-man image, and I want to make it clear that that is not undeserved in terms of his activity inside the Labor Party. Robert took a keen interest in internal party matters and he did play the game hard, but he always played it in an honourable and principled way. If Robert Ray said he was coming after you, he was, and he would get you. You could rely on all aspects of that commitment. He is an unusual character in that he is probably feared on both sides of politics, but the other side of him is not broadly understood. He brought a very keen intellect to politics, a very principled approach to issues, and I found him very honourable and straightforward to deal with.

Kay Patterson (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Patterson interjecting—

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

As Senator Patterson interjected, there is a softer side to Senator Ray. For instance, when one of our senators was hospitalised in Melbourne—not her home state—he made considerable efforts to support her while she was in hospital. He visited regularly and provided real support to her during her illness while she was away from home. So there is another side to Senator Ray. He will hate me mentioning this, but I think people do have to understand that he is a much more rounded character than is presented in the press.

One cannot do justice to a career in the short time allowed other than to record the appreciation of the Labor Party, the Rudd Labor government and all senators for the contribution that Robert Ray made to the Senate and to politics in this country. This is not a condolence motion; he is very much alive and kicking and I am sure he will continue to contribute by providing advice and support to the Labor Party and the Labor leadership.

I would also like to mention the role that Koula Alexiadis has played in supporting Robert in his office. She is actually staying on with the Labor government, which is great to know. Obviously she has been well known as a key support for Robert during his career, as has his family. I want to place on record my personal appreciation for the contribution Senator Ray has made to the parliament and to the Labor Party. No doubt we will get an opportunity in coming months in a less formal setting to properly acknowledge his role in Australian politics over the last 30 years.

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

I rise to support Senator Evans’s motion. First, I join Senator Evans in welcoming Senator Jacinta Collins back to this chamber. It is good to have you back, Senator Collins. Those of us of a socially conservative disposition are particularly welcoming of your presence here.

On behalf of the federal coalition senators, I want to record our congratulations to former Senator Robert Ray on a magnificent career in the Senate. As Senator Evans said, 27 years is a very long time to spend in this chamber. It is half of my life currently, and it is almost half of Robert’s. As Senator Evans said, of current senators, Senator Watson is the only one who has served a longer term and, regrettably, we are also losing Senator Watson in six weeks time.

Obviously, Robert gained an extraordinary wealth of knowledge and experience during his long service in the Senate and therefore his retirement represents a huge loss to this chamber, and one that is felt across the chamber. He was a great asset to our political opponents, the Australian Labor Party. As Senator Evans said, he is obviously a real party man and not someone who was just on the coat-tails of a political party as a way of getting his bottom on a Senate seat. Robert was and remains, I am sure, a very loyal, dedicated servant of his political cause, and for that we respect him.

Senator Ray was, in his Senate career, respected and admired across the political spectrum, and most particularly on our side. He was, as has been said, feared on his own side, but we regarded him as a formidable political opponent. As a minister for some 10 years in the former government, I actually looked forward to my clashes with Senator Ray in Senate estimates. I knew I had a day in which the adrenaline would run, I would be stimulated and there would be no risk of falling asleep. I am not sure that all my former ministerial colleagues looked forward to their clashes with Senator Ray quite as much, but we certainly knew we had to be on our toes to face Senator Ray at Senate estimates. I think he has shown all of us the way in which Senate estimates can be used properly and effectively. One thing I did respect about him in relation to Senate estimates was that, unlike some of his Labor colleagues, he had great respect for and showed civility towards public servants. The thing I did dislike as a minister was that—rarely, fortunately, but occasionally—some senators were quite intemperate with public servants. Robert was never guilty of that and treated all public servants with the respect which I think is a model for the rest of us.

As Senator Evans said, while Robert was a formidable politician, he was a man of integrity. You did know that, with Robert, his word was his bond. I certainly experienced that. Tony Harris, the former New South Wales Auditor-General, noted in the Financial Review today in referring to former Senator Ray:

... those who have worked closely with him commend him for his impeccable, principled and ethical behaviour.

I would certainly second that reference to, and acknowledgement of, his character. As Senator Evans said, he had a very distinguished ministerial career. We regarded him, and continue to regard him, as one of the real strengths of the Hawke and Keating governments. We readily acknowledge that the Hawke and Keating governments, while weak in some areas, certainly did happen to assemble quite a formidable array of Senate ministers. Indeed, we will be referring in due course this afternoon to another great Labor Senate minister. Unfortunately, in that context it will be a condolence. I refer of course to John Button. Fortunately, Robert Ray, I am sure, has many healthy years ahead of him. He was one of the real strengths of the former Hawke and Keating governments.

Knowing Robert a little, it is not surprising to me that he has chosen to leave in the manner that he has, without any fuss or fanfare. Not for him the long, drawn-out departure but up and off. I hope he really enjoys the West Indies tour.

John Faulkner (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

He certainly enjoyed the last one.

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

Tell us more! We are all ears, Senator Faulkner. On a more serious note, I note his parting message to the Labor Party, which I think applies across the board. I particularly note his message to the Labor Party about the importance of widening the ALP gene pool beyond union and party officials. I say as a former party official that party officials are a very important part of the political process and all parties should have a quota of party officials—

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

Those who do not have access to blog sites.

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

Particularly those who know nothing about blogs, like me. But I do think he makes a fair point. I have always thought that, objectively speaking, the Labor Party’s future lies in breaking its ties with the trade union movement. I think Labor would be a healthier social democratic party for breaking those ties. I think the Labor Party suffers from the perception that it is a retirement home for former trade union officials. I think that is the point that Robert was getting at—that it is important for both major parties to ensure that they have a wide gene pool of talent available to them. It is a message that applies as much to us as to the Labor Party. I hope that his parting remarks are taken seriously. In closing, on behalf of coalition senators I want to congratulate Robert on a magnificent Senate career. We wish him and his family a very long and very happy post-parliamentary life.

Andrew Bartlett (Queensland, Australian Democrats) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would like to associate myself and the Democrats with the comments that have just been made by Senator Evans and Senator Minchin. Others are far better placed than I am to talk about Senator Ray’s contribution to the ALP, although undoubtedly it was a major one, not only in Victoria but also nationally. I want to particularly note his contribution to the institution of the Senate, not just in his role as a government minister or as an opposition frontbencher and backbencher but to the Senate itself. He will be a huge loss to the Senate as a chamber and his departure is a huge loss of corporate knowledge for the Senate as a chamber.

It is worth noting in that context that not only have we lost Senator Ray and will be losing Senator Watson but we will also be losing a huge number of people in the near future. We lost quite a large number at the last changeover, in July 2005, and quite a number in between. From my quick calculations, from the end of June 2005 to the start of July this year—a period of three years—half the Senate will have changed over. There is the unique instance of Senator Jacinta Collins, whom I welcome back to the chamber; she is the only one returning. We have had a changeover of basically half the Senate in the space of three years. An enormous amount of corporate knowledge will be lost—some of it deeper than others, I readily admit, but it is quite a lot over a long period of time.

In that intervening three years we had a period that was unusual, where the government of the day controlled the Senate. A loss of corporate knowledge of what things were like prior to that period could be problematic. If there was anyone who had corporate knowledge in enormous amounts it was Senator Ray—with the possible exception of Senator Faulkner, who we do still have here for the time being. I think that wider point needs to be made. We saw that repeatedly, particularly in debates about procedure and proposals with regard to sitting hours, committee inquiries or make-up or length of time to report—all of those sorts of issues. You would get the usual convenient spin of the day from the government minister and sometimes also from the opposition spokesperson, putting the political points. Senator Ray invariably would come in and cut straight to the chase and talk about the simple facts of the history of the matter. He would be quite open in acknowledging, where it was relevant, any failings or the short-term political advantage that his own side perhaps sought to gain at particular times. He would simply tell it like it was. That is important.

I think I have read that it was said about Senator Ray—and it certainly sounds accurate to me—that he was somebody who, if he was going to use the strength of numbers to shaft you, would not put a lot of pretty justifications around it. He would simply say, ‘We’ve got it and we’re going to do it and that is that.’ Putting things as they are, without trying to put a veneer of spin and rubbish over the top, is a very valuable attribute, not just because it saves a lot of us a lot of frustration and a lot of time, frankly, but also because it means that you are making decisions on the basis of a much more honest and intellectually robust set of facts. That is something that we need to strive for much more often than we do.

I saw a quote from Senator Ray in the last week or so, in one of those pieces where his retirement was announced, where he spoke about the fact that he was quite a strong supporter of the notion of adversarial politics. He said that, even though it could occasionally be quite brutal, it was a far better way of getting results from your political system. I am not totally convinced about that, but I do think he was a good example of how, even though adversarial politics is often portrayed in a negative way, you could be a practitioner of adversarial politics without being a liar and without being a perpetually offensive, obnoxious person out to win through smear and that sort of thing. He could certainly be very aggressive and accusatory when he felt like it, but the comments that others of us have already made I would very much concur with. He is someone with significant integrity with regard to his word. He would be straight up and would not beat around the bush in what he was putting forward. His is a clear example that you can have an adversarial approach that is still quite honest, frank and up-front and achieves results.

In this context there was one example where he repeatedly made a number of allegations with regard to the operations of the Democrats in Victoria which, whilst I could understand why he might have had suspicions, were ill-founded, and I think it would have been much more desirable if he had not kept making those allegations. Even though I believe he was occasionally unfair in some of his accusations against other people, he nonetheless was very up-front about them and at least you could tackle the allegation head-on and put your version of the story on the record.

I think his contribution in policy areas also needs to be acknowledged. I did not necessarily agree with his policy approach in a lot of areas, particularly in defence and security areas, but he would be much more clear-cut about the reasoning behind the decisions he took. He resorted much less to just rhetorical flourish or setting up straw men or shooting the messenger; he was much more intellectually honest. In the approach he put forward he would often simply acknowledge that there was an alternative view and simply say that he did not agree with it and thought it was wrong. I think that is a much better approach than simply seeing if you can win debates by either attacking each other’s credibility or putting forward a lot of dishonest and misleading spin. So I think the general approach that he took was an honest one, particularly with regard to justifying decisions in this chamber about the use of guillotines and the like, about whether or not to send things to various committees and about trying to be fair in respect of giving meaningful participation to people across all sides in this chamber, taking into account the different size of our makeup and political support.

Frankly, he was quite often very blunt in putting forward the need for a balanced approach to question time and the structure of committees and would take an approach that was not in the short-term self-interest of his own side. The reason for that was not that he was being nice and sweet and cuddly—which I do not think is a phrase anybody would use with regard to him—but because he was thinking of the long term. He knew that any time you used the short-term advantage you had to stick it to somebody else, some time down the track the wheel would turn and you would be just as likely—more likely—to cop it back in the neck yourself if you did things that were blatantly unfair. So that long-term view of being up-front but fair about how you go about things is something that I thought was very consistent with regard to his approach.

I also want to indicate and acknowledge his contribution in the area of immigration, which is a particular area of interest of mine, and the attempt that he made, with some very major reforms to the Migration Act, to make it more transparent. Regardless of your views about desirable policy approaches to immigration, making it more transparent is something that is very important. It is unfortunate that things have degraded again so badly since that time.

As well as a significant intellect, he is also someone with a very significant sense of humour. That is also something we could do with more of in this chamber and political debate in general. My colleague Senator Stott Despoja remembers being labelled as Princess Leia in debate in this chamber—in combat with another senator known as Jabba the Hutt. Beneath that reputation of a ferocious hard man—from all reports quite a deserved reputation—there was nonetheless a real humanness and I think that side of things needs to be brought out and acknowledged as well.

I pay tribute to the solid work and the very strong legacy of Senator Ray. Serving a long time in this chamber does not necessarily equate to making a strong contribution in this chamber. Without being churlish, I could think of others who have served for very long periods of time but whose contributions, frankly, have not been particularly noteworthy. Senator Ray certainly stands out as one of those whose contribution is a very significant one—a historically significant one from the context of the Senate itself, over and above whatever his contribution may have been both as a minister and within the Labor Party. Others are more qualified than I to comment on this.

Alan Ferguson (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is a mark of the respect in which Robert Ray was held in this Senate that practically everybody who speaks to this debate will have almost the same notes down as to what was his contribution to this place. I think of Senator Minchin, who said, ‘He left without fanfare.’ That is true and that was Robert Ray’s style. I distinctly remember, when I first came to this place, former Senator Brian Archer saying to me one night, ‘I won’t be here in the morning,’—and I knew he was not contemplating suicide—and I asked why. He said: ‘I am retiring and people can judge me on what I have done. I have no wish to make a valedictory speech.’ Probably former Senator Robert Ray is of the same ilk—he will be judged for his contributions in this chamber because of what he did and said in this place, not because of any particular speech he might make at the end of his career.

We have heard phrases like ‘the loss of corporate knowledge’ used in relation to Robert Ray’s retirement. We will certainly miss his wise counsel. Strange as it may seem, I think people on the coalition side of politics will miss Robert Ray just as much as those on the government side of politics, because he was a person whose advice was often sought. He had the knowledge of what had happened before. He managed to make sure that he was on the committees that actually dealt with the institution of the Senate. Robert Ray had a genuine concern for the institution of parliament, and particularly the institution of the Senate. That is why we saw Robert Ray serving on the Senate Standing Committee on Procedure for so many years and why we saw him serving on the Senate Standing Committee of Privileges. He had dealings with all of the committees which dealt with the running of this place and maintained the conventions and procedures of this place that were so important to him—but he was not afraid to make changes where he thought change was necessary. I will certainly miss him. I know that many people in the Senate will miss Robert Ray’s contribution to this place, to the running of the Senate and to making sure that the Senate as an institution in the future is an institution which we can all be proud of.

I, along with Senator Faulkner, served with Senator Ray on the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence and Security. Of all the committees that I have served on in my time here, I enjoyed that committee almost as much as any because it comprised of people who had been in this place for a long time and because, in most instances, partisan politics was almost put to one side. It was a committee that worked together with the knowledge of what had gone on in the past. Of course, having been a minister of defence and having dealt with security organisations, Robert Ray’s knowledge was absolutely imperative to that committee. I know that he will be sorely missed on that committee, which has had an almost complete change of personnel from 12 months ago.

I listened while Senator Evans said that opposition senators may have suffered because of Senator Ray’s debating skills and the speeches he made in this place. That is true, but I can say that one of his former colleagues suffered much more than any of us on the coalition side of politics. There is one particular thing I would note about Senator Ray’s time in this place, and that is that, if you were in your office or close by and he stood to speak, you always stopped and listened. A number of people can be speaking in the chamber and I can continue quite comfortably with whatever I am doing but, in the case of Robert Ray, I always stopped and listened because he only spoke when he thought it was absolutely necessary. He did not speak just for the sake of making some statements in the Hansard. He will be remembered for that.

I, like many others, am well aware of Senator Ray’s great love of cricket and of Collingwood. I think that he is likely to have more success with cricket than with Collingwood. Senator Ray will now have the opportunity, in retirement from the Senate, to pursue other interests, which I am sure he will. I am sure that his concern and love for the Labor Party will continue—but maybe he will express those in a different role. He will have time to spend on those pastimes which, for him, are great loves. He was a good companion to speak to about things. His knowledge of cricket and of football, in particular, meant that he was genuinely good company in whatever place you found the time to talk to him.

I want to pass on my respects to Robert in his retirement. The contribution that he has made to this place is an enormous one. He will be sorely missed. You cannot say that about every senator that leaves this place, because they will not all leave the impact on this chamber that Robert Ray has left. He is one who will be missed, and I certainly wish him well in his retirement.

John Faulkner (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Cabinet Secretary) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have been fortunate to serve in the Senate with Robert Ray for some 19 years. When I became a senator, Robert had already been in parliament for eight years, and a minister for two of them. He was an exceptionally capable minister, and whether in agreement or disagreement with him, members of cabinet and caucus respected his judgement and knew that his opinions and decisions were scrupulously determined by his understanding of the national interest.

I want to talk most particularly today about the years after Labor was no longer in government. Many former ministers find they cannot face time on the back bench after an election defeat. With 15 years in parliament behind him, his reputation ensured and his future secure, Robert Ray could easily have chosen to be one of those. But, just as his decision to join the Australian Labor Party and to become involved in politics was never motivated by the idea of personal gain, his decision after Labor was defeated in 1996 was not motivated by the pursuit of personal comfort.

Robert stayed on. He stayed on to do the hard yards. He did not want the limelight. He did not seek a position on Labor’s front bench, which would have been his for the asking—the leadership in this place would have been his for the asking. Instead, steadily and doggedly, he set about using the mechanisms of the Senate, most particularly the Senate’s committee system, to hold the government accountable, to expose waste and mismanagement and to attack rorting and, where necessary, rorters. The role suited him well. Robert has a justly deserved reputation as a factional number cruncher. But, contrary to the picture that some like to paint of factional players being willing to do whatever it takes, Robert Ray is scrupulously honest and scrupulous in his adherence to the principle of putting the party first. He has a reputation as an honest broker—a reputation also justly deserved.

Robert’s disdain for those who were purely self-interested, and his contempt for anyone who saw the public service of parliament as an opportunity for self-enrichment, found its most apposite target in the former Senator Mal Colston. Not only was Colston a rorter; he was a rat. Parliamentary invective is often measured against the standards set by Paul Keating. Robert’s memorable characterisation of Colston as ‘the quisling Quasimodo from Queensland’ raised the bar even higher. Robert’s quick wit and way with words made him a gallery favourite—such as when he referred to Bronwyn Bishop not as ‘the Minister for Aged Care’ but as ‘the Minister for Caged Hair’. But the pointed jokes had a very serious purpose. For example, when Senator Minchin attempted to justify $8,000 for a prime ministerial wine consultant by referring to Australia’s wine export industry, Robert witheringly pointed out that fish had overtaken wine as an export industry and said:

We do not have a fish consultant that I know of.

It is true to say that Robert Ray has been known throughout his career as one of Labor’s toughest figures. He is tough, but I can say that I saw him hurt. Every day the coalition was in government hurt him. While it galled him to see the coalition in government, it incensed him to see the coalition—or, for that matter, anyone—governing badly. So he applied his considerable intelligence and determination to transforming the Senate committee system into an instrument of penetrating investigation. For example, in 2000, it was a Senate estimates committee with Robert Ray as chief inquisitor—and I was junior counsel in that episode—that forced the Howard government to admit that the plan to use the electoral roll to send a personally addressed letter from John Howard to every voter on the roll was illegal. The plan was stopped; the letter was pulped.

So closely did Robert become associated with the estimates committees and their most telling exposes of poor governance that on several occasions he was credited with estimates performances when in fact he had not even been present at the hearing. But, don’t worry, the boot was on the other foot on a few occasions when I was quoted but it was in fact Senator Ray who had been responsible for the pearls of wisdom.

Over the years that I have worked with Robert I have also benefited from the support of his staff in this place. All of his loyal and hardworking staff members have done great service not only to Robert but to Robert’s colleagues and to the Australian Labor Party. In particular, Koula Alexiadis, who worked with Robert from the early days of his parliamentary career, has been an absolute mainstay of our parliamentary operation here in Canberra. I would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge her contribution and thank her for it.

As my leader, Senator Evans, said, I am sure Robert Ray would probably prefer that these speeches were not being made today. But, as they are being made, I am sure he is very pleased that he is no longer a senator and thus under no obligation at all to listen to what any of us have to say. Robert Ray was in this parliament for 27 years. He managed to make sure that Labor was in government for the majority of that time—if only by two days. If anyone deserves to choose the timing and manner of their departure from the Senate it is Robert Ray. His contribution has been tremendous. I said publicly at the time of his retirement that I think he is simply irreplaceable in this chamber. We will miss him. I will certainly miss him. I think I can say that we all wish Robert and his wife, Jane, well as they enjoy a well-deserved retirement.

Kay Patterson (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to support the motion put forward by Senator Evans. It is ‘not quite cricket’ that Robert is not here to hear what we have to say, but that was his style. I was not surprised when I woke to hear the news that he had decided to leave and not wait around with the rest of us who will be leaving in a few weeks time. Robert was seen as the hard man of politics, and I know that many ministers were in fear and trepidation when he used to appear at estimates. But he was also a fair parliamentarian. There are not many people who can blend the requirement in this place to be a tough politician and a fair parliamentarian. Some people go too far on the side of the tough politician. But, as some people have said today, in his role as a parliamentarian and on the procedures and privileges committees, Robert respected this place. He did not have regard for people who did not respect the Senate. He railed against hypocrisy, he railed against hubris and he railed against people who abused the system. Anybody who abused the system, either by having their snouts in the trough or by misusing the system, rightly attracted the ire of Robert Ray.

As was said earlier by Senator Evans, Robert Ray might have been the hard man of politics and he might have played it hard, but he also played it fair. I remember when my mother was terminally ill. I drove to Tuross Head, where she lived, to look after her for a weekend. It was one of those middle weekends. My mother became acutely ill and I could not get back. At that stage I had two Comcars: one in my home state and one which I had for the weekend. Then senator Sue Knowles contacted the responsible minister to see if there was a way that we could overcome this, and got no joy at all. She went to Robert and he organised for the car in Melbourne to be put back into the pool and the car in Tuross became my Commonwealth car until my mother died. On the day my secretary drove the car from Melbourne up to Tuross, I signed a statutory declaration to say that the car in Tuross would not be used. This was all orchestrated by Robert Ray to ensure that I was not in breach of my entitlements by having two cars. Robert went out of his way to do that and I never forgot it.

Robert’s guiding principle was trust. It is something I remembered when I was in government and a minister. He always used to say this when I thanked him profusely for what he had done to get me out of the situation, because I was in a bit of a pickle and the then minister did not seem to be of a mind to assist me. During estimates one day he asked a question as to whether I had done something and I said no. He did not persist because he knew that he could trust my word. I trusted Robert as well and I think somebody else has talked about that today. If Robert made an agreement, then he would stand by it.

The other advice Robert gave when he was in government was, ‘One day you will be in opposition.’ It is the best piece of advice anybody in government can take because sometimes something you think is very smart does not look so good from opposition. He also used to have the quid pro pro view that what is good in opposition is also good for the new opposition. I remember that we did not let parliamentary secretaries answer questions. Robert made us sit in estimates committees as ministers for hours on end because we could not have a parliamentary secretary. He made us wait for as long as we had made the Labor Party wait. As I said, what was good for the goose was good for the gander, both in opposition and in government. I think it is a lesson we should all remember and learn from.

I saw Robert as a tough politician but a very fair parliamentarian. As I said, when I was in a bit of strife, he found a legitimate way out of that for me as a government minister. He took the time to help me and I will never forget that. He also gave me some advice when the planes ran late on a Friday. Everybody ran around like chooks with their heads cut off, saying, ‘I’m late for a meeting. I’m late for a meeting.’ He used to say, ‘Kay, it’s better to say you can’t come than to get there late.’ He said, ‘If you’re not at this function, I won’t be there either so we’ll pair each other off.’ That was his advice to me when we used to sit till late on Friday nights.

I have respected Robert as a person on the other side and I also respect him as an individual and a human being. He showed his humanity in the situation that I was stuck in. I want to wish him and Jane all the best for the future. I am sure it will be full of lots of films, cricket and football, and I am sure he will find a niche for himself as well in doing something in the community. I am sorry I cannot say this to Robert firsthand, but hopefully he might have time at some later stage to actually read the Hansard, if he can be bothered, and know that he was respected on both sides of this house. His going is a great loss in lots of ways to the process of this Senate and the process of parliament.

Michael Forshaw (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Collins, congratulations on your election and your appointment.

Jacinta Collins (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This is not my second first speech but I could not miss the opportunity, probably unwanted by Robert Ray, to add a few comments of acknowledgement of his distinguished service as a fellow Victorian Labor senator. I would first like to thank Senator Evans and others for their comments of welcome to me this afternoon. I, like other senators, over the last several days have reflected on much of the commentary on Robert’s contribution and the accurate descriptions of him as a factional operative and back room heavy, or on his being one of Labor’s most effective or aggressive parliamentary performers. I noted that certainly his style has been very direct, strong and, I would say, ‘assertive’ rather than ‘aggressive’, and I think some of the comments from other senators here today have reflected on that. Robert would be strong, direct and assertive but not aggressive in a way which compromised public servants in estimates and not aggressive in a way which unfairly compromised the position of an adversary. When we say ‘aggressive’ I think often people mean ‘strong’, and certainly Robert was that. As has been noted, his style was such that he would avoid undesired attention but certainly when he wanted attention, he would get it.

There is another aspect, one which Senator Evans touched on, which I would like to acknowledge today. Robert also performed a pastoral role but without the religious connotations. I could not think of other words that described pastoral interest or care for others without those connotations. His support and guidance was important when I first arrived in this place as the only female Labor representative from Victoria. I was impressed that, whilst Robert was a highly effective Minister for Defence, he could also anticipate the needs—and I stress ‘anticipate the needs’—of a new senator and her new baby. More broadly, his role in building and maintaining party cohesion and discipline has been critical—and I highlight ‘critical’—in Labor achieving government at both state and federal levels. There are many stories about him, some of them touched on today and some that will never see the public record, but I believe this aspect of Robert’s work should be acknowledged.

As Senator Faulkner highlighted, Robert’s staff of many years—in particular Koula Alexiadis—have made a significant contribution. They were a key part of Robert’s influence and support. This influence and support will be greatly missed here, but I am sure it will continue within the Labor Party. I conclude these brief remarks by wishing Robert and Jane all the very best in the future.

Steve Fielding (Victoria, Family First Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On behalf of Family First, I would like to wish Senator Robert Ray well in his retirement and also welcome Jacinta Collins back to the Senate. Twenty-seven years in parliament is no mean feat. I do not have stories of funny interactions with Robert Ray, but I do remember fondly the Australian Financial Review giving me some advice. It was at a time that I was throwing up my hands at Senate estimates and saying I thought Senate estimates was a place to find out what departments were actually doing with their budgets, where their work was going, what the issues were and what they were up to. They quickly told me that there were no simple questions and no simple answers and that in actual fact I should take a leaf out of Senator Ray’s book and look at the work that he had been doing in Senate estimates for many years. So I think that is to his credit, as is his work around the chamber and in estimates. As Senator Collins was saying, his assertiveness and the way he went about his business were certainly a credit to him, his party and also all Australians, because he held the Senate in such high regard as a place to make sure that the government of the day was held to account. I want to say to Robert Ray that his was certainly a real example to show how to be a senator serious about getting to the bottom of issues and that I wish him well in his retirement.

Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will firstly take this opportunity to congratulate Senator Jacinta Collins on her return to the chamber. Senator Robert Ray was a proud defender of the great Labor traditions. He served his party professionally for the better part of 42 years. In this chamber we all carry private images of ourselves which do not always bear a close relationship to reality. In my mind’s eye, I am a man with a 90-centimetre waistline. In Robert Ray’s mind’s eye, he was a noble and chivalrous contestant. In some media circles his hands were unsoiled by the grubby stuff of base factional politics.

Robert Ray, as I think all would agree, was a great senator, a great colleague and a great Labor man. He was also a man who loved a political stoush, and I think it is equally fair to say that he was more than accomplished in the dark arts. It would be a bit of a stretch to say that Robert Ray and I were soul mates, but we did have a surprising amount in common. We both started our professional lives as teachers in Victorian technical schools, and we both set out to make a difference in the Australian Labor Party from a pretty fragile base. We were not lawyers and we were not union officials. We started working in our professional lives in unfashionable schools—he at Baxter tech and I at Glenroy. We found ourselves in different camps of the Victoria branch of the Labor Party, yet we were able to establish a very good working relationship based mostly on mutual respect and occasionally on mutual forgiveness.

Robert was misjudged when he arrived in this place and the superficiality of the press analysis of politics was quickly revealed. He was pigeonholed as a factional operator. He was sometimes seen as a bovver boy with no real interest in policy or ideas. In fact, he was a very well-rounded politician. It was no surprise that he was so successful as a minister. In my judgement the training ground of internal party politics in the Labor Party—and I am sure this applies more widely than just to the Labor Party—can be a very good training ground for politicians. In fact, there are not too many others that are available, especially for those that do not have access to the great institutional connections. Anyone who can survive and thrive in the political boiler room of the Victorian branch of the Labor Party is likely to have a great deal of determination and a thick hide—a hide, I might say, supplemented by a substantial layer of scar tissue.

Whatever Robert Ray’s detractors might have thought, he was a substantial thinker. He had a deep interest in policy issues and in the strategic directions of the labour movement. Robert Ray himself sometimes played up the bovver boy image and played down his interest in policy. He used that often to distinguish himself from some of my colleagues, but I do not think he fooled all that many. It was a surprise to me, however, that an ex-schoolteacher could take so little interest in education. Whatever Robert Ray did in terms of training his intellect on policy questions, you could always count on his thoughtfulness and his imaginative responses.

His enthusiasm for the defence portfolio struck me as heartfelt and genuine and was actually quite inspirational. He is forthright, even brusque. As he said himself, he would never make a good diplomat because he saw them as professional crawlers, which gives the lie to the story that appeared earlier this year that he had accepted a diplomatic posting. I always found him to be courteous and professional in his dealings. Despite the fact that we might have disagreements, he never personalised things, at least not to me and not face-to-face.

Robert Ray had considerable courage in his political professional career and he was always prepared to face down those whom he thought he needed to, even if they were in the highest of offices, including the office of the Prime Minister. In fact, he was ready to face down anybody who opposed him when he thought the need arose. My colleague Senator Conroy and I in recent times have been described by him as ‘factional Daleks’ whose intention was apparently to exterminate in the best of Doctor Who traditions. I did receive an emissary on this issue, and it was pointed out to me that in fact I was collateral damage in that arrangement. I think Robert Ray made the point himself. We have been forgiving each other for many years. In recent years Robert Ray has in fact withdrawn from factional politics and he has become quite a critic of aspects of the ALP factional system. He has always remained a consummate numbers man. He remained a person who had a very deep understanding of the fact that political numeracy was not just a question of being able to add up columns of names—that it was more a branch of the behavioural sciences, and a good numbers person was one who could actually understand what people thought and why. It is often misunderstood what function that has within political organisations.

He was a pleasure to work with and, in his time here in the Senate, I have found him to be a great mentor to Labor senators. I do not think I would be the only one to say that he offered advice which was considerate and incisive. He was a plain dealer and a man of integrity. As long as he practised it he gave factionalism, in my judgement, a good name. He gave Labor a good name. He gave politics a good name. I wish him well in his retirement and I trust that his life at home with Jane will be rewarding.

Ron Boswell (Queensland, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would like to associate myself and my National Party colleagues with the remarks of many people in the chamber today about Robert Ray. He has long been the father of the chamber and, with the influx of new senators, I probably knew him for longer than almost anyone here. I suppose if you could describe Robert Ray you would say he was a hard man. He played it very tough and he played it hard but he played it fair. He was an inspiration to many people and certainly he would have been an inspiration to the Labor Party. When I came here, there were people like John Button, who we will honour later today, and Peter Walsh and quite a number of hard-hitting members of parliament who were not from the ranks of the unions or the Labor Party but who did have a wide coverage—

Judith Troeth (Victoria, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Boswell, I do not like to interrupt your speech, but it would aid us in hearing your speech if you could move to your seat so that you are speaking into the right microphone.

Ron Boswell (Queensland, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I apologise, Madam Acting Deputy President. As I was saying, Robert Ray was an inspiration to the Labor Party and he held it together through some pretty difficult times. When I came here, Robert Ray was a member of a government that had some pretty strong people in it—Senator Button, who we will honour this afternoon, Peter Walsh and a number of other people. He sat there for a number of years—a very small number of years—on the backbench but eventually he was made Minister for Defence, a portfolio that he very strongly enjoyed and took a great deal of interest in. He was a man of humour and he was a man of honesty. He was a very hard player. We got involved in his accusations that I had eight telephones. It was quite untrue; I had one telephone. I went wrong by not mentioning that the Leader of the Opposition at that time had 55 telephones. I tried to quieten it down, and he went on the attack. That was a mistake on my part.

He is going to cast a big shadow over those who come after him. You do not get players like Robert Ray coming into this place now. He must have held the Labor Party together in Victoria, just as he played a very significant role in the Senate for the Labor Party.

Could I take the opportunity to welcome back Jacinta Collins. Jacinta, we missed you very badly in some of the debates on more social conservative issues that we had over the last three years when you were missing. We look forward to your contribution again on some of those issues, which will no doubt come forward.

I would like to wish Robert Ray a great retirement. He has retired on top of his game. He is probably the last hard man of the Hawke-Keating years left. He leaves us, and we pay our respects to him. In closing, if I were to describe him I would say: Robert, it was a fair bump, but play on.

Alan Eggleston (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would like to make a few short comments about Senator Robert Ray and the time that I knew him in the Senate. Senator Ray was obviously a very distinguished Labor Party senator who made a very major contribution to the Senate over the years that he was here. As Senator Boswell said, he was a former minister who, I gather, was a very good defence minister. That was prior to my arrival in the Senate in 1996. My dealings with Senator Robert Ray were very largely in committees—I served on two committees with him: the Senate Standing Committee of Privileges and the Senate Standing Committee on Procedure. Of course, he was a frequent visitor to estimates committees that I chaired.

I was always impressed by Robert Ray’s intelligence when dealing with issues. In the privileges and procedure committees I found he could cut to the core of an issue very quickly, and he understood the broad principles. I found that, after Robert Ray had spoken on some issue in either the privileges or the procedure committee, that tended to end the debate because his comments encapsulated the core of the issue under discussion and usually provided the correct solution to the issue or the problem. He certainly was an extraordinarily adept committee man. He understood the procedural rules of the Senate very well and I often thought his suggestions on Senate procedure were very good.

In estimates Robert Ray used to work with Senator John Faulkner. The two worked as a team, like forensic barristers cutting down to the core of an issue. I must say that, as chair of a Senate estimates committee, when these two walked into the room I always knew that the hearings that followed would be interesting because, as I said, they worked together like forensic barristers, opening up with very wide questions and narrowing down all the time to ever more focused questions. That was a skill which I admired, and Robert Ray was a very exceptional senator in the way he handled those estimates inquiries. Of course, I know nothing of Robert Ray’s role in the ALP but I simply wish to put on record my respect for him as a great committee man and somebody who respected the institution of the Senate. I wish him well in his retirement.

Lyn Allison (Victoria, Australian Democrats) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Before joining this debate I also want to welcome Senator Jacinta Collins back to the Senate. I am sure she will fit in very quickly where she left off a few years ago.

Robert Ray and I have some things in common—not a lot, but some things. We are both Victorian senators. I have not spent anywhere nearly as long in the chamber as Senator Ray—former Senator Ray as of today—but I, like everybody else who has spoken here today, admire him enormously for his great skills, his intellect and his contribution to the Senate. Thank you, Senator Carr, for pointing out that he was a technical school teacher. I did not know that, so I have that in common with him also—as well as our age, which I understand to be the same. He will be missed in this place, there is no question about it. He was an erudite, very articulate man and he was also very funny. A lot of people in the rest of the chamber would not have been able to enjoy some of the comments he yelled across the chamber at the government back before Labor came to office, but it kept those of us on the crossbench amused on numerous occasions. Senator Abetz, I am afraid, came in for much of this banter. It is true that, when he spoke, we listened because he did not waste words. He did not get up for no reason at all. When he had something to say, everybody knew that it was going to be important and so we did exactly that: listen.

I must say that since I have been here I have not felt a great closeness with Robert Ray in political terms. I do not know that he had a lot of time for the Australian Democrats. He certainly targeted me on occasions, suggesting that because my office was in the same building as the party’s that there must be some skulduggery going on. But it was done in an open way, and I think he accepted my arguments as to why he was wrong and he desisted in that effort. He was clearly a very tough and a very principled man. He did not suffer fools gladly and he expected a high level of engagement in this chamber, just as he gave. It does not surprise me that he would be a good mentor to new senators in this place. He was deeply loyal to the Australian Labor Party—no-one has suggested otherwise and I have no reason to think that would not be the case. It was pretty obvious from the way he spoke that the Labor Party is deeply important to him and that he was at all times interested in its wellbeing and in its being in office.

He was an interesting man to observe whether it was in committee work or in estimates, which is where I spent most time observing him. As others have said, when the duo of Senator Faulkner and Senator Ray came into the room you would know that there was an issue being pursued. It might have been trivial—it might have been the Prime Minister’s couch or it might have been something more significant than that—but there was always a story in it. There was always something in the media that would follow that was of great interest to people.

To some extent, I think it is a pity that Robert Ray did not do more media work. He used to come in downstairs to avoid the media doorstop interviews out the front and I think that is a pity. I think that as a commentator he was insightful and, as others said earlier, cut to the core on so many issues. It is also probably characteristic that he is not here today to listen to us speak about him. It is probably not something that he would have enjoyed. He struck me as not being a very sentimental individual. As I said, he was tough and not someone who would necessarily indulge in the sentimentality that necessarily comes at the end of a 27-year career in politics.

I hope that he pursues whatever he wishes to. It does not surprise me at all that he would not wish to be in the diplomatic corps or get a plum posting somewhere. He will do what takes his interest rather than do what might be expected of him. I hope he is successful in that and that his retirement is enjoyable for him.

Kate Lundy (ACT, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am grateful for this opportunity to say a few words about Senator Robert Ray. I was elected in 1996 when Labor lost office, so my first experience of working with him was in the early days of opposition. It was a particularly challenging time for many of my colleagues but, as a new senator at that time, I can say it was quite an extraordinary and exciting time, albeit a tough political environment. My early recollections of Senator Robert Ray were on the Senate Standing Committee on Finance and Public Administration during estimates hearings, which of course back then went from 9 am to about six the following morning. So 18-hour stretches were not unusual for Senate committees at the time. We had the habit of sitting right through the night if issues were pressing. This habit, fortunately, changed after the first term. Spending many a long night around the estimates table, I got an insight into the forensic mind of Senator Robert Ray—and indeed that of Senator Faulkner—on that finance and public administration committee, which I think set a benchmark for performance in Senate committees for Labor’s whole period in opposition.

I would like to make particular comment about Senator Ray’s commitment to this place—to the standing orders, protocols and traditions of the Australian Senate. It is a tough job, but to pay some mind and consistently pay some mind to those protocols, traditions and standing orders takes quite a special commitment. He certainly did that and in the argy-bargy of the political debate often brought a moral dimension to bear on discussions taking place at any one time. He certainly brought his wrath down upon those who sought to exploit the traditions and protocols of this place and was unrelenting in his criticism if he felt they had crossed the line. What the line is in this place is unwritten, but Senator Ray was a good measure of where the line was and, if you ever crossed it, look out!

From a personal perspective, I would like to thank him for the mentoring and support he gave to me as a senator, particularly early on but consistently through that time. His deep understanding of the operations of this place, of not just the Senate committees but also the procedure and standing committees that sustain the institution of the Australian Senate, has placed us in good stead. I know that this compliment that I want to pay to Senator Ray for his commitment and work in those places will be agreed to by all Senate colleagues. His contribution was often unseen in the public mind but it is something that all of us in the Senate are extremely aware of and grateful for.

Finally, I wish to personally thank Senator Robert Ray and wish him and Jane all the best in their retirement. I hope that he is able to watch many a game of test cricket in great comfort and enjoyment, without the interfering question times that he would no doubt be obligated to attend. I wish that they have all the pleasure that is so justly deserved after such an extraordinary and successful parliamentary career.

Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I want to talk briefly about Senator Ray. He is in fact going on to enjoy another career, a career in retirement, but I am sure his advice and assistance will still be forthcoming if one should be game to ring up and ask for it or see him in the street and similarly inquire. I want to personally thank him for what Senator Lundy has described as mentoring but also for the advice and assistance that he has given, not only to me personally but to others, on the type of work that we undertake in the Senate.

The work Senator Ray has done in supporting other senators in this place, by and large, goes unseen. This is an opportunity for commenting on the work he has done consistently and for a long time behind the scenes, not only in supporting new senators but in supporting those senators who are at the skinny end of their contribution to this place with respect to how they will fare when they leave. He also supported senators in opposition when times were a little bleak, if I could use that expression, post 2001. Of course, with every intake of new senators, Senator Robert Ray would be there to assist in providing support, assistance and help and to lend an ear to those people who wanted assistance.

Senator Ray would not suffer very easily those who would ask a question when the answer was clearly obvious. In those instances, before I would approach Senator Ray and ask him for advice, I would ponder long and hard the question that I was going to ask and whether I had explored all the possible avenues, because if I had missed the obvious then I would clearly suffer his wrath and very sharp humour and wit. The other work he did in this place included parliamentary work on a range of committees to support not only the Senate but Labor, along with the advice and assistance he gave to the whole of the chamber. With those short words, I wish him well in retirement and from a personal perspective thank him for the assistance he has provided me.