John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Pursuant to the order of the Senate agreed to on 24 June 2013, the Senate will now move to valedictory statements.

Gary Humphries (ACT, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Defence Materiel) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the night 10½ years ago when I gave my first speech in this place, I was unfortunate enough to have that speech coincide with the decision of then government to go to war in Iraq, which rather deprived my speech of some of the attention that it deserved. Another war seems to have conspired similarly tonight. I must be cursed in some way, I suppose!

I was preselected for the ACT Senate seat made vacant by Margaret Reid retiring in late 2002 after the last sitting for that year of the legislative assembly. I resigned from the assembly before its first sitting in 2003 before it had a chance to say goodbye and so, with your indulgence, Mr President, I will make this my valedictory from two parliaments not one.

I entered the Senate in 2003 as the 500th Australian to do so since 1901. I would have mentioned that fact in my first speech if I had been aware of it. Obviously, I am employing better researchers today than I did back then. I first entered this chamber with a sense of pride and of awe but wondering how I would translate from being a big fish in the nation's smallest pond to being a small fish in its biggest. I confess to more than a few moments of dislocation and bewilderment in those early days. Coming from a place where I had been in charge, I found it hard to work out just how things got done up here on the hill.

In fact, it was the then arts minister, Senator Rod Kemp, who provided me with the breakthrough insight I needed. The National Film and Sound Archive had suddenly announced that it was sending part of its function to Sydney and I was mightily upset by this. In a rather agitated state, I rang Rod and said: 'Mate, this is just dreadful. What can we do about this?' He responded by saying calmly: 'Well, Gary, you're the local member. If you don't like it, it's not going to happen.' I put down the phone and thought, 'Well, that's how you get things done; you throw a tantrum.'

Getting things done is, of course, the business of politics. Every one of us blessed with the honour of holding a seat in parliament knows that the honour comes with a responsibility. We need to make a difference with the time we are granted. Change in the world around us is inevitable, and the rate of change seems to have accelerated in the 24 years I have served in these two parliaments. Managing this change—ensuring that it best serves the people we were elected to look after—is a deep responsibility. The biggest change this community of Canberra has had to deal with, perhaps, has been the advent of self-government, back in 1989. The citizens of this territory were quite determined that they would not be detached from the teat of a bountiful Commonwealth. And when they were, they expressed their disgust—in no uncertain terms—at the inaugural election of that year. The major parties managed to scrape up just nine seats between them, out of an assembly of 17, and a period of uncertainty and two changes of government in less than three years followed. It was a strange experience to enter a parliament that most citizens did not want. And so began the long, slow grind of persuading our reluctant population that it was actually better to have a local person deciding which potholes would be filled and which bus routes would be diverted than to have a person who flew in each week from Melbourne or Hobart deciding that.

That was a real baptism of fire for a 30-year-old newbie politician. After being a salesman for self-government, WorkChoices was a cinch. The responsibilities I was given in successive ACT governments were extraordinarily broad, since everybody in the phone-box government that is necessary in a boutique parliament has to wear a lot of hats. I personally wore just about every hat there was to wear. I particularly enjoyed the challenge of being the Territory's Attorney-General for five years. But, for a man who always got his wife to do the annual tax returns, the prospect of being appointed Treasurer in 1999 was the most daunting. The role appealed more to my children than to me. When the Chief Minister told me about her intention, I went home and into my then six-year-old son, Felix's, bedroom to tell him about what the Chief Minister was about to do and how I was about to become the Treasurer. He sat up in bed, his eyes as wide as saucers, and asked, 'Daddy, are you gonna be a pirate?' I thought, 'Very perceptive kid, at that age'!

Representing the ACT at both levels of government has been a challenge and a privilege. I make no bones about it: this is a special community. This is the Australian treasure house. The great national institutions around us are the repository of the things that describe the achievements, the aspirations, the challenges and the uniqueness of the Australian experience. And the community in which they are set is highly educated, has a high disposable income, is highly politically literate and has a social conscience—and I would not have it any other way. What a glorious privilege it has been to be a parliamentary guardian of this community set in the bush, the largest inland city in the nation, a place that in significant respects has lived up to the ambition Lord Denman described for it in 1913, when he hoped it would be 'the city beautiful of our dreams'. I was appointed to the Senate just days after a hellish bushfire burnt through Canberra, destroying 500 homes and killing four people. The 'city without a soul', so called, bared at that moment a beating heart to the rest of the nation as we suffered together and reached out to those who had lost so much. Ten years later, this same city proudly celebrates its centenary.

I know Canberra baiting is a national sport, but amid the send-ups and jibes let none of us forget how much of our past and our future as a nation is tied to this city's destiny. As far as our past is concerned, I remind my colleagues in the Liberal Party in particular that we are the party that overwhelmingly has shaped the Canberra of today. The three greatest builders of this city were, in order, Bob Menzies, John Howard and Malcolm Fraser. Go to the roof of this building and look out across the landscape and what you will see is an almost uninterrupted vista of projects and institutions initiated by Liberal-National governments. To run down Canberra is to sell short the proud legacy of this side of the chamber. Menzies, the greatest Liberal of all, was passionate about Canberra and accelerated the relocation of some 5,000 public servants and their departments, such as Defence, from places like Melbourne to Canberra. Canberra's population grew from 28,000 in 1954 to 93,000 by the time Menzies retired in 1966.

Canberra is pivotal to the future we make for our nation. Central to that proposition is the Australian Public Service. No less than any mineral sitting in the ground, no less than any produce from the land, the APS is an asset owned by and of enormous value to the Australian people. It is the vehicle through which every national government since Federation has delivered on its promises and will again be central to the great changes we in the coalition will need to effect if we are honoured with the privilege of government after September, as those of my colleagues in this place who have been ministers before know full well. The APS was a trusted and professional partner when coalition governments of the past delivered the Colombo Plan, state aid to non-government schools, the ANZUS and SEATO treaty agreements, the Medicare safety net and work for the dole. This is not to deny that a coalition government should and will find savings, including by reducing the size of the Commonwealth payroll. That is, without any shadow of doubt, an essential step in restoring the budget surpluses that will be the vehicle to deliver on our national ambitions. I argue merely that quality should not be sacrificed when quantity is cut.

I spoke about the responsibility we all have in politics to make a difference with the time we are granted. I recently asked myself what difference I have made with my time. There was, in the early days of ACT self-government, so much to be done. I am proud to point to a number of things that I as a minister initiated and obtained recurrent funding for in the territory: the ACT Hospice, the Tuggeranong Arts Centre, the consolidation of the city's two major public hospitals on to one site, allowing for a teaching hospital to be developed, nation-leading defamation laws, the Territory's first 24-hour mental health crisis service, the city's first birthing centre, and many others. I am perhaps most particularly proud, however, of the Snowy Hydro SouthCare Rescue Helicopter service, perhaps because everyone said it would never happen—particularly the public servants who were supposed to be making it happen. There is no record of how many lives this service has saved in the last 14 years of its existence.

At the federal level, achievements for those who are not ministers are more fine-grained and collegiate. Two such achievements stand out. I put my shoulder to the wheel with other senators during the inquiry into mental health in 2006 and various inquiries into children in institutional care, leading, respectively, to a blossoming of new mental health services in 2006 and the apology to the Forgotten Australians in 2009—seminal achievements, I believe, of the last decade.

I hope that my contribution to the development of coalition policies for this year's election will lead to other achievements, albeit ones that others will deliver. I am proud to have been part of this great chamber of review for this past decade, and I have tried to uphold its best traditions and advocate for its relevance and purpose.

One of the weapons used against me in the recent ACT Senate preselection was that I had crossed the floor to vote against the party, the implication being that, by doing so, I was not quite an authentic Liberal. Can I take this opportunity tonight to remind my party that the ability of its members to cross the floor to defend the primacy of their conscience and judgement occasionally, against the dictates of the whips' call, is a practice that defines Liberalism in this country and sets it apart from the Labor Party. Sometimes we need to stand up for a higher principle, and our ability to do so underscores that, essentially, Liberal MPs and senators are the products of their communities, not of a party machine, and that this device is a strength, not a weakness. Although I was the only Liberal senator to cross the floor in the life of the Howard government, I am pleased to say that I have led something of a revival of the tradition in subsequent days—a trendsetter, if you like! Even as late as this week, some of our colleagues have taken the opportunity to exercise that very important right, and I remind all of us that none of them are less a Liberal for having done so.

In any case, I think I have enough brownie points to warrant some indulgence. I roughly estimate that, over the last 24 years, I have voted in divisions and on the voices in accordance with the whips' direction approximately 55,272 times. That is a lot of loyalty. I have a perfect attendance record in the Senate; I have never missed a day of the Senate sitting. And I have only ever missed one division in this place in 10½ years. Okay—it was for the sale of Telstra, I admit! But nobody is perfect.

I am, and always have been, a Liberal to the core. I have, for more than three decades, been investing in an enduring message—not a slogan, but a conviction—that the Liberal way is about creating communities that are stronger, more prosperous and more secure, and that this message has a relevance at every level of Australian government. That investment has paid dividends. I am proud, for example, that former Gary Humphries staffers now sit in three Australian parliaments, with more yet to come.

There are many tonight I need to thank. So many have lighted my way or lightened my load. I acknowledge my predecessor, Margaret Reid, who is here tonight. The first woman to be President of the Senate, she was a paragon of hard work and dignity. I acknowledge Amanda Vanstone, who first brought me to the Senate as a staff member and who taught me the value of a sense of humour in politics. My predecessor as Chief Minister, Kate Carnell, is also here tonight. She was an extraordinary woman to work with, and an exceptional person in so many ways. I have never seen a more courageous politician—a compliment meant only slightly in the Yes Minister sense. My little place in history is secured by having served as deputy leader to the first, and so far the only, woman to head a Liberal government in Australia.

I pay tribute to those who served as my ministers in the brief but glorious Camelot that was the Humphries government. I do not know why you are laughing! But I think you are on side. The Territory has been exceptionally lucky to find many fine ministers in each administration, despite the ridiculously small gene pool from which they are drawn.

My time here in the federal parliament has been enriched by the privilege of working with some exceptional people. Attempting to pick out all of those people would be sheer foolishness. Allow me to mention a few. To the four shadow ministers I have served as shadow parliamentary secretary, Scott Morrison and Kevin Andrews, and, more recently, George Brandis and David Johnston, I pay tribute. These men will, I feel, be called on to play great roles in the affairs of our country in the near future, and they have the heart and character to carry off that great responsibility. I also acknowledge Luke Hartsuyker, who I represent in this chamber on matters youthful and sporty.

Heart and character lie thick on the ground in this Senate. It has been an extraordinary experience to serve with the remarkable people who make up this place. I single out only one for mention tonight, and only because he is about to bail out of this place: Barnaby Joyce. In the version of this speech I saved last night before going home, I was going to say that Barnaby is about to attempt the political equivalent of Daniel Craig leaping from a speeding Bentley and landing on a moving train. I have had to modify that slightly as a result of today's events; perhaps it is more a case of stepping off a stationary train on to a platform now! I hope I have not jinxed you, Barnaby; I am sorry.

I put on record my thanks to the Leader of the Opposition, Tony Abbott, for his loyalty and support during my recent preselection battle. On the day in 2009 the Liberal Party elected Tony Abbott as its leader, I thought it had made a serious mistake. Today, I see in Tony Abbott a man ready in every way to lead this nation and who will confound his critics to make a fine Prime Minister.

The people who power this building and keep it running smoothly, despite the politicians, are owed a great deal by all of us. The gracious Senate attendants, the cheeky security staff, the omnicognisant procedural officers, the Hansard staff who practise the dark art of turning our gobbledygook into statesman-like addresses and the drivers who are always the first to know, I thank them all most sincerely.

I have been blessed by truly exceptional staff members of my own over those 24 years. I was inspired years ago by the American movie Dave to always choose staff who, if I fell into a coma, would do my job in the interim better than I could. My present staff fall very much into this mould: Danielle, Pat, Cam, Jules and, above all, the indefatigable Ross. I owe them and all who sailed with me over the years, and there are more than a few in the gallery tonight, more than I can say. I hope your talents and loyalty are not lost to the Liberal Party. Of my former staff, I need to particularly thank Rowan Greenland and Stephen Forshaw for outstanding service.

My family has shared this journey with me every step of the way. My wife married a politician and my sons were born to a politician. In fact, Cathy has trod these halls and those of the Old Parliament House for longer than I have. I thank her for her wise counsel and unfailing support. To my sons, Felix and Owen, thank you for standing up for me, even when I missed so much of your growing up because of the job that I did.

I wish Tony Abbott and my party colleagues the best of luck at the coming election. I will take this opportunity, however, to offer some advice to my colleagues in the event they are favoured by the Australian people with the privilege of government later this year. As the only person on this side of the chamber to have actually led a government—there are three on the other side of the parliament but only me on this side—I think I am entitled to offer a little advice.

Set yourselves sensible nation-building goals in government worthy of the best traditions of the coalition but not beholden to the values of a former age. Having chosen those goals, stick to them; talk about them with passion so that the Australian people never fail to associate you with those goals. They may not always share those goals but they will give you credit for having convictions that do not crumble in the face of an adverse opinion poll. Listen carefully to the voices of those affected by those goals, remembering that in such exchanges there is sometimes no voice for the greater public interest. Above all, take full and careful stock of the cold, hard evidence in all its comfortless ugliness. A government that continually skips that stage of the process, relying instead on hunches and focus groups, is destined for grief. Calibrate your actions not by the next news poll but by what historians will say about those actions. After a period in office, measure success or failure by whether, objectively speaking, Australians have more control over their lives—whether more of what they earn stays in their pocket, whether they have more chance of building something or producing something or achieving something worthwhile than they had before you came along, and whether they are more hopeful about their future. In that process, however, remember that there are many Australians who will never have effective control over their lives. Ensure they too have a respectable share of the choices this great and wealthy nation confers on its citizens.

Mr President, I thank you, my Senate colleagues—the visitors from the other place have obviously just gone to something much more important—and the many family and friends who have travelled here to be with me and my family on this special night. I particularly thank the many members of the ACT Division of the Liberal Party who are present here tonight. Of course, if you had been here on the night of my preselection, I might not be giving my valedictory speech tonight, but que sera, sera! I thank you all for your loyalty and support of me over a long career. It would not have been possible without that affectionate support from a party and a community which have obviously shared so many steps along the way. Thank you.

John Hogg (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senators not partaking in the further valedictory speech will leave the chamber or resume their seats. That would be helpful.

Barnaby Joyce (Queensland, National Party, Leader of The Nationals in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You will have to give me some latitude tonight because, on the other side of the building, we have what is obviously of momentous effect to our nation, in that we are about to go through the process of changing prime ministers again, we have the State of Origin on television, and I have just listened to a speech by Pliny the Elder. It reminds me very much of what the Grateful Dead said when they came on between The Who and Jimi Hendrix. They said they were the most forgettable act at Woodstock, and I think I will be too.

I have not written a speech, because there has been so much that should be in it that I could not really do it justice. But it has been a great honour to be a part of this collegiate atmosphere which is the Senate. It has been an incredible honour to represent Australia, to wear this pin—as I always have—in my lapel, and be one of 76 Australians who have the right to go beyond the bar and come into this chamber and vote. That honour comes with immense responsibilities—immense responsibilities, because it determines the texture and nature and culture of our nation. We are reflections of that nature and its diversity.

I would like to acknowledge, most importantly, my colleagues around the chamber and the work that they have done. Although you might not presume it, I hold you in the highest respect. There are people that I have worked with, and, without mentioning all, I just wanted to mention a few—not the ones you would suspect—for the certain things that they take to this chamber. As we go around, and in no particular order, I would always like to acknowledge the work that people such as Senator John Faulkner have done—the fact that he has always held this chamber in respect. He is a person of incredible decency, a person that I do not necessarily agree with on virtually anything, but you always knew that he took the job seriously, that he held the office with respect, that he added to the office and that he was the person you could trust.

I would like to thank the vitality that Senator Doug Cameron has, and the fact that he is always getting rolled on everything—but not tonight. Tonight, Dougie wins! I would like to thank—and I really mean this—the work rate that is shown by people such as Rachel Siewert. Senator Siewert and I started at the same time and I have always looked across and thought, 'Now there is a person who is always doing their homework.' They are always across it and not acknowledged in the form that they should be for the immense work they do. Behind me is Senator Nick Xenophon. When you are busting for a pizza and you need someone to go out with, someone to bounce a few ideas off, someone you can hold in your confidence, Nick Xenophon is the person that you recognise.

Obviously, I would have to go through my own team. Not only have I had the chance to be a senator, but I have had the chance to work with an incredible team, a team that for our own part, have never leaked—and that should be advice to some on the other side. It is not that we did not have our differences. At times we did. But we always worked together in a form of collegiate experience. It was a representation within the National Party that I had, and I loved it. There was me as a little old bush accountant, I had Fiona as a farmer, I had Wacka as an ex-shearer, I had Bozzie as a paint brush salesman and I had Nige—who is not here—who was a fisherman. We managed to work together in such a way as to do the job of the representation of the people of our respective states and, most specifically, the people of regional Australia. There is also Bridget McKenzie who has now climbed to the rank of wanting to be on every possible committee that has ever been devised in this building.

There are so many others of my Liberal party colleagues that I would like to acknowledge. I would like to acknowledge them all, but time does not permit. But I would like to make special mention of those with the courage to stand up on issues where they get derided, because I have had that experience myself. So I have great empathy for people such as Cory Bernardi. I have great empathy, as I have said, for the tenacity of Bill Heffernan. When he was not haunting me and trying to track me down, he was generally focused on something that was going to bring about a better outcome for regional Australia. It is my colleagues from Queensland, most importantly, Bretto—Brett Mason—because every day is fun if Brett Mason is there. Everything is always about looking to the better angels of the people that he is with. With Macka, it is his parochialism for North Queensland—not that North Queenslanders are parochial—and the representation of that. George has perfected the form of the erudite salesman for the coalition, and, with his work as the shadow Attorney-General, he will make a great Attorney-General of this nation. These were people at the start, and I had a very peculiar start.

People talk about doing the James Bond act, and it was done before when the National Party tried to win back the Senate seat. It was a time when nobody gave us a chance. It is so confronting when not one paper writes you up as having a prospect of winning back a Senate seat that had been previously lost. We were up against everybody from the Greens to Pauline Hanson, from the Labor Party to the Democrats, from One Nation—and because we had to stand on our own barrel—to John Howard. They were all campaigning for their turf, and into that environment we had to try to win. When we did win it was an amazing experience. From that I did carry a sense of combativeness, which I have probably expr­essed a range of times. If Senator Humphries was the trendsetter for crossing the floor, I can assure you I verge on Coco Chanel. It was the time to make sure, in that iteration, that the National Party never lost that position again. We made sure that we were relevant to the people who had elected us.

I would also like to reflect on the people who have supported me so well through that path. They are here tonight. It is incredibly humbling for me to see Lenore Johnson from Longreach. Lenore and I basically drove a bus around Queensland numerous times. We thought it was a huge hit if we got on a community radio station. We thought that was really cutting the mustard. Lenore has been my friend, guide and philosopher for so many years, with Bill Taylor, and with Denise Jeitz, who is also here. These people are like gold. They are called branch members and they are like gold because they are the ones that carry you along. There are so many people's names that I could go through. I can see Llew O'Brien and Bruce McIver, President of the LNP. I call these people friends because we work together in a team as friends. We could always trust each other's confidences as we went through the difficult times and the not-so-difficult times as we combined two different parties into one organisation with all the contentions that that involved.

During the election campaign of trying to reclaim this Senate seat, you had to make every item work on your behalf. I remember at one stage being in Paul Neville's seat and I saw an opportunity. We were at an air show and I saw a camera crew filming a skydive which was about to happen, and I knew that I had to insert myself into play between that skydiver and that camera crew because that is how I would get coverage, so I did. I said to my colleagues, 'Guys, I'm going to ask these people for their vote, and just watch this.' So, I looked up and I saw two dots come out of the plane. As they got closer I noted that they had, obviously, lycra on and were coming down at a rate of knots and, as they were coming down, I thought, 'This will work well.' As they got closer I saw that it was mottled lycra of a pinkish colour. As they got even closer I noticed that one of the lycra-people had something that looked awfully like a penis—they were nude! They landed, and they did not particularly want to meet a politician. They most certainly did not want to meet a camera crew, and I do not think they ever voted for me. These are part and parcel experiences of being a senator.

During this time I have had some great staff. I have never asked my staff which way they vote. They vote whichever way they are inclined; it is their right. I have always believed absolutely in the liberty of the individual and their expression of how they vote. I do not know, but I think I have crossed the floor 19 times or something, and if you add up some others it gets into the high 20s. That is important because we are in a chamber that is supposed to express the nation's freedom, and if we do not have it, then who does have it? Where does that freedom reside? This is no longer, to be honest, a states' house, but it should be. I thought it would be a states' house but it is not. It is a house made up of party bodies. If it were a states' house we would sit as states and not as political parties, so there must be other virtues to this house. I think one of the important ones is that there must be the right of philosophical freedom, of your capacity to express your views, as ardent as they are, you should have the right to do it. If your argument is not sustainable, then you will be torn to pieces by right of argument but not by right of intimidation. That is what this place should provide.

I remember Karen Lee, who came to me from the Democrats, and was my chief of staff at one stage. I am pretty sure that if Karen had voted for me she would not have voted for my party. We had a good working relationship and she would always make me aware that you have to know how to step off your left and your right if you are going to make your way through. I have had some brilliant other staff members. I can see Matt Canavan who is going to be a senator for Queensland. He will be a great contributor to the debate in this chamber, and he has already earned himself laurels around this chamber. I have had Scottie Buchholz who obviously is a typical representative of the other chamber—oh, there he is! It has been a joy to be able to work with these people and see their careers progress. I would like to make special mention of the staff members who were there day after day. Alana Brosnan who started with me from day 3 and is still with me today. Hayley Winks, who is now Haley Wildman, who left and came back, so we must be doing something right. She is a person who could get you in and out of purgatory or in and out of hell. She is the most incredible person who can organise someone's life. They have all of my bank account details—the whole lot—so I will never sack them!

I want to acknowledge Robyn Mills, Raelene McVinish and Sam Muller. This is a great story. Sam Muller went for an interview with us when our plane landed at Toowoomba. She got on. I said, 'The plane is taking off; you will have to come with me for the interview.' By the time we got to Dalby her dog had just about given up trying to keep up with the plane! We got back to Toowoomba and I said, 'You've got the job,' and she's been there ever since. These are the sorts of people I have in my office. There is Deborah Dennis and Jenny Swan. As you would note, the vast majority of my staff have been ladies. I am thankful for that because they take the harder edge off so much of what I say and do.

Some of the formative debates probably left people a little bit perplexed. I know I had a lot of friends on the right when we took on the ETS. We took on the ETS when the polling said only seven per cent of people agreed with our position. But with tenaciousness dedication and support from Senator Boswell and so many others we managed to change the position of the National Party and change the position of the coalition. And then we changed the position of the nation. That shows that every person in this chamber is given the keys to affect the nation, at times against impossible odds. If you wish to do it, you can, but you must have the fortitude to pursue that course. And that right should be yours, because it is vital for our nation that you have it.

The Birdsville amendment is something that I worked on with Frank Zumbo—a great guy—to try and reinvest in the liberty of the individual as expressed in small business, because small business is where you can be who you really wish to be, where you do not have to follow the corporate manual, where you can set up the time that you come to work and the time that you leave, where the sweat of your brow is reflected in your bank balance and you are not guided by others. Therefore it must be precious and something that we must always stand behind.

I acknowledge the corporate interests that come in here and say that that is not the case. They always try to cajole us into moving away from the protection of the rights of the individual. But we must stand behind those small businesses because they are the powerhouses that are the expression of the philosophies that we hold in this chamber. And I believe those philosophies are held, in many instances, by senators from both sides.

There is more room to move on that issue, and we must go into that space to battle for the things that I spoke about in my maiden speech—such as the over-centralisation of the retail market—and that we do not find excuses to remove ourselves from that battle. We need to step into that space and say, 'Big business is great. It has a role—and congratulations to it!—but it must not compromise the rights of individuals in the expression of their freedom in that space.

The nation has to take the next step. I have been very lucky to have been part of the process of being deputy chair of the dams committee, as we move the nation into what is our new horizon—our new agenda. We have to make that next step because the world is changing around us. We say we live in the Asian century but we have to start understanding what it is that we are going to do in that area. If we are going to survive in the service industry it is going to be difficult, considering many of the people we will compete with—because the internet is ubiquitous—will not necessarily by in Sydney and Brisbane but will be in Singapore, Taipei and Shanghai. And those people will be on a lower wage structure than ours. And to be honest, their standard of education in many areas is now higher than ours. The standard of English in Singapore is better than our English, and we are supposed to speak English! And as well as English they speak Bahasa, Cantonese and Mandarin.

So we must read into this Asian century what it actually means. We must understand that other nations are more proximate to the major markets. And we must understand that in many instances they have developed trade agreements which give them greater access to the world they live in.

So, where do our strengths lie? We have been blessed in this nation with mineral wealth and agricultural potential, and we have to make sure that we do not lose sight of our strengths. Sure, the others will grow. They will grow in the tertiary sector. We acknowledge that. But we must not lose sight of our strengths because, as any accountant will tell you, you must not lose sight of your strengths.

I was instructed in my accountancy by another gentleman who is here today—Phil Mortley, who I started with. Through that form of accountancy I carried certain fears. I had two groups of people that I was always very aware of—the ones who were the roaring successes and the ones who were the unmitigated failures. The rest were kind of irrelevant. The roaring successes and the unmitigated failures had one thing in common—their capacity or the lack of capacity to manage money. That is why I am almost apoplectic about our nation's debt. I have watched it and watched it because it concerns me deeply. If you do not manage debt, debt will manage you. It will become your master. The hardest task master you will ever have is trying to pay off debt.

I acknowledge the work of my parents who instructed me in that. Marie and Jim are here today. I can see my daughters there as well. My parents were not parsimonious but they were most definitely frugal. They made you respect the dollar. They made you account for what you did. They made you note that the money you spent was the sheep that you would have the shear, the steer that you could sell. And money can be saved by being completely diligent about how money is spent around the property. That stayed with me. So when I saw our nation going down a path where we were getting ourselves further and further into debt I remembered the experience of working under Phil Mortley and others, and how hard it is to pay it all back. That task will be before us in the future. It will be a massive task. I firmly believe that none of the people in this chamber—none of us—will be here by the time we have got on top of the debt we currently have. And I find that to be an incredible indictment and legacy for our nation. On other issues, on sideline issues, I hope that in the way I have conducted myself I have brought a form of pragmatism into how we see things.

There is no such thing as a free trade agreement. There are things euphemistically called free trade agreements, but there is no such thing as a free trade agreement. The world works pragmatically. It is ruthless. It is governed by commerce. We have to also acknowledge where we are. We call BHP the big Australian . It is not; it is 60 per cent foreign owned. We say Rio is another Australian company. It is not; it is majority foreign owned. The biggest farm in Australia is foreign owned. If you look around the skyscrapers and look for the neon sign that is a reflection of the Australian owned international champion—what is it? Where does our success lie if all the international champions are someone else's international champions? We must deal with them, and they will be part of an open marketplace.

But we must realise that it is not selfish to want to have one of our own. It is actually wise and diligent, if we want to be a strong nation—and we must be a strong nation—to have our own champions in our own country. I do not see that happening. I see us more and more becoming the servants of other people. We romanticise it, but we will be working predominantly for others. What we must do is create a culture to create our own champions. The latest iteration of that, obviously, is ADM and GrainCorp. We say we are going to live in the agricultural century. Well, where is our international agricultural champion? Which one is it going to be?

I just want to remind the people on my own side of three issues that they probably disagreed with me on. Much to the disgust of so many of my colleagues, I supported David Hicks getting a proper trial. I strongly believed, and I was guided by my mother, that a person deserves their day in court, that we cannot abscond from the legal process. It is for people to be proven guilty or innocent by the legal process, not by our beliefs. Obviously VSU got me lots of friends, but not on this side of the chamber. That was an issue about the provision of services to regional universities—that is how we saw it. We saw it as being about football fields and—

Honourable Senator:

An honourable senator interjecting—

Barnaby Joyce (Queensland, National Party, Leader of The Nationals in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes. Obviously, the other one was the West Papuan boat issue. We are the neighbours of West Papua, so when the West Papuans turn up here it is different from when other people decide to make their way here through myriad countries.

Why do I bring these issues up? It is to try, as I leave, to reinvigorate your beliefs as senators, no matter which side of the chamber you are on. If you have a belief that you strongly hold, that might not be the belief of the colleagues beside you, it is your right—in fact, it is your duty—to stand up and say something about it and to express your view. If you do not, you are letting yourself down and, worse than that, you are letting your nation down.

I have enjoyed my time here. My final thanks go to the most important group. I want to thank deeply, with the most conviction I can possibly muster, my wife, Natalie. Natalie is a person who shuns the public spotlight. She does not want to be the politician's wife. She was dragged there, unfortunately, by a person who wanted to be a politician. She has been both mother and father to my children as they have been brought up. Everybody says what a good job we have done. We did not do much of a job at all—she did a very good job. I apologise to Natalie for all the times that I have spent away and for the times that, basically, I have been the absent father and the absent husband. I was reminded that, in the first six months of last year, I spent eight days in my own bed. Natalie would get to the end of the year and remind me how many days I had been home, and it would be 25 or 28. When I had a good year, it was 42. As I was out saving the planet, Nat was managing the house. I apologise to Natalie and also to my daughters, Bridgette, Julia, Caroline and Odette, for not being there as much as I should have been.

Likewise, you cannot do this job without a support crew. To see the Travises here tonight is to see an incredible part of that support group. When you live in a country town, you can just go to someone and say, 'We're dropping our kids off.' Sometimes we did not come back for weeks.

The final group is obviously my National Party colleagues, who are around me here. This is going to be, I believe, a momentous time. We are coming to an election. The Australian people, whatever choice they make, will make the right one, and then once more we will be servants of those people. I thank you all for your tolerance of me over so many years. If I am successful, if I do the right job and walk humbly with the people of New England, I may get the opportunity to represent this great nation in another place. But I will always hold in fondness and admiration my time here. I hope I have not disgraced you too much. All the best and God bless.

Kate Lundy (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister Assisting for Industry and Innovation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Joyce, I understand that your valedictory speech was your second chance today to reflect on your time in this chamber and on how you are hoping to move the other place and represent a seat in another state. I would not be the first to note the irony of this choice given your passion for the states' house, although I also note with interest your lament this evening that you think this place has lost that role in the way that it represents. As it is Origin game 2 tonight, I think the question on many, many people's minds is: what colour scarf will you be wearing?

Senator Joyce, your presence in this place has added a great deal of colour in its own right, whatever that colour is. Your wonderful nature, the garrulous, friendly way in which you approach your work, will be sorely missed. You have always been prepared to express a very independent sentiment, and often in a very unique way. But the character you bring to this place brings so much to the Senate as a whole and, indeed, to the parliament. I am delighted that you have noted that the persuasion of the Labor argument managed to grab your attention, and you have indeed chosen to cross the floor from time to time. As an illustration of your independence, you understood the impact of abolishing student fees on university campuses, and you crossed the floor to vote against legislation that nonetheless passed. I note that in 2006 you crossed the floor again, unsuccessfully moving amendments to cross media ownership laws. Both of these are issues that I know you feel passionately about. But you were not always swayed by the arguments put forward by the Labor Party; you have never been captured by the logic of Labor arguments. Without pre-empting the electors of New England, I presume that your inclination for independence of thought might be a little constrained in your future career. I guess we will see how that plays out.

In your Senate career you have participated in an enormous range of committees. You were dedicated to your committee work. I had the pleasure of serving with you on the national capital and external territories committee, and we shared many an adventure in many an exotic location—our external territories. I think it is reasonable to say that you are leaving before your time; you are doing this by your own volition in pursuit of a different kind of opportunity. On behalf of the government, I wish you and your family all the best for your future endeavours. Who knows what will come to pass. With Mr Windsor's decision today not to stand at the next election, your fortunes have changed come what may. Senator Joyce, thank you for your contribution and thank you for your friendship. Perhaps we will see you again.

I would now like to make some comments with respect to my ACT Senate colleague, Senator Humphries. I respect the fact that Senator Humphries has made it clear that he would like to focus on the future and not dwell on the way in which his time in the Senate was prematurely ended. I would like to say that I personally thought it was unfair and certainly undeserved. I will leave it at that.

As a territory senator, I would like to reflect on the departure of my friend Senator Trish Crossin. We have often found ourselves working collaboratively on issues that are dear to our hearts with respect to the territories we represent. I note with interest that you made reference to the crossing of the floor—somewhat enthusiastically given that, on many a Friday morning with Ross Solly on the political panel, you have rubbed my nose in the fact that I am not able to cross the floor because of the rules of my party. I will talk a bit more about that shortly. But you are entitled to do so because that is in fact the way it is: as a member of the Labor Party I am bound by its rules. I certainly stand by and that respect that. But I also acknowledge your inclination on at least that occasion, as so eloquently expressed tonight, on the nature of your party's approach to such matters.

For Senator Humphries and me, our shared interest in our constituencies in the ACT has manifested itself in a number of ways. The first thing I want to mention is the cultural institutions, our national treasures, most but not all of which call Canberra, the national capital, home. Senator Humphries' support and appreciation of the arts and culture generally is very well known throughout the Canberra community, and it is reflected in his diligence with regard to holding the government to account through Senate estimates. I know that it was a genuine and abiding interest for him as a territory senator representing a Liberal government.

The other area of intersection has been on planning policy, with your active interest and involvement in the Joint Standing Committee on the National Capital and External Territories, which in fact Senator Trish Crossin also shared for a deal of time. That has been another area of great intersection and concern for many of our constituents. Navigating what is often a complex demarcation between the roles and responsibilities of the Commonwealth in planning for the national capital and the roles and responsibilities of the ACT government is something that your experience in the ACT government brought invaluable insights to in the respective deliberations over many, many years on that joint standing committee, and I would like to acknowledge that tonight. We certainly have not always agreed on those issues. We have had many complex discussions about them, but on all of those things I know you to be someone who is extremely well motivated in the way that you see things and very focused on getting a constructive outcome.

We have not spent too much time on committees really, you and I, other than that, but I want to also acknowledge the work that you have done, particularly with Senator Trish Crossin, on the both the legislation and references committees of the Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs. Your contribution to reviewing legislation and developing policy agendas in that area of the law and how that applies to the reform process of keeping this country's laws updated is well respected and observed formally this evening.

I also would like to make a note, as you did, of your work on both the Senate Select Committee on Mental Health and the 'forgotten generations' inquiry. I think, having taken part in many a debate and many a forum with you on various election campaigns, that there is no doubt that your proficiency and expertise in both of those areas are second to none and well respected, again, in our constituency.

There are another couple of roles that I think it is important to mention—and this would go, I know, for many senators—but they are often an invisible role that senators play. Senator Humphries has played two important ones that I would like to mention and has probably played many more. One is, of course, as the co-chair of the parliamentary interfaith group; the other is as co-chair of the parliamentary friends of people with multiple sclerosis. I know that we are having a morning tea with the friends of people with multiple sclerosis tomorrow morning, so I will not say too much more about that other than that, again, your role with both of these organisations has been highly respected and will be sorely missed. As an ACT senator, your connections with many of the national advocacy groups are very strong and very real and have been for many years. In that respect, you will be missed. These groups play a significant part in ensuring that parliamentarians remain literate and educated about the issues affecting their respective constituencies. In this way, we are very proud as parliamentarians about how we keep our parliamentarian colleagues up to date with those issues.

Perhaps, in all of this, where I will miss Senator Humphries the most is probably, I reckon, those Friday mornings in the ABC studio with Ross Solly. The regular session with a political panel on Friday mornings on our ABC local radio was something of an institution, and it is just not going to be the same without you! I remember bringing in coffees one day, which totally flummoxed Ross Solly. He said, 'How can you bring your political opponent a coffee?' Anyway, it started a great tradition of bringing coffees, at least for a while. I think I spoiled it by moving to decaf and not wanting to drink it anymore.

Senator Humphries, I think those debates showed that not only is it possible to have a fiery debate with you but you are the sort of person who can walk out of the room and be entirely civil. This is not a characteristic shared by all colleagues. It is certainly a characteristic shared by most, but it is most certainly a characteristic that you have displayed over many years, and I appreciate that in this place, as I know everyone does.

So, Senator Humphries, I take this opportunity to say that I am sorry to see you go. I wish you all the best in your future. I am not going to say 'your retirement', because I have no idea what you are going to do next. From reading the paper this morning, I think you obviously have some really positive things in your mind about how you can keep contributing to the Canberra community. I would also like to acknowledge Cathie, Felix and Owain. I know the political life is very tough on families. I have met them a number of times over many years. I have seen your boys grow up over those years. To your family as well, I would like to pay my respects, and on behalf of the government I wish you all the best for the future.

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

'Solid', 'dependable', 'a good thinker' and 'capable' are all words that easily come to mind when you seek to describe the contribution of Gary John Joseph Humphries. I did not know that was his full name until I did some research for this evening! Senator Humphries's contribution as a Liberal senator for the Australian Capital Territory has been one of absolute distinction. Not only has he held the position but he has served in the position with absolute distinction. Above all these descriptions, he has been a true gentleman of the Senate whose effectiveness was not through bluff and bluster and overblown rhetoric but through considered, sound contributions.

I got to know Gary through student politics—10 years ago, was it? All right, it was 30 years! That was through that great, formative and character-building organisation known as the Australian Liberal Students' Federation. He was always polite and decent, even way back then. Google the good senator's name, and there is not one nasty website dedicated to criticism of him. Gary's thoughtful and unassuming style as a servant of the people saw him rewarded at the ballot box time and time again both in the Legislative Assembly of the ACT and more recently as a senator on three separate occasions, in circumstances where, I might say, the Liberal Senate seat can never be—nor was it ever, by Gary—taken for granted. His capacity for marginal seat campaigning is reminiscent of a skill set usually found in the other place—albeit that I sometimes think we Tasmanian Liberal senators have a bit of a feel for it, though nowhere near your ability. I, for one, enjoyed the electorate visits. When I found myself lost in Canberra for an afternoon, going on the small-business visits with you was enjoyable and informative but also very instructive in relation to the high regard in which you were personally held by the people of Canberra and the ACT.

Gary's first speech in this place contained this wonderful passage of his intended approach:

I am here to argue for the enduring relevance of Liberal values as tools in facing up to the problems of this nation and indeed our world: the values of independence, self-reliance, tolerance, the pursuit of excellence, choice, equality of opportunity and individual freedom. In turn I reject as bankrupt the socialist alternative. That alternative fails to appreciate that people who have no incentive to work and invest will not create wealth. It thinks that collectivism and standardisation in the workplace are a substitute for hard work and innovation. It sees government as a better solver of people's problems than they are themselves.

His speech continued:

I have no truck with those who elevate Australia's shortcomings above our successes … I refuse to be apologetic about the kind of country we are today.

His approach throughout his 10-plus years in this chamber has been true to those principles that he enunciated in his first speech.

His love of Canberra shone through as well, although I fear his passion for his city and territory was often lost on those of us who did not harbour as wild a fondness for Canberra as did the good Senator Humphries. For many of us, Canberra is the necessary evil in the equation of serving our nation. It is the word that means painful separation from loved ones. It was therefore vital that the ACT had a strong voice in the coalition party room, and Senator Humphries provided it with eloquence and common sense. Not only was it a strong voice; as he told us this evening, it was also a very effective voice.

But Senator Humphries was at his best when he was campaigning against the Greens. His Senate campaign in 2010 was truly effective. He restricted the growth in the green vote in the Senate to what we could put down to a simple margin of error. To limit the green vote, as Senator Humphries did right here in the ACT, was a colossal effort, a gutsy effort and an effort that was rewarded at the ballot box. He showed we have nothing to fear by taking on the Greens and the Greens have everything to fear when we do.

Senator Humphries's other substantial success—among the many others, might I add—and one of which I am also particularly fond was his ability to bring transparency and openness to the dark CFMEU-Graeme Wood-bankrolled abomination of an outfit known as GetUp. GetUp's sickening hypocrisy, its wholesale deceit and its blatant misinformation—do you remember the vote generator?—became fully exposed with Simon Sheikh's Greens candidacy for the Senate. In true alliance style, the captain's pick for Territory Senate candidates has not been that flash. It would have been true justice had Senator Humphries being given the opportunity to see off Simon Sheikh on 14 September. Whilst we on this side will work to see Mr Sheikh off, we regret it will not be with Gary as part of our team. While Senator Humphries and I may have sat at different desks from time to time politically, within the broad church of the coalition, I am sure we shared the same pen and rule book when it came to dealing with the Greens and with GetUp.

Amongst his colleagues, especially his marginal electorate colleagues in the other place, Gary was a real asset with the provision of his real-time information updates in his role as the shadow representative for Emergency Management Australia during national disasters of fires and flood.

In less happy days, I recall Senator Humphries being on the other side of a contest which is now well and truly forgotten. Suffice to say, in its aftermath the Senate leadership team actively advocated for Gary to join the front bench, which he did very ably, hardly surprising given his previous ministerial and chief ministerial experience. It was an indication of the high regard in which Senator Nick Minchin and I held Senator Humphries that, despite those unhappy circumstances, we were more than willing to advocate for Gary's ascension to the front bench.

Gary, if we may, we pay tribute to your wife, Cathie, a wonderful human being in her own right. The two of you were a team and remain a team. To you, Cathie, and the boys, Felix and Owain, thanks for lending Gary to the ACT and the nation for public service for just shy of a quarter of a century altogether, I believe. Knowing Gary's civic-mindedness, I have no doubt he will continue to serve his community even if it is no longer in an elected representative role. Gary, all your colleagues wish you and your family nothing but good health, good fortune, happiness and fulfilment for the future. As someone who shares the Christian faith with you, can I say, on a personal basis, God bless.

I now turn to my friend Senator Barnaby Joyce. Nationals Senate Deputy Leader Nash will speak on behalf of the coalition. Suffice for me to say it was a pleasure to work with Senator Joyce as my fellow party leader in the coalition Senate team. And, 'Bosie', I always knew you would see him off. Who would ever have thought upon with Senator Joyce's arrival in the Senate that Senator Boswell would still be here when Senator Joyce left this place. It is an amazing thing how events turn out.

Barnaby: how would you describe him? Forthright, usually right and always of the right. The values for which you stand are the right ones for our community. You can look back on your time of service in the Senate with thankfulness that you made a difference for the good, as do all your coalition colleagues. Above all, as we farewell you from the Senate, we trust we will be able to welcome you as the next member for New England. To Natalie and the girls, thanks for sharing him with us in the Senate, and for your willingness to share him in the House of Representatives. Just quietly, I think he is trading down. I say to Natalie and to Cathy and the children of both Barnaby and Gary that the politicians in a family are the volunteers, and the spouse and the children are the conscripts, and they often have a lot harder and heavier load to bear. So, as we farewell Gary and Barnaby, can I also say a special thanks to Cathy and sons and Natalie and girls. God bless you, Barnaby.

Nick Xenophon (SA, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My contribution will be brief, because there are so many other speakers, but I do want to make the point that the length of my contribution is inversely proportional to the regard I have for the two senators who are leaving this place. Firstly, in relation to Senator Gary Humphries, it was a magnificent, inspiring and moving speech, not just by the benchmark of valedictories. It was a great speech that I will be keeping for years to come. It was a benchmark of a great speech. Thank you for that inspiring contribution. I wish you and your family well for the future, but I get the feeling that your contribution to public life is not yet over. I am sure we will see you popping up making a contribution to public life in another forum and I look forward to that.

In relation to Senator Barnaby Joyce, I say this: Bill Hayden once said something along the lines that there is no such thing as a friendship in politics, just passing acquaint­ances. Well, he is not right. I regard Senator Joyce as a mate. He was one of the first people who contacted me after I was elected, along with Senator Williams. Senator Joyce flew over to Adelaide to talk shop with me, to talk about issues, to talk about the Birdsville amendment, to talk about competition law and to talk about common ground. I think that was the beginning of a good friendship that I hope will continue if he goes to the other place, which I think many expect now. If he is elected as the member for New England, hopefully he will not pass me in the corridor and sneer and say something like 'unrepresentative swill' to me!

I got some perverse satisfaction having Senator Joyce and Senator Bob Brown co-sponsoring bills I put up on country-of-origin food labelling and on palm oil labelling. It was a wonderful thing to see both Bob Brown and Barnaby Joyce co-sponsoring legislation together. The legislation did not get up, but nevertheless it indicated his commitment to issues beyond those of ideology about farmers getting a fair say and about consumers getting a fair say in relation to country of origin.

I also want to say that I was lucky enough about four and a half years ago now to go to St George to see Barnaby and his family there. I got to know his wife, Natalie—Saint Nat I call her—of St George, and his wonderful family. That was a privilege indeed.

I will finish off by making this final observation, which just struck me recently: Senator Joyce can count himself as part of an exclusive, elite group internationally, along with Madonna, Britney, Kylie, Cher and of course Kevin. He is instantly recognisable by his first name only. For almost all Australians there is only one Barnaby, and I warmly wish him well and all the best in the next exciting chapter of his life.

Fiona Nash (NSW, National Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Regional Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What do you say when your best buddy in the Senate leaves? Bye! No, not at all. Eight years ago Barnaby and I entered the Senate together and we now get on extremely well. It was not always the case. When we first came together it was actually for a Page Research Centre inquiry into regional telecommunications, where we both learnt a lot about telco and about each other. Barnaby describes our relationship then as being a bit like two cats in a cage that did not get on. When we were just about to release the report I can remember this absolutely screaming argument we had one day on the phone as I was driving between Boorowa and Yass. It was a very interesting start.

But along the way we did develop a very strong respect for each other. It was not all that long after the eight-year start that we really did develop a very close working relationship and a very strong friendship. There are not too many really strong friendships formed in this place. There are some, and it is always great to see. We are very fortunate to have one. In all this time we have watched each other's back. In a place where often you can have people watching your back one minute and not the next it has been a really extraordinary thing to have that sort of friendship where we know that we really will look out for each other.

He has certainly always been very colourful. Sometime early on after a very long and late passionate discussion dealing with deep policy challenges on all things rural with Dave Toller, Barnaby and Nigel were admiring the recently shaved hedge near the Senate entrance. While the details of why they fell into the hedge are sketchy at best, they both appeared in the Senate the following morning looking like they had been attacked by identical hedgehogs. The two body shapes imprinted in the hedge for several days soon grew back. The mystery of the hedge fairies was eventually solved. They do assure me that they have now both grown up.

The stories from Barnaby are just part of him. There was this one story that Barnaby was telling me that I will relate. He had been away from home—as he indicated earlier, he often was—for quite some time. He was out near Lightning Ridge and was driving home to see Nat. He picked up the phone and he called Nat and he said: 'Nat, I am so looking forward to getting home. I can't wait to see you.' That is the Hansard version. It was a little more colourful. The person on the other end of the phone said, 'Who is this?' Barnaby, of course, had neglected to put '07' in front of the number and rung some random woman and told her how much he was looking forward to 'seeing her' and that she should be looking forward to 'seeing him' too. The colour always associated with Barnaby is legendary. I have a long list of achievements that I was going to read out and I am not doing so. I am really conscious of other colleagues in this place.

Speaking of colleagues in this place, I want to associate myself with the remarks by the leader with regard to you, Senator Humphries. You know the regard in which I hold you. You will be very sorely missed in this place.

I also want to take the opportunity to make some remarks regarding Senator Trish Crossin, who I think has made an extraordinary contribution in this place and who is leaving under very, very cloudy circumstances. We will miss her contribution also.

The achievements that we have seen from Barnaby are long and lengthy. I will save those for another day, actually, and do a specific adjournment speech during which I can spend some time going through all of those things. He has not put them all on the record.

Opposition Senators:

Opposition senators interjecting—

Fiona Nash (NSW, National Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Regional Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will indeed. I will do all of those things at that point in time. At the federal council in 2009, in the midst of the ETS debate, Barnaby, as part of his speech, was relating the story of the deeds of Hernan Cortez in 1519 in the conquest of the Aztecs. Cortez ensured the resolve of his troops by burning the boats and in doing so cutting off any means of retreat. The only way his men could ensure their survival was to achieve victory. It struck me that that was exactly what he was doing in terms of leaving this place and going to New England.

I have to tell you that the conversation that we had the night it became very apparent that we were going to need a new candidate for New England was all about the National Party having to win the seat. It was not about Barnaby having to win the seat. I can clearly remember walking down the corridor after we had been to the party meeting at which we had heard the news and saying: 'Do you want to do it? Do you want to put your hand up for New England?' He said, 'I have to. The Nationals have to win the seat.' It was not about him. It is a real measure of the man that it was all about the party and not about him as an individual.

And he took a huge risk, with his family having to make potentially an enormous change to accommodate this. With the percentage that he was up against it, he was on the most difficult campaign trail that you could possibly imagine. And yet he chose to take the risk and do it because he knew that it was the right thing to do. I do not think any of us should ever forget that. We now have some changed circumstances, though: following on in the vein of my good colleague Senator Humphries, I was going to make this great analogy with Hernan Cortez but now it is a little more like Barnaby in a dinghy with a fishing line and a stubby rowing gently to another shore. But he still has to win the seat and I know that he will not back off one spec in trying to win that seat.

Barnaby has taught me a lot. He has taught me how to have courage and how to be determined. He has taught me about having the courage of your convictions. He has taught me that just because you are a girl does not mean you can't be tougher than the blokes. And he has taught me to never, ever give up. One example around at the moment and that Barnaby referred to earlier is the issue of Archer Daniels Midland potentially taking over GrainCorps. I will prove the case that that is not in the national interest and I know that my good colleague Senator Heffernan, who I have to acknowledge as well in this, will be right there with me. For the future of our farmers and the future of this nation, we have to make sure that does not happen. It is not in the national interest.

To Nat, Bridgette, Julia, Caroline and Odette, thank you for sharing him with us. It must have been incredibly hard along the way. But thank you so much. More than just sharing your husband and your father with us in this chamber, you have shared him with the Australian people. For that, on behalf of them, we really thank you. Bridgette, Julia, Caroline and Odette, just remember that your father will have a place in history that nobody else could possibly have. When the history books look back at politicians, your father will be one of the most amazing people who is referred to. While it is hard, I thank you, Nat, and all four of you for sharing your husband and your dad with us and the Australian people.

It is absolutely an honour to be deputy. People used to come to me occasionally and ask whether I could get Barnaby to do something, get him to that, get him to do this. It was not that I had any magic wand; I think that they thought I had some magic power. It was just that I really nagged him a lot—although my wonderful, wonderful husband used to say that that was fantastic, because while I was nagging Barnaby I was leaving him alone! He has been the most extraordinary leader; the most extraordinary friend. He is a great leader, a great fighter and a great friend. We are going to miss you in this place; we are going to miss you terribly. It is not going to be the same. It is going to be a very different place without you, but somehow we will manage.

We think, though, that he has already moved on. We were discussing a little earlier in our Senate party room the makeup of the Senate after the election and Barnaby said: 'Senate? I always wondered what those senators did.' We figure that he has already moved on. We will really miss you in this place. You truly are a great Australian. Thank you for your contribution. Go forth and conquer.

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

Strange things happen when you are in politics. I campaigned with Barnaby the first time, and he did not get close. I campaigned with him the second time, and he did not get close. But he had the tenacity to keep going, and the third time he got there. I remember going into the counting room. The computers were going around and around in circles and spitting out various names, and I saw his name come up—number 5. I had the great satisfaction of picking the phone up, and I remember these words: I said, 'Barnaby, you have won; go down to your church and thank God, because you have won.'

We did not start off too well. In fact, it was a tussle over whose way was going to take precedence in the Senate, and it was a huge battle. But I believe we have both learnt from each other. I have certainly learnt from Barnaby. I was a bit backward in coming forward on right-to-life issues, but I saw him stand out there and run up the flag and not take a backward step. I saw him stand up for what he believed in, and I learnt a lot from him. I remember counting the votes. We were taking bits and pieces off, and we came to the one where you give your preferences out. I found one guy, and I asked, 'Who do you represent?' He said, 'I'm a sort of right-wing Catholic', and I said, 'Well, give your preferences to Barnaby.' That guy got to the extreme left-hand side of the ticket and got a donkey vote of 8,000. And that went to Barnaby.

I believe he was anointed to go into this place. I remember he went through one gate—with three million votes out there or whatever it is—with 167 votes. He then picked up and became the fifth senator from Queensland and gained the majority in the Senate. Then he made a statement: 'I am for the bush'. And what bigger statement could you make? He said, 'I'm going to open my office in St George', and everyone said, 'Barnaby, you can't get there, you can't get away, you'll drive yourself made trying to get to places—don't do it.' But he ran that flag up and said, 'I'm for primary industry, I'm for regional Australia, I'm for rural Australia, and there is no better way to say it than to go and find myself a position and a home and an office in the middle of the bush.' That is where his love is.

My time is nearly over. I will be exiting this place in 12 months time. But I know Barnaby loves the National Party. He loves what it stands for, he loves its history, he loves what it can do for people. And he has defended that National Party for the six or seven years that he has been on central council. We stood shoulder to shoulder to defend the National Party and keep it as the National Party, and in the end circumstances moved differently. I remember the debate we had on regional universities. His view was that they had to be protected, that we had to provide playing fields, and if we voted for this legislation we would not be able to do it. I could not understand why the Liberals were getting so excited. But to them, the bill was their single desk, and they would die for it. That was the highest priority of the Liberals. I could not understand it, but that is what they wanted. So, we had a diversion of views on that. But over the period of the last six or seven years we have become very close friends. I know as I go out that he will carry that banner for the National Party. I believe we will see Barnaby Joyce in the lower house, and he will be holding, in time to come, one of the highest positions in this land. He goes with my blessing, and I wish him all the best.

To Gary: you were the right fit for a senator for the Australian Capital Territory. I do not think you would fit in Queensland, but you certainly fit like a glove in the Australian Capital Territory. And yet you married a National Party girl! And she could not bring you over! I had a function the other night. A lot of people came, and they said it was a wonderful function. I said, 'You've seen politics at its best, but politics can be cruel, and it can be vicious.' Gary, you have experienced that. You do not deserve it; we think you deserve better. But that is the game we play, and we willingly play it.

I wish you all the best. To Barnaby and Gary, good luck, and God bless you both.

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Attorney-General) Share this | Link to 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.

John Williams (NSW, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would like to add a few words, because I know my colleague Senator McKenzie would like to speak. I first met Barnaby Joyce in late 2005, early 2006. I was driving him from Inverell to Moree. As we were driving along, I said, 'Can you keep a secret?' He said 'Yeah,' and I said 'I'm going to run for the preselection.' He looked at me and said, 'You are?' I said, 'That's right.' He said, 'I hope you win it. I'd have a mate to have a beer with me down there. No-one speaks to meet down in that place'—I think it was in some of his early days of crossing the floor and causing a few rumbles in the place, and of course that is all behind us.

I said in my maiden speech that where I sit in the chamber is unique, because when I am seated I look at the head of Barnaby Joyce. I said then that I had not worked out what goes on in that head. I can say with confidence tonight that I still have not worked out what goes on in that head, except for the fact that he has courage and a passion for regional Australia and for what is right. I said to Barnaby when he took on the challenge for New England, 'It's a classic case of no guts, no glory.' This man has shown the most courageous thing I have ever seen in my time following politics: to stand down from the Senate, in what is clearly a safe position, elected six years at a time, to put his whole political career at risk. I think that says it all.

You have been a great friend, a great leader and we have had a lot of laughs. We rarely had an argument, although he gave me a roasting at Bathurst; he was being a bit precious! We have enjoyed your friendship, your leadership, your company, the laughs and the good times, and you have had a real effect in the Senate and a real effect on our nation. That will go down in history and you can wear that with pride. Barnaby Joyce, I look forward to working with you on the New England campaign. I hope the people of New England see that in Barnaby Joyce they have a real fighter for regional Australia and for the people there.

Brett Mason (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Universities and Research) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to pay sincere tribute to my two friends, Senator Gary Humphries and Senator Barnaby Joyce. Gary, when I think of you I cannot help thinking of you more than 33 years ago, in March 1980 in the Union Court at the Australian National University here in Canberra. There you were in a pair of blue shorts and a T-shirt, berating the Left on campus. I then was a shy bystander with braces, long hair and sporting a black beanie. I remember going up and saying, 'Hi.' My recollection is that you thought I was one of those unwashed Lefties. You were half right.

Gary was a leader of the Liberals at university in 1980 when it was not that easy. He would not forget what it was like then. The Vietnam War was over by only less than five years, Margaret Thatcher had just been elected and Governor Reagan was just another Republican candidate. The Left were rampant internationally and they were rampant on campus. You never, ever failed to take them on. I was always in awe of that. In many ways you showed enormous courage then and you have not changed. The character of the man—the honesty, the loyalty and, Gary, most recently the grace you have displayed—is a lesson to us all. Tony Abbott always says, 'In this place, character trumps position.' So, Gary, you leave at the very pinnacle, with our great respect and the great affection of all of us.

Stephen Parry (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Mason, just at this juncture, I do have to propose the question that the Senate do adjourn. I understand that, in doing so, you may be the first adjournment speaker.