 |
Stephen Parry, Senator for Tasmania
First Speech - 18/08/2005
Senator PARRY (Tasmania) (5.47 pm)—
This is the final first speech of all the 15
senators who were elected in October 2004. I
can see relief in some senators’ faces. Whilst
not agreeing entirely with the content of
some speeches that have taken place before
me, may I commend my colleagues for the
passion and delivery of their first speeches in
this chamber.
I am a Tasmanian by birth and come from
a line of many generations of Tasmanians. In
fact, I am a descendant of the First Fleet
convicts who arrived on 26 January 1788
onboard the ships the Scarborough and the
Prince of Wales. I left home at the age of
16—much to the joy of my mother, I think—
joining the Tasmanian police force as one of
their youngest ever recruits. After 10 years as
a police officer I became a funeral director,
eventually buying the longstanding family
business with my wife, Allison.
As a result of my vocations I am conversant
with many sides of life. Like all good
senators I bring to the Senate an additional
range of experiences. I have been to government
and non-government schools, I have
been an employee and an employer, I have
been a public servant and I have been in the
private sector. I know people. I have dealt
constantly with people: people under pressure,
people who are suffering, the wealthy,
the poor, our youth, people with disabilities,
criminals, the mentally challenged, sexual
assault victims, drug users, the bereaved, the
traumatised, prostitutes, beggars, the homeless
and the dying. I have become adept at
handling people and I feel the plight of
many. I know about the harsh and ugly side
of life. I have been there with the victims and
the offenders. I have seen and experienced
things in my life that I would never want
others to have to experience—from horrific fatalities and injuries to the inhumane treatment
of one human being by another.
I also understand what it is like to go
without and what it is like to have plenty. I
struggled, alongside others, in the early years
of married life with a mortgage and the prospect
of raising children. I know what it is
like to be faced with spiralling interest rates
and to sometimes deprive your family and
yourself of essentials in order to retain the
family home. I have known times in business
when money was tight and loans were enormous
but I have also known success, and the
spoils that success from dedication, long
hours and honest labour brings. Throughout
all these times as a child, as an adult and as a
business proprietor, I have never lost my
sense of purpose, of reality, of obligation to
those around me, of patience and of strong
commitment. I have remained focused on the
important aspects of family, of loyalty to
both friend and client, the need for hard work
and the importance of not losing sight of the
objectives. I also know of the good side of
life. I am in my 24th year of a vibrant and
happy marriage to a beautiful and loving
woman. Together we have raised our children
into adulthood. I value and subscribe
wholeheartedly to the liberal philosophy of
the protection of the family unit. Like Senator
Nash, I also value the extended family
with the importance of the role of grandparents,
siblings’ families and beyond. Often
great stories, great experiences and great
love can come from those who are fortunate
enough to have the closeness of extended
family relationships.
I respect and am passionate about the law.
As a police officer I have applied the law
that legislators have enacted. Effective legislation
comes from good policy. I am keen to
pursue the continuance of good Liberal policy
so that this country can continue to move
forward with the values and the lifestyle that
all Australians deserve. I am a team player. I
believe that the team is bigger and more important
than the individual. I have seen and
experienced the benefits of a team, of the
esprit de corps that is generated through people
coming together and working towards the
same goals. I know the advantage of working
as a unit and the achievements that can flow
from such a team perspective. I have worked
in partnerships and teams that have required
loyalty in order to not just achieve but survive.
My life has been in the hands of others,
and their lives in mine—never more evident
than during my time as a detective.
Conversely, my role as a funeral director
allowed me to take the emotional lives of
others into my care. Funeral directors have a
unique role in society, where each of us becomes
a part of a family’s life during a very
special and very private time. I make mention
that a number of my funeral industry
colleagues have journeyed here today, and I
thank them for taking time out of their busy
schedules to be in this house today. Equally, I
trust it is not of concern to you, Mr President,
or to honourable senators, that this is
the largest gathering of embalmers and practising
funeral directors ever to witness live
the proceedings of the Senate. I also wish to
assure all gathered here that no professional
interest from the gallery is apparent.
While speaking of occupational paths, I
mention in passing that I will one of the few
senators—if not the only senator—to have
covered, vocationally speaking, both of life’s
certainties: previously, death; and now, taxes.
I am confident that the diverse backgrounds
and experiences contained within the ranks
of all new senators will complement the array
of prior occupational backgrounds of
senators already ensconced in this place.
If one looks at the makeup of the Senate
by way of past vocations, then the people of
Australia should be satisfied that this body of
76 elected individuals contains enough skill, expertise and life experience to effectively
deliberate on all legislation and issues that
are placed before it. This current Senate is
made up of people that have a wide range of
occupational classifications and come from
areas such as nursing, practising medicine,
farming of all varieties, journalism, policing,
lecturing, wholesaling, labouring, skilled
trades of all kinds, fishing, horticulture,
teaching, accounting, the legal profession
and many more.
Importantly, coupled with occupational
definition, many have actually owned and
operated medium and small sized businesses,
giving that added advantage of having more
than just a passing knowledge of what issues
face the small business owner. Rather many
in this place know exactly what the 1.26 million
small business owners in this country
face on a daily basis. I note the greater diversity
of occupational background and small
business experience comes from this side of
the chamber.
I have just spoken about the makeup of
the vocational attributes of this place. Now I
want to speak about the political makeup of
this chamber. In doing so, it is appropriate to
consider the last half-Senate election. Fifteen
senators left the Senate on 30 June this year,
replaced by 15 senators elected on 9 October
last year. This represents the largest change
of the Senate since 1950, equating to
19.74—or 20—per cent of the Senate. Much
has been said, and said by people with far
more knowledge than I, about the contribution
of the senators that are no longer in this
place. I will not add to that except to publicly
acknowledge the longstanding contribution
of Senator Brian Harradine, a fellow Tasmanian,
and I wish him well in retirement.
As I reflect upon the change to the
makeup of the Senate, I note that the media
has focused—often negatively—on the configuration
of the Senate and the strong position
the coalition now has by way of a majority
on the floor of this chamber. I want to
make three observations about this. Firstly,
the makeup of this chamber is determined
solely, and without recourse, by the electors
of our nation voting in all states and territories.
This is not an electoral aberration, this is
not an engineered outcome and this is not, in
any way, shape or form, a mistake. On 9 October
last year, this nation voted and this is
the legitimate result.
Secondly, commentators—both from the
parliamentary wings of some political parties
and from the media—treat the result of the
last federal election as though it was unique
in our time and something of problem, and as
though an entirely new landscape has presented
itself in Australian democratic history.
This is not true. There are two other jurisdictions
in this country that are operating under
similar majorities. The Victorian parliament
has a majority of government members in the
upper house: 23 Labor members occupy
seats, with 15 Liberal and four National.
Similarly, the single-house system in Queensland,
which has less scrutiny than the bicameral
houses across this nation, has a majority
without upper-house scrutiny or hostility.
One could confidently argue that the sky
has certainly not fallen in in either of those
states.
The third comment that I make in regard
to the configuration of the Senate is to do
with control. I am on the public record from
a very early stage after the October election
result objecting to this word, ‘control’. The
government does not control the Senate. It
never has and it never will. The Senate is
comprised of individuals who have an opportunity
to exercise their vote as their hearts
and minds and the will of the constituency
guides them. The only control that is exercised
is that of the Australian people at the
ballot box. This, however, does not prevent a
collective of like-minded senators voting in a similar pattern on legislation presented to
this chamber. In fact, the people of Australia,
in deciding whom to elect, chose individuals
by their alignment to political groups or parties.
Our constituents have expectations that
we will fight for their causes in the party
rooms of our respective organisations and
then, after the exhaustion of battle there, vote
as a collective. The only way to effectively
govern this nation and provide for our states
is to have a common, aligned, working majority.
I believe that we and the Australian people
need reminding of the difficult nature of our
roles in two respects. Each senator in this
place wears the burden of having two masters,
the first being the constituents of the
state or territory from where each senator
resides, and secondly the master that goes by
the name of national interest or the common
good for the people of Australia as a whole.
If each senator were to consider only the
welfare and benefit of their respective states
and territories, then the overall wellbeing of
this country would be sadly, and recklessly,
abandoned. The ability to place national interest
ahead of state interest when a conflict
of opinion is apparent is indeed what tests
the courage, intelligence and integrity of
each and every one of us.
Mr Abraham Lincoln, the 16th President
of the United States of America, in his 1860
Cooper Union address, captured the essence
of what I have just said rather well—not that
he heard what I said. Mr Lincoln said:
Neither let us be slandered from our duty by
false accusations against us, nor frightened from
it by menaces of destruction to the Government
nor of dungeons to ourselves. Let us have faith
that right makes might, and in that faith, let us, to
the end, dare to do our duty as we understand it.
Many members of parliament have taken a
keen interest in the health and wellbeing of
every person in this nation. I have a strong
view that preventative medicine is better
than being reactive to problems after they
arise. I have been proactive in my community
regarding medical research both at a
fundraising and an awareness level through
to administration. Being a funeral director,
whilst also being proactive in medical research,
certainly raised some eyebrows.
When giving addresses to service clubs and
similar groups about medical research, I
would often be taken to task by fines masters
and the like for trying to reduce funeral industry
based clientele. I would graciously
accept the humour, but then deliver my serious
message.
As a funeral director, I have stood beside
the bodies of hundreds of people who have
died from what will one day be a preventable
disease. Sadly, on many occasions the bodies
of those people were younger than me or the
same age as my children or were people in
their fifties and sixties, all far too young to
die. I have also experienced, with the families
that I have served, the emotion and
heartache that befalls us when someone close
to us dies.
Whilst dealing with traumatic and other
sudden deaths through accident or injury is
devastating to families and funeral directors
alike, the death of Australians from cancer
and other medical illnesses appears to harbour
a cruel aspect because of the thought
that it just might have been preventable. So it
is my vocational journey that has created a
passionate desire to see medical research
funding continue to increase. I commend this
government on its record so far. Following
the Wills review in 1999, this government
made a commitment to double the research
funding to the National Health and Medical
Research Council. This increase has taken
place over a six-year period and will reach a
peak of $445 million dollars this financial
year, up from $176 million in 1999. I am
very keen to work towards further support
for medical research funding.
On matters concerning health, I place on
record my view that further examination of a
single national approach to health is warranted.
The blame shifting from one agency
to another; from one government tier to another
misses totally the point of health care.
There are people throughout Australia that
want service delivery in relation to issues
that affect them personally. They do not care
who is responsible; they—and rightly so—
just want treatment. It is our duty to see that
happen.
We need to be delivering the best outcomes
in this critical area of public service.
A duplicative administration and convoluted
funding arrangements complicate and create
bureaucratic jungles rather than medical service
solutions. If the public interest is best
served by a single national health entity then
I want to start working towards that. The
states will need to agree to this, and I would
encourage state governments to explore this
option with a view to a better health service
for our nation.
I want to turn my attention to the Tasmanian
Liberal Senate team. As a group, we
regularly caucus and utilise the skills and
interest areas of each senator to pursue issues
for individual constituents and groups alike.
Whilst we do not always agree and whilst we
may have healthy debate, the team attitude
removes duplication of effort and provides
for a higher degree of representation by now
having six senators supporting any single
issue and by drawing on the expertise and
experience of each team member in advancing
issues. As the newest member of the
team, I place on the public record my respect
for this cooperative and unified method. Not
only does a single unit of senators auger well
for the people of our state and nation, but it
is worth noting that we have a highly credentialed
team.
Mr President, we are privileged to have
you as President and part of our team. On
that note, as this is my first speech since your
re-election to office, I congratulate you on
your re-election. I also note that in our team
we have a minister of the Crown in Senator
Abetz, a parliamentary secretary in Senator
Colbeck and the longest serving senator in
this parliament—now father of the Senate—
Senator Watson. Together with Senator Barnett
and myself, we can truly have direct
influence on working for the betterment of
our country, state and regions. I am pleased
to have joined my colleagues to continue our
team approach.
Time does not permit me to indulge in
other areas of interest that fall within the
purview of the federal government and the
federal parliament. I make it known that over
my time in this place I will be keen to explore
and assist in areas that relate to the environment,
our quarantine and federal policing
efforts, electoral matters, migration,
small business compliance issues, taxation
simplification—just to name a few. I will
certainly welcome the opportunity to involve
myself in these and other areas as time progresses.
I do need to publicly thank some important
people in my life. To my wife, Allison, I
thank her so much for supporting me not
only as a fantastic wife but as a business
partner, as my No. 1 constituent and, to my
annoyance at times, my best critic. I cannot
thank her enough for her support. To my two
adult sons, Joshua and James, my thanks to
them for not only being good mates and
great fun but for being ambassadors for my
cause, especially in a university environment
where support for a Liberal Senate team was
not necessarily the most popular role on
campus. I also take this opportunity to publicly
express my congratulations to my eldest
son, Joshua, on announcing his engagement to his now fiance, Amber, here in this house
yesterday. Congratulations to you both.
I owe so much to so many others for contributing
over short and long periods
throughout my life’s journey, which has led
to me standing here today. I do need, and
indeed want, to acknowledge some important
people. To my parents, Bill and Patricia, who
have moulded, nurtured and shaped me, led
by example, especially the installation of a
strong work ethic in me and the sense of
needing to support one’s community; thanks,
Mum and Dad.
To my three brothers, Dean, Vincent and
Andrew, I thank them for all our adventures
together, for the comradeship of brothers and
for the continued support and spirit of family.
My parents-in-law, John and Anne Vincent,
I thank you, as you have also been an
integral part of my life. To my extended family,
friends and past colleagues, thank you for
attending today. I cannot and will not name
you, but it is fair to say that virtually all of
my best friends, confidants, mates and debating
partners are all present today. I thank
each of you most sincerely for your encouragement,
your support and, most importantly,
your honest friendship. I also thank
you for giving up your day. With some pride,
I acknowledge that each state of Australia is
represented in the gallery.
I also thank the members of the Tasmanian
division of the Liberal Party of Australia
for having the confidence to preselect me
and to the voters of Tasmania for placing
their trust in the Liberal Senate team and
indeed their faith in me. I hope to serve you
well. To the gathering of friends and state
colleagues in my electorate office at Burnie
watching these proceedings on the web
broadcast, thank you for your support. Finally,
to my three new staff members,
Leanne, Michelle and James, all four of us
set out on this journey on 1 July. I thank you
for your loyalty thus far and look forward to
counting each milestone with you.
Prior to concluding, I wish to quote, once
again, President Lincoln. This is from March
1832, well before he became President. I
thought this statement of Lincoln’s to be
poignant for two reasons: firstly, it talks
about ambition in a way I subscribe to, particularly
in his reference to worthiness; and
secondly, like me today with a first speech,
this was reportedly—while not his first
speech—his first political announcement. I
quote:
Every man is said to have his peculiar ambition.
Whether it be true or not, I can say for one that I
have no other so great as that of being truly esteemed
of my fellow men, by rendering myself
worthy of their esteem. How far I shall succeed in
gratifying this ambition, is yet to be developed.
Mr President, I am new; I am keen; I am here
to serve. I thank the Senate.
|
 |
