Adjournment Debate

Valedictories

The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON (Croydon) (15:43): I seek the leave of the house on indulgence for retiring members to make valedictory remarks.

Leave granted.

The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON: In 1988, when I obtained ALP preselection for the state district of Spence, which was to become Croydon, I was 30 years old and had lived in Croydon for only two years.

Members interjecting:

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON: I had much to learn about the area. Although the electorate bordered the city and North Adelaide at Ovingham and Hindmarsh, many of its neighbourhoods were poor and were years away from becoming fashionable. Most of the town of Hindmarsh councillors in 1988 were Labor and their outlook had been formed by the Great Depression and the Second World War. They were my mentors. I valued the advice of the Hindmarsh councillors and the old Australia they represented, the Australia of my parents, Melva and John, and Australian grandparents, Fred and Emma. I am still close to the Charles Sturt councillors, and I value their friendship enormously.

On average, the electorate was older than I was. Thousands of Spence voters came from Calabria, Benevento, Greece, Poland, Yugoslavia (as it then was), Vietnam, Cambodia and the former Soviet Union, and they brought with them the language, apparel, religion and culture as it had been practised exactly when they left. Some were refugees, traumatised by their experience of communism. I came to love the people of my electorate—not all of them, of course. I enjoyed learning about them, reading their history, picking up words and phrases from their language, worshipping God in their churches and temples, drinking their grog and their coffee, riding around on my cyclos.

It seemed to me that in the communist countries they had been treated like laboratory mice in a Leninist experiment. Now they were in Australia to live under the Crown and the rule of law in a mixed economy, own their own home (and maybe another to rent out), raise their children and get them a good education, run a business, grow vegetables and fruit trees, keep chooks and goats—Christos Kalaitzis and Spyro Karzis grazed their goats on the verges of the town of Hindmarsh when I was first a member—enjoy some domestic bliss unencumbered by a rapacious ruling class, practise their religion freely or perhaps not at all, and work out their own salvation.

His Excellency the Governor, Mr Hieu, was the first Vietnamese person I met who answered this description. He returned to Vietnam for the first time in 2006 with me, and we visited the town of his childhood, Quang Tri, and the Shrine of Our Lady of La Vang. C.S. Lewis wrote in Mere Christianity:

The State exists simply to promote and to protect the ordinary happiness of human beings in this life. A husband and wife chatting over a fire, a couple of friends having a game of darts in a pub, a man reading a book in his own…garden—and that is what the State is there for. And unless they are helping to increase and prolong such moments, all the laws, parliaments, armies, courts, police, economics, etc., are simply a waste of time.

So my job, as I saw it, was for the South Australian government to let them do this and help them out in a way governments in their old homeland, did not. I was watchful for pressure groups, corporate interests and media outlets that were contemptuous of the people I represented and wanted to exploit them or experiment on them.

Gaya is one of the people I am talking about and, for the purposes of these remarks, Gaya can stand for all of them. Gaya is still puffing on her cigarettes, despite her stroke, and living in a Housing SA unit—the kind of state socialism she does not much like. Her family fled Russia after the October Revolution when the Bolsheviks used military force to disperse the only democratically elected parliament in Russia's history until 1991. Her family joined the Polish Armed Forces in their successful resistance of the Bolshevik invasion, and the family settled down in Eastern Poland. In 1939, the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact gave them back to the Soviet Union, and in 1941 Nazi Germany invaded.

Gaya and her twin sister Nika were born in the midst of Operation Barbarossa, in 1941. Gaya's father joined General Andrey Vlasov's formation, and two pictures of General Vlasov still adorned Gaya's sideboard when I called on Monday. Vlasov's was a controversial outfit, but they were the liberators from the SS of the most beautiful city in the world, Prague, and they saved the old city from destruction. Her family avoided deportation to the Soviet Union in 1945 and, after the war, they went to Casablanca because it was part of France.

After more than 10 years in Morocco, they came to Australia. Gaya is deeply religious, but suspicious of priests. I made the mistake of congratulating her at a street-corner meeting in Renown Park about the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad reuniting with the Moscow Patriarchate. She gave me the rounds of the kitchen for that.

She lived with her twin sister in a beautifully decorated Housing Trust house on the Sam Johnston Estate, cluttered with icons, fine art and literature, embroidery and a samovar. They had an exquisite garden. When Nika died, Gaya moved to Ridleyton and Housing SA pulled out the garden—quomodo sedet sola civitas. I visit her occasionally and it is the only time I smoke. She speaks fluent Russian and French, tells me Pasternak's Doctor Zhivago is better in Russian than English, reads Russian newspapers and is full bottle on contemporary Russian politics.

Gaya tells me Ukrainians are little Russians; they only think they are Ukrainians. It is something we passionately disagree about. She is pleased that I can assure her that the dual citizenship saga does not mean she is going to be deported. Gaya has never been to Russia and never will. I am blessed to have a job that for the past 28 years has taken me to the homes of Gaya, Hieu and hundreds of people like them.

One of my happiest engagements with ethnic communities has been with the Greeks, who backed my preselection in spectacular fashion at the 1988 Spence East sub-branch annual general meeting. I was pleased to reciprocate their support by getting through parliament a motion recognising the Pontian Greek, Armenian and Assyrian genocide. I then travelled to Mount Athos and addressed a rally of between 5,000 and 10,000 people in Aghia Sophia Square in Thessaloniki on the anniversary of the genocide. Australian politicians do not normally get to do things like that.

When I returned to South Australia, disgraced News Limited employee Michael Owen wrote that whether the genocide occurred was 'controversial' and that I had offended the Turkish-Australian community. Perhaps he thinks the holocaust is 'controversial'. I say 'News Limited employee' rather than 'journalist' because journalists are people who subscribe to the Journalist Code of Ethics, and I say 'disgraced' owing to a formal finding being made against him by his professional regulator, the Australian Press Council, in a March 2016 adjudication No. 1663, and I am happy to say that on the Spin Cycle if I am invited.

My first term in parliament did not go well. Under the Bannon Labor government, the State Bank, which had promised rich dividends to consolidated revenue, lost $3,500 million. Yes, much of it was subsequently recovered, but the disaster had a big influence on me and my generation of Labor candidates. Michael Wright from Premier Bannon's office rang me on a Sunday in 1991 at my electorate office. He told me the bank had lost $1,000 million; that was the first stage. I put the phone down and thought, 'Oh, well, my career will now coincide with permanent opposition.'

We came to office in 2002 desperate to show we could manage the finances, although we were not always fiscally virtuous with windfall tax gains, as Michael McGuire relates in his roman à clef Never a True Word. I doorknocked assiduously throughout the State Bank disaster and, if I could doorknock as a member of one of the most unpopular governments in the state's history, I could doorknock in almost any kind of adversity. In December 1993, Labor was reduced to 10 members in this place and the new Liberal MPs spilled over to the other side and they were interjecting on us from the side and from the back.

At Minerva Crescent, Croydon Park, one Sunday afternoon I was invited in by the householder, a Scot, Mrs Marsh. She made us a cup of tea. She told me she would never vote Labor, but I was relieved to hear it was not anything to do with John Bannon or Tim Marcus Clark. No, Mrs Marsh would never vote Labor because Ramsay MacDonald had closed their local coalmine in 1929.

I apologise to my children, Hugh, Bridget, John and Christopher, for all those afternoons and evenings I spent riding my bicycle around Spence and then Croydon, and attending endless ethnic functions, some of which I took them to without obtaining their informed consent, especially Tet, which was loud, exotic and lasted for many hours. I missed much of your childhood, but you have grown into fine young people under Joan's guidance. I hope I can make it up to you. I thank Joan for supporting me for many years, especially those early years when we were still learning about politics, the years of being a tiny opposition, and my difficult first four years as a minister.

In 1996, the Liberal government was kind enough to accept my amendment to the Residential Tenancies Act. My amendment became section 90, and it allowed neighbours to apply to the tribunal to terminate a tenancy where the tenants had persistently caused a nuisance, or used the premises for an illegal purpose, or interfered with 'the reasonable peace, comfort or privacy' of the neighbour. As members of the House of Assembly, you are probably familiar with that section.

Before section 90, the Trust used to tell neighbours there was nothing it could do and the best the neighbours could hope for was that the disruptive tenant would be convicted of an offence and gaoled. An elderly Devon Park resident, Irene McKay, who lived in a Housing Trust dwelling, had suffered from a junkie living next door and putting on a festival of crime for the neighbourhood. I helped Mrs McKay make an application under section 90. A tribunal member refused to apply section 90 because, she said, she 'did not agree with section 90'. The president of the tribunal got another member of the tribunal to hear the case and Mrs McKay's application was upheld. The tribunal member who refused to do justice according to law was Penny Wright, later a Greens senator.

In modern politics—and I refer in particular to federal politics—the frontbenchers on both sides know that the electorate wants government benefits but does not want to pay the necessary tax, so they frame their policy accordingly and we end up with the highest debt in the country's history. I worry that both the federal Labor and federal Liberal parties have given up on a disciplined approach to budgeting, reviewing expenditure, making savings, justifying the savings to the electorate, making room for a combination of new expenditure and tax concessions.

Now that the Corbynite approach of promising loads of free stuff is in fashion and the 24/7 news cycle makes politicians so reactive, it is time for me to go, as the Nick Xenophon team, the Greens and One Nation break down responsible government. Not long after the turn of the century, Joan suggested we go to the Queen Street Cafe in Croydon more often and meet the new people in the area. I told her that I was happy with the old people, but I went anyway and still go regularly with my daughter, Bridget.

In recent years, I attend many funerals of whose who have supported me, such as that of Jonny Andrea at St George Mile End earlier this week. I keep up with the doorknocking of new citizens and produce my new citizen and new constituent letters in more than 50 languages, including five languages from the Horn of Africa, four Sudanese languages, 10 Indian languages and so forth, but Croydon is moving on. I am pleased Labor has preselected someone who will now be more representative of the changing area than I can be. My biggest regret is that I could never get the numbers to—

Members interjecting:

The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON: —reopen Barton Road. When I had them, thanks to Nick Xenophon in the other place, I did not have them in the house. And now that I have them in the house, I do not have them in the other place. I am confident that when 3,000 residents of Bowden Urban Village are on the electoral roll they will not tolerate going out of their way to get to O'Connell Street. A small slip of the redistribution pen might put them in the state district of Adelaide. Even the member for Adelaide told the Charles Sturt council that she would review her opposition to reopening Barton Road when Bowden Urban Village was complete.

Ms Redmond: That was going to be the first thing you did in government.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order on my left!

Mr Marshall: You've got one day.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order!

The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON: Over the past 30 years, our Barton Road mailing list, which includes thousands of electors from the Parklands to the coast, has done good work in defeating state and local government candidates silly enough to oppose this worthy measure. Former Charles Sturt mayor, Kirsten Alexander, up there in Mildura, must regret responding to the member for Adelaide's urging to support continued closure.

In March 2002, I became attorney-general, minister for multicultural affairs and minister for consumer affairs in the Rann government. Mike Rann wanted the justice portfolio to be a combat portfolio as it had been in opposition, with Labor taking away law and order as an issue from the Liberals. My office was expected to lead the artillery barrage most days, so it was no surprise that I attracted a bit of return fire. I am grateful for Mike Rann's giving me the gig and sticking with me for eight years. One piece of advice Mike gave me that I will never forget is this: in politics, if it does not make you cringe, it is probably not worth doing.

Let me first outline the worst decisions I made as minister. The worst by far was in my capacity as minister for cemeteries and exhumations. After two years of my resisting, I surrendered to the Charles Cameron Kingston society, which claimed that this premier of South Australia—and rake—had fathered many illegitimate children and therefore the alleged descendants wanted their lineage established by the new technology of DNA. I told former premier John Bannon that, if Charlie could get away with fathering all these children at the height of the Victorian era, his secret should be buried with him, but John countered that Charlie would be chuffed to have his fecundity established after more than a century.

I fell for it. I signed the exhumation order, and the remains of Charlie and his adopted son, Kevin, were due to be raised from the family crypt at West Terrace, together with the remains of a lady who had been interred at Centennial Park. I imposed strict orders that no filming was to be done other than for an ABC documentary. One night, I came home to Croydon to watch the TV news and saw vision of a professor dusting off Charlie's femur. Joan reproached me, 'Did you let that happen?' My conditions had been broken. I revoked the order, no useful DNA was obtained, but the descendant-in-chief proclaimed that his lineage was established by rings in the flesh around the ears.

Nick Xenophon was a great friend to me in the last four years in opposition and the first years in government. He knows how much he helped Joan and me, and there were certain indirect knock-on effects for the state that have been wholly good. I will not say what they are. I admired his legislative work in another place, thinking that he used the house of review as it should be used, but we have grown apart and I do not welcome his returning to the state to hold the balance of power in the House of Assembly while refusing to participate in a government. In about 2004, we went on a family holiday together to Aldinga beachfront. There, I told him that I did not think he would make quota at the 2006 state election and would he be interested in joining the Rann cabinet and taking a spot on Labor's ticket for the other place? How wrong can you be?

I served almost eight years as Attorney-General. I had excellent and loyal ministerial staff, including my longest suffering staff member, Sally Bartlett. There were outstanding public servants in the policy and legislation section, the Crown, DPP and the AGD generally, including victims of crime commissioner Michael O'Connell and Simon Forrest's team at Multicultural SA. Vicki Antoniou, originally from Multicultural SA, still works for me. My shadow was the member for Heysen, and I enjoyed those long hours almost alone together in the chamber, debating legislation with no other member willing to listen to us voluntarily—there was a roster. We developed a kind of respect.

I will talk about my time in the portfolio under some headings: Nemer and the Director of Public Prosecutions; judicial appointments and the magistrates; two controversial cases, Easling and Keogh; and the Crown Solicitor's Trust Account. A thread running through these is that most lawyers conduct themselves honourably as officers of the court but, alas, there are some who do not. Another bad decision of mine was appointing Stephen Pallaras as Director of Public Prosecutions. His reference from the Office of the DPP in Western Australia was excellent, but a mate of mine in Perth rang to warn me that the reference was glowing for the usual reason. She was right.

We were too keen to appoint someone from outside South Australia to replace Paul Rofe. Paul Rofe had led from the front as DPP. He managed the operation in the early years on what Angus Redford described as 'the smell of an oily rag'. He had the respect of most of the staff. As his health declined, he tried to continue being a warrior advocate, but the temptation was to enter into charge bargains in some of his own cases so that he could cope. Nemer was one charge bargain too far. Although the defence lawyer was doing what she thought best for her client, at the end of the day her client came a gutzer.

Paul Rofe was also subject to a campaign against him by Graham Archer at Today Tonight. Graham Archer had covertly filmed him crossing Gawler Place from our building at 45 Pirie Street to the TAB opposite many, many times on a particular day, with the imputation that he was not concentrating on his work and therefore all Kevin Borick's clients who had ever been convicted should have the conviction set aside. I exaggerate the second imputation only slightly. Paul came to see me for our regular meeting. He told me that he bet according to a system that required him to reinvest after every win, and that day all his bets were winners. These days a punter would do it from his phone.

In August 2001, Paul Nemer had shot newsagent Geoffrey Williams in the eye, mistakenly believing the newsagent, making his early morning deliveries in the dark, was stalking two girls. The case was heard by my first Supreme Court appointment, John Sulan, but a charge bargain was entered into and Nemer received a suspended sentence. The state was convulsed by what it saw as an injustice. The DPP, having made the charge bargain himself, could not very well appeal against it on the ground of manifest inadequacy.

The Solicitor-General, Chris Kourakis, advised that the Attorney should direct an appeal under the DPP Act. The Crown Solicitor, Mike Walter, doubted that an appeal could be directed under the DPP Act and recommended no appeal. The public servants at the top of the Attorney-General's Department were appalled by the prospect of a directed appeal, which, they said, would undermine the independence of the DPP. They argued in a long meeting that, as the Solicitor-General and the Crown Solicitor disagreed, a third law officer of the Crown should be called in to break the deadlock. They suggested parliamentary counsel Geoffrey Hackett-Jones.

I admired Geoffrey's work and I enjoyed his company, but the idea that parliamentary counsel should be called upon to break this deadlock was risible, a desperate last attempt by the AGD permanent heads to stave off the government they despised. Soon enough, they would have what they thought was their revenge. Of course, the Liberal Party opposed our directing an appeal. An appeal was directed by Acting Attorney-General Paul Holloway and heard by the Court of Criminal Appeal, comprising Chief Justice Doyle and Justices Prior and Vanstone. By 2-1, the Chief Justice dissenting, our appeal was upheld.

After the Solicitor-General's report on the Nemer charge bargain put pressure on Paul Rofe to resign, I had a meeting with him, Wendy Abraham and Pauline Barnett in my 11^th floor office. At Paul's funeral, his brother told the congregation:

I think Paul was now like the magnificent marlin lashed to the side of the boat, making its way back to port in Ernest Hemingway's The Old Man and the Sea. Hemingway wrote of huge, shovel-nosed sharks tearing pieces of flesh from the carcass. Shovel-nosed sharks. How amazing! Had someone beamed a photo of Mike Rann to Ernest Hemingway!

Well, what his brother could not have known is that, after Paul and his two supporting companions had left my room to consider Paul's position, a shovel-nosed shark caught the lift back to my office without Paul to put the case for his removal and the installation of Wendy Abraham forthwith. No doubt she was a mourner and joined in the applause of Paul's brother's remarks.

However, Paul's brother was right: principal responsibility for forcing Paul out was the Rann government's. During Mr Pallaras's tenure, serious organised crime became a major political topic and I was able to get a big increase in the DPP's budget. We more than doubled the number of staff. The more money we gave DPP, the more Mr Pallaras criticised us. Unlike Paul, he did not lead from the front.

Among my good decisions, I think, was appointing more women as magistrates, District Court judges and Supreme Court justices than any Attorney-General before or since. For me, it was not an ideological decision so much as thinking outside the square in the appointing process and making sure that people who were capable got onto the consultation list, even if they would not have been thought of at first if the process was on traditional lines.

I had a dinner group of close friends around me who advised me about appointments known as the Judicial Disappointments Committee because none of them got one until the late Rosey Davey finally scored while I was overseas and there was an acting attorney-general. May I take this opportunity to apologise to Alex Ward for never creating a resident magistrate at Ardrossan within walking distance of the jetty and commend the measure to the members for Enfield and Bragg.

For me, the Magistrate's Court was always the priority in budget deliberations. It was the court with which the people were most likely to deal, and if we could get the Magistrate's Court working well the justice system would be humming. We built new courts in Victor Harbor, Port Lincoln, Berri and Port Augusta, and I prevailed in my struggle to appoint to the countryside resident magistrates, which had been abolished under the Liberal government. The Supreme Court was offered a new building on the tram barn site to be built as a public-private partnership, but the justices declined the offer, one because he might from time to time have to walk across Victoria Square to the Sir Samuel Way Building for a hearing.

When I appointed Chief Magistrate Alan Moss to the District Court, I was keen to replace him swiftly. I appointed Deputy Chief Magistrate Kelvyn Prescott as Chief Magistrate and then, looking at the file, noticed that a previous appointment panel had thought Andrew Cannon would be as good a deputy chief magistrate as Kelvyn. It was explained to me that Attorney-General Trevor Griffin had appointed Kelvyn Prescott instead of Andrew Cannon on character grounds. I did not heed Trevor Griffin's wisdom and thought that if Andrew Cannon was good enough to be deputy chief magistrate when the Liberals were in office, he ought to get the gig now. I appointed him forthwith so the magistracy would not be preoccupied by a long process—read 'faction fight'—though Kate Lennon rightly reproached me for not putting it through a panel process.

When one becomes a minister, one notices people laughing at one's jokes even when they are not funny. As Attorney-General, one has the authority to appoint magistrates and judges, so the sycophancy could be alarming, as well as the vindictiveness when a coveted appointment was not forthcoming. Andrew Cannon would take me aside to thrust on me his latest prolix manifesto on improving the Magistrate's Court and generally conducting himself like Edmund Blackadder as a courtier. This was a pity because practitioners tell me he was a magistrate who listened patiently, was fair and worked hard. Time passed, factional warfare broke out among the magistrates, Kelvyn was undermined by his deputy and stories about the unhappiness in the Magistrate's Court started appearing in The Advertiser.

I appointed Kelvyn to the Youth Court and set up a panel to appoint the new Chief Magistrate presided over by the Solicitor-General, Chris Kourakis, who is now the Chief Justice. There were many applicants, among them Magistrate Liz Bolton and Deputy Chief Magistrate Andrew Cannon. The latter came to see me regularly in his capacity as Acting Chief Magistrate and took the opportunity to lobby for himself. The panel recommended Liz Bolton be appointed. An agitated Andrew Cannon came to see me. I would normally see him in the small boardroom, but, as this was tough news for him, I invited him into my room. He strode around my room angrily, as I sat at my desk, proclaiming that the panel was corrupt.

The next Monday, he sought an emergency meeting with me. I met him in the small boardroom. The only emergency was that he told me I should appoint him a District Court judge forthwith. Nigel Hunt had a front-page story in the Sunday Mail in which Andrew Cannon accused Liz Bolton of impropriety at a suburban Magistrate's Court when she was a manager by dint of appointing a former colleague from commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions, who was already a magistrate, to a temporary office that carried a small stipend. There was no impropriety. Liz Bolton, decent and conscientious person that she is, phoned me to say she wanted to withdraw her application for Chief Magistrate in light of the published story. 'Be buggered you will,' I replied.

After Liz Bolton became Chief Magistrate, Andrew Cannon issued what he called 'sentencing guidelines' and uploaded them on Juris, the shared website of magistrates and judges. It was not appropriate for magistrates to issue sentencing guidelines. Andrew Cannon's guidelines said that imprisonment should not be imposed in sentencing if the state of South Australia's prisons did not comply with a utopian set of prison conditions, such as one prisoner per cell, each cell having a view of the surrounding landscape and the prisons being close to the prisoner's relatives. There were other stipulations, all of them with huge budget implications. One could have viewed this more favourably if it were not so transparently an attempt to punish the government for not appointing him Chief Magistrate.

A career burglar called Bieg, whose offending demanded a term of imprisonment, was released by Andrew Cannon using his guidelines. As we found out later on, Bieg soon resumed his life of crime. More victims of crime were created by Cannon's decision. The prosecution appealed to the Supreme Court against the non-custodial sentence. Justice David heard the appeal. Unusually, Bieg's solicitor, Greg Mead, conceded that Andrew Cannon's decision was wrong. Both sides agreed, and Justice David made scathing remarks about Cannon's guidelines, calling them, and I quote, 'a press release'. Newsworthy though this was, The Advertiser did not print a word of it. The matter was remitted to the Chief Magistrate, and she sentenced Bieg to a term of imprisonment.

One of the conspiracies against the public interest perpetrated by the Law Society was keeping the decisions of the Legal Practitioners Conduct Board secret. During my time as attorney, lawyer George Mancini was a regular before the board and had been criticised by the Supreme Court, but his clients had no means of finding out. The current Attorney should be congratulated on ending this rort and publishing findings against lawyers on the website of the Legal Professional Conduct Commissioner.

Although Mancini had the benefit of his pre-2014 misdeeds before the new act came into effect being suppressed, I notice he has started quickly under the new regime, with an unprofessional conduct finding in 2014, just after the midyear start for the new regime, and in 2015 a finding of failing to appear in court to represent a client and failing to submit a client's application for legal aid. Hendrik Gout told radio FIVEaa listeners that George Mancini is a very well-respected lawyer in Adelaide.

I gave two grievances about the case of Thomas Easling on 17 and 18 of May 2011, and I stand by everything I said in those grievances. It is one of the few things Stephen Pallaras and I agreed on. In those speeches I told the house:

I am all for the polite convention that once an accused person is acquitted he or she is entitled to the presumption of innocence. Tom Easling is entitled to the presumption of innocence having been acquitted by a jury on 18 counts, 12 by unanimous not guilty verdicts and six by majority verdict. What I say is that a not guilty verdict is just that: it is not a verdict of innocent. It is a verdict that the prosecution did not prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. It sometimes happens that a criminal prosecution fails to prevail beyond reasonable doubt but that the same allegation prevails in a civil court on the balance of probabilities.

Mr Archer, Mr Gout and the member for Davenport—

I hasten to say a previous member—

prey on this legal principle not being widely known in society. It is appropriate that, once a not guilty verdict is given, the media, parliament and society should then apply the presumption of innocence. But Mr Archer, Mr Gout and the member for Davenport have not been applying the presumption of innocence as a shield for Mr Easling: they have been using it as a sword to assert that the not guilty verdict means that the investigation was crooked, the prosecution should not have been brought and the witnesses lied.

What I want to talk about now is the pressure that was brought to bear on ministers by Tom Easling's brother, John Easling. John Easling paid his money to attend Progressive Labor Business dinners. He was put on my table at one of these. His brother had not been charged at the time of the dinner. It was unusual for me to go to AFL football, but on one weekend a couple of years later I went to see the Crows play at Football Park. As I was taking my seat, I heard someone shouting at me from above me in the West Lakes grandstand. I scanned the crowd above. It was John Easling shouting that he had paid his money to Progressive Labor Business but now his brother Tom had been charged. His shouting was to the effect that he wasted his money and I was a useless minister.

Some years later, my partner, the member for Wright, was the minister for education and children's services. She had boarded a flight at Adelaide Airport. As she was settling into her seat, John Easling leant over the row of seats and shouted at her that she was a disgrace and much else besides. It took some minutes for the crew to get him to stop and lead him away. Needless to say, neither of us had any say in the prosecution decisions, as it should be. Those members who have not been ministers but have an ambition should take note: every day you go to work as a minister there are at least 100 ways you could lose your job.

In my early years as Attorney-General, Graham Archer wrote to me about the Keogh case. He pointed out that Today Tonight had screened some very harmful stories about me. He wrote that all this could change to positive stories if I did what he asked. I did not take up Archer's offer and never heard anything more other than vindictive defamation of me, culminating in a 2015 Hendrik Gout series that tried to link me to a family day-care scandal on the basis that I had been married to childcare centre operator Judith Atkinson. We barely knew each other, and neither Archer nor Gout had bothered to speak to either of us. Judith had not done anything wrong either, as it happens, but had been singled out because of her married name.

What I can say about the Keogh case and all the Today Tonight criminal cases is that even though I read all the Solicitor-General's advice carefully and painstakingly, I acted on the advice of the Solicitor-General at all times, and to have done anything else would have been a breach of my oath of office.

I wish Henry Keogh well now that his conviction has been set aside and now that he will not be retried owing to the poor health of a key witness. But here is the Court of Criminal Appeal's conclusion of its judgement after setting aside the conviction. It is the part that Graham Archer censors, not allowing Channel 7 viewers to hear it:

We do not accept the submission made by the applicant’s counsel that there should be a direction of acquittal. To the contrary, we consider that the non-expert circumstantial evidence, when considered together with the forensic pathology evidence as it is now understood, is such that it would remain open to a properly directed jury to convict. However, we expressly recognise that a properly directed jury may consider that that evidence would not be sufficient to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. These are truly jury questions and this judgment should not be taken to express a view on whether the applicant in fact committed the crime with which he was charged. For our part, our review of the material does not establish a case for an acquittal following this appeal. Accordingly, we would set aside the conviction and order a retrial.

I turn now to the Crown Solicitor's Trust Account contretemps. The Supreme Court judgement dismissing Kate Lennon's unfair dismissal claim deals comprehensively with those issues. It took six years for me to be vindicated by the judgement, and by then I was no longer Attorney-General. I gleefully annotated and underlined Justice Layton's judgement in a lovely square in sunny Nafplio, in the Peloponnese, to which it had been faxed.

The most telling vignette in the whole case was a huge sum of money being returned to the justice department unspent from the new Adelaide police headquarters. It was so big that the deputy head of AGD, Kym Kelly, could not process it at all, as it was over his monetary delegation. He therefore split the sum in two and put it in the Crown Solicitor's Trust, half in one financial year and half in the other. I thank the then auditor-general, Ken MacPherson, and Michael Jacobs, at The Adelaide Review, for a clear-headed explanation of what was going on when the opposition and The Advertiser were hysterical.

Treasurer Kevin Foley had every reason to test whether unspent carryover should be retained by each department, and Kate Lennon's and Kym Kelly's attempt to cheat the Hyperion system by diverting unspent moneys into the Crown Solicitor's Trust Account and pretending that it had been spent was deplorable and a fraud on the budget process.

As my old parliamentary roommate and friend the late Frank Blevins once told me, 'In politics, never turn the other cheek.' No-one seriously believed I knew what Kate Lennon and Kym Kelly were doing, but this became conflated with the question of whether I knew the Crown Solicitor's Trust Account existed at all. Apparently—and any members who are about to become ministers should listen—my incoming minister's brief of about 1,700 pages had mentioned the trust account as one of 28 administered funds in the department in dot points at about page 1500.

The Rann government's criminal justice policies were mocked by the Liberal opposition, the Greens and their allies in the media, but our tenure coincided with a drop of more than 40 per cent in the crime rate. One of the key factors was our willingness to employ DNA technology which my two predecessors had been cautious about. The Rann government ordered the DNA testing of all prisoners, all people charged with offences, and Mike Rann and I went around to the Forensic Science Centre to be DNA tested as volunteers.

Ms Redmond: And did you have any?

The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON: Sorry?

Ms Redmond: Did you have some DNA?

The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON: Yes, I thought you were interjecting, 'Were there any matches?' A modest increase in the imprisonment rate also assisted by giving society a slightly longer breather from career criminals, especially those remanded in custody. Improvements in car-locking technology helped, as did the widespread possession of iPhones and, of course, CCTV. I suppose 25 years of continuous economic growth helped as well, not that we are claiming credit for that. I also lifted the statute of limitations on historic sex offences. I was surprised by how many accused people pleaded guilty. We had to build special lodgings for male prisoners in their 70s and 80s. We also made much progress with the rights of victims of crime.

Returning to local issues, West Croydon matriarch Eileen Harris told me that the people in the queue for the cinema on South Road at Ridleyton in 1948 were talking about the need for an upgrade of South Road. Now it is happening, even though the Greens opposed it. It will make Renown Park, Ridleyton, Croydon, Hindmarsh and West Hindmarsh much better neighbourhoods and improve productivity. We are also in the midst of putting the Outer Harbor and Grange lines under the standard gauge freight line in the Parklands and putting the passenger line under Park Terrace. We are going to get new upgraded, rebuilt railway stations at Bowden and Croydon. No longer will freight trains stop on Hawker Street or Torrens Road. Memo to transport minister: Eileen Harris would be a good choice as the person to cut the ribbon on the Torrens to Torrens project.

During my time, Labor governments have done wonders for The Queen Elizabeth Hospital and the wonders have not ceased. Dr John Horowitz has been telling patients in clinical situations not to vote Labor for about 25 years, whether we are in government or opposition, so I doubt whether the latest injection of funding for The QEH is going to stop his doing that. He told my dear neighbour whom he was treating for a heart condition, Stanija, that I had got him suspended from The QEH, which is of course ludicrous as I had no idea that a younger professional colleague had complained about him.

When one becomes a minister, one's income increases and, as the Rann cabinet illustrated, ministers' clothes improved. I thought mine did. But my friend Rory McEwen put me in my place by telling me often that I came to cabinet dressed like a pox doctor's clerk.

The Hon. S.W. Key interjecting:

The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON: The member for Ashford says it is the bow tie; perhaps it is the braces. I think it would surprise most people to know that around the Rann cabinet table, minister Lomax-Smith and I were usually allies—the odd couple, as she put it. It was the two of us who argued unsuccessfully for the release on parole of lifers whose cases came before cabinet. I knew the Premier, then just a minister, was going for the top job when he deserted Jane and I and started backing continued incarceration in order to protect society.

One of the best things about the Rann cabinet was the presence of the member for Mount Gambier, Rory McEwen, and the member for Chaffey, Karlene Maywald. They brought to the table an understanding of the countryside and its rhythms, the price of grains and grapes, the price of lambs, wool and heifers, rainfall, the seasons, where small towns were located. During the drought and its dreadful effect on the Murray-Darling system, I would ring Karlene when I had looked at the Bureau of Meteorology website and exclaim, 'Karlene, have you seen how much rain they have had at Narrabri?' During the drought, we made plans to dam the Murray just south of Wellington.

The best things about the Rann cabinet, until about 2008, was that there were no leaks. We liked each other enough not to leak. And then the leaking started from the newly appointed Michael O'Brien, an old friend of mine from the mid-1980s. I do not know why he did it, but for him maybe it seemed sport. Michael was rewarded with glowing assessments of his abilities by those journalists to whom he leaked. The leaking contributed to the atmosphere of crisis leading into the 2010 general election, as did Michelle 'Chantel-wah', as Christopher Pyne always pronounced it.

After the 2010 general election, I went to the backbench because I had had enough. My marriage to Joan had broken up and I was living in an old row house on Coglin Street, Brompton, with my eldest son, Hugh. They were tough times for both Hugh and I, but he has done well ever since in his education and career, and now he is married to Dzenana and living in Hamilton Hill, above Fremantle.

In 2013, while I was in Hoi An in central Vietnam, on holiday with the member for Wright, I got a phone call offering me the Speakership. When the member for Wright then got a phone call from the Premier, she assumed she was going to be sacked or demoted—you know how it is, one per family. But, on the contrary, she was promoted to Minister for Education and Children's Services. We are grateful to the Premier for having confidence in us, despite our having been rusted-on Mike Rann loyalists, and these vocations have been fulfilling. We hope we did our best for the Premier and those we served. If I had known what a great gig the Speaker was, I would have got out of the ministry much earlier.

I have enjoyed my interactions with members of the opposition in my capacity as Speaker, particularly the leader, the member for Finniss, the member for Morialta and the member for Mount Gambier. The number of opposition questions has more than doubled and the number of Dorothy Dixers is at an all-time low.

Members interjecting:

The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON: Thank you. The member for Wright has a gift for detecting and punishing my vices and excesses. I could not imagine life without her. The member for Wright and I enjoy our morning and evening walks around the western suburbs. Sometimes, in Kilkenny or West Croydon, we walk past an old shopfront attached to a home. The shop has long been closed. The member for Wright says to me that, whether the Hon. Peter Malinauskas is elected as the member for Croydon or not, I should rent one of these shopfronts in retirement and renovate it. I should put fresh glass in the window and on the window I should paint the state's emblem, the piping shrike. Above it, I should paint the words 'Mick Atkinson—

The Hon. P. Caica: JP.

The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON: —JP'—and below it I should paint the words 'former member for Croydon'. I should provide a JP service from there and wait for constituents disgruntled with the new member to come. I know you all think I could do it, but I will not be or anything like it.

I look forward to cultivating my verge gardens, reading many books I always intended to read, punting at country races in the South-East and in the western district, harvesting Senator Don Farrell's grapes at Sevenhill, riding my bike with the member for Wright on our adventures, attending the Holy Mysteries more often and parachuting into a few electoral contests with the member for Wright to work our special kind of magic. I feel about my time in parliament as Bert Facey did about his life, when he concluded his memoir with the words:

I now wish to end this story. I have lived a very good life, it has been rich and full. I have been very fortunate and I am thrilled by it when I look back.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Well, member for Goyder, top that if you can.

Mr GRIFFITHS (Goyder) (16:33): Rather difficult, Deputy Speaker, but I do appreciate the opportunity. I commend the Speaker for his contribution, as all others will.

Can I start by saying that I never sought a life in politics. There are many in this place for whom it had become part of their teenage years and all through their 20s, when they sought a chance to be here. For me, it was a matter of being asked if I was interested. I am still grateful to that person who asked me. He and I do speak, though not as often as I would like. I reflect upon that telephone call he made to me, and I thank him for it because it has provided me with an opportunity I never thought I would seek or, indeed, have an opportunity to pursue.

I was preselected in April of 2005. It is an exciting period as a candidate. The ego goes wild and you think, 'God, people think that I am actually good enough to be in the parliament, the place where the great orators are, the most knowledgeable people who live in the state, those who possess every possible level of information and can make the best possible decisions for the future.' I have since learnt that I was rather naive in that belief I held coming into this place, but it is what I think should be captured as part of it. When I reflect upon the time I have spent here, it has not quite achieved the outcomes I thought it would, that is for sure.

When it comes to my political life, I will be forever grateful to those who believed that I had a future in it. I pay tribute to two people who have now passed, Robert and Sharon Schulze, who were from Maitland, where Donna and I live. I will be forever grateful to them. From a very early stage in my time working with Robert, he believed in me and became a very close friend and confidant. Sharon volunteered to remove herself from several roles in the Liberal Party to give me a chance not just to get to know the members in the area but also to get a greater knowledge of the community. I will always be thankful for their friendship and the support and encouragement they provided to me.

I was like all people as a first-time candidate: I thought my job was to go out and doorknock, and I did that for quite a few months while still trying to work full time. I left my work with the Yorke Peninsula Council only two months before the election, but I doorknocked about 7,000 homes and spoke to roughly 2,500 people. I was abused by many who reflected upon some actions and statements made by me in my previous role, but I was really welcomed by the absolute majority of people, and there is no doubt about that.

Until the day I die I will remember being in Dublin on an exceptionally hot day. The perspiration had dried on my face and my face was caked with salt. A lady invited me in, gave me two glasses of cold water and encouraged me to keep going. I have forever been a friend of hers, and if there is anything I want to know in the local community I go to her because I trust her implicitly. In the district we serve, I think we all need to have people we trust to tell us the truth—whether we want to hear it or not. She was a reflection of people across the electorate.

Goyder is a community of 70 different towns and locations. It would be wonderful to think that you had a photographic memory of every possible place and that you could remember every person you had ever met or who lived in the district but, unlike the Speaker, I do not possess that ability, even though across the electorate I guess I know probably about 10,000 people by face. I pride myself on knowing three generations at Glossop. I love knowing family history and community history because not only does it give you a connection with those places but it helps you to make better decisions and to represent the community in an improved way.

I was very lucky to be elected in 2006 election, which was a challenging election for the Liberal Party—there were only 15 of us on this side. I was one of four members who were elected on the primary vote at 50.1 per cent. It has improved since then, so I have been lucky in that regard because I represent an area that has traditionally voted Liberal and is very much a blue community, but they have high expectations. They want to make sure that the person they select has an opportunity to hold senior roles in the government, and the community deserves that. If the support is there, they want to see a return on that investment.

In that regard, I was very grateful when not long after the election Iain Evans, who was about to be elected as the leader of the Liberal Party, rang me and said that he would like me to take up a position as a shadow minister in areas that I had no experience in, and gambling was one of those—I am not a gambler by nature; I am a very frugal person—and I loved it.

Mr Pengilly: Tight.

Mr GRIFFITHS: 'Tight' is a word that some people use. Going to some of the Gamblers Anonymous meetings opened my eyes to those who live with the terrible scourge of what gambling does to their lives every day. Some people said to me that it was 15 years since they had gambled but that every day they had the urge to go in there and put money in those bloody machines. In every portfolio I have had the blessed honour to be involved in, I have learnt something and benefited from it as a person.

In my maiden speech, I reflected upon the words of John Meier, who was the member for Goyder before me. He was elected in 1982 for the first time. My great frustration is that I had many concerns similar to those he had about the needs that exist in the community. That goes back to 1982, and I know that when the next member for Narungga, as Goyder becomes at the election next year, makes their maiden speech—and my greatest wish is that it is Fraser Ellis, who is the candidate selected by the Liberal Party to replace me, and I think he will do a great job—they will reflect upon many of those same frustrations.

I know that I have said many times that governments are here to represent all. It is not just for me and it is not whether political need exists for expenditure to be undertaken, but it is where the priority exists for a community. I have taken that very strongly on some of the debates that I have had within the roles, and prior to the 2010 election about elections commitments to make. I think it is important that all of us can hold our heads high and say that we are trying to get the best possible outcome, instead of the political opportunity it represents. I know we lost the 2010 election because of it, too, so you have to try to find that balance. Politics is about needing to somehow find that balance.

I might just recount a story I have told a few people. For me, even though I had never sought an opportunity to be in politics, or thought that I would, I had a dream about it in 1995. So 11 years before I became a member I had such a vivid dream that I was the member for Goyder. I was not even living in the district anymore. The next morning, I told my wife, Donna, who is here in the gallery, because it was so vivid in my mind. When eventually the telephone call came from John Meier in December 2003 about an opportunity that might exist, I spoke to Donna and said, 'The dream is going to come true, darling.' I believed that no matter who else stood as a candidate I would be successful.

I am probably ad-libbing a bit on this, but I think Donna cried for three days. It was not because she did not believe that I could do it, but she was worried about the impact it would have upon us as a nucleus and on our family. It is still true today. I know for all of us in this chamber that it is a challenge to retain our relationships with our families, let alone with our friends. There is barely enough time in our lives to be close to those we love, let alone to those who have been important to us as we have grown up and, hopefully, will still be important to us as we leave. Donna has been such a wonderful support to me, and I will talk about my family later.

I have been grateful for every dollar that has ever been spent in Goyder, I have to tell you. When grant applications were made, my usual practice for a long time was to write to the minister and thank them. The member for Wright said to me, 'That's unusual, Steven. We don't get letters of thankyou from people.' But I believe it is important for those who sit on this side to have relationships with those who sit on that side. They can be collaborative. They do not need to be argumentative all the time; they need to be outcome based. So, when the money has come through, I have said thanks.

Indeed, I have thanked the Minister for Transport for the nearly $40 million that is coming through to the district as we speak because I believe investment has been determined because the priority exists. We have waited for it for a long time, but it just a fraction of what we need. No matter who represents the electorate that I currently serve, and no matter who sits on that side, the ongoing pressures will be immense to make the right decisions all the time. I know I have always spoken about roads and health services and water needs that exist in the community. It occurred in the 1982 speech of John Meier, it happened for me in 2006, and it will happen next year for the new member also.

One of the challenges is that we have to remove ourselves from any shyness that we have. You have to be an outspoken person to be a politician. You have to have the confidence to stand up and speak at the drop of a hat, to know the right questions to ask and to be able to give the answers to the questions that are posed to us. I have really enjoyed being challenged intellectually in that regard. I am a person who by nature loves to know the detail. I am not sure how I can remember all of it sometimes, but I do manage to bring some of it out, but I think afterwards I have missed a political opportunity that the knowledge of that detail gives me the chance to do.

I have loved public meetings. I have done some big ones in our community, where we have had 700, 600, 500 and 400 attend, and they have been about health and that sort of thing. I have been blessed that when people stood up in the crowd and wanted to ask a question I knew who they were. It is just such a fantastic thing to do. It gives you a connection to the fact that, yes, the question is being asked, but you know the reason why the question is being asked, and you know the reason why the investment needs to occur to give those people hope. They are asking because they are desperate for an outcome and because they believe in government.

I do not believe that they actually distinguish between the three levels of government anymore. I think a blanket has been thrown over federal, state and local, and people just say they want 'government' to provide it without understanding how it is determined. That is part of the communication challenge that we possess in this place: to make people aware of it. I want to reflect a little bit upon the tumultuous times that I experienced within our party room in the first four years.

Iain Evans came in as leader with the member for Bragg as the deputy. The member for Waite became the leader, I think around 16 months later or thereabouts, and there were tumultuous times then also. Then the member for Heysen became the leader. In part of the process, I put my hand up as deputy leader on the previous ballot, not necessarily thinking that I was going to win, when the member for Heysen became the leader. It surprised a lot of people. I know I am not a political beast, but I wanted to try to ensure that I was part of a team that made a difference.

Subsequently, when another ballot was held a week later, when there was a change again and I became the deputy leader, I committed myself totally to the Liberal Party and, indeed, the member for Heysen. My life changed, I have to tell you. I barely saw many things that had been common parts of my life for the previous 40 years. In the five weeks prior to the 2010 election, I told Donna that I had spent 13 hours in the electorate and for six of those I was asleep. There is nothing like it.

Members who live with the constant pressure adjust to it, I imagine. But from an opposition perspective your life is different. Yes, you are expected to critique and criticise and challenge all the time, but there is not the pressure that comes with the level of data that comes through in order to make the decisions to ensure that the structures you are in control of operate efficiently. In that nine-month period I had to step up to a level that I did enjoy. I loved getting to know everything. It felt as though we lived in this clustered, protected world, where we were told things that were occurring without necessarily experiencing them ourselves. We had to believe what others told us, and it was not always correct because they had a perspective on it, too.

Mr Pederick: Funny about that.

Mr GRIFFITHS: Yes. I found it exhilarating to be told that, for two of the many press conferences I held, the future of the campaign depended upon how well I went. It did not quite turn out that way. It went alright, those went okay. I thought that election day in 2010 would be either the best of days or the worst of days for me. Politically, it was not: two days beforehand was. Some in this chamber know that I was then shadow treasurer, and I had to present the forward estimates and the predictions from the Liberal Party. I was proud that we put 27 pages of notes together, which we provided to the media, setting out what we wanted to do. A billion-dollar surplus was projected as part of that. I was indeed very proud of so many aspects of it.

In the 35 minutes or thereabouts of the press conference, I did not have to refer to those notes once. I am told by others that even experienced members, who are used to media pressure, start quivering at the lips and that sort of stuff once it gets to about 15 minutes. We get anxious about what the next question is going to be and what our answer will be. I know that I walked away proud of that, but the challenge for me occurred several hours later when, after words to one print media outlet, I said things that I do not necessarily walk away from. Upon reflection, I would say it differently, that is true, but the message I tried to espouse then would have been the same. I just would have said it in a slightly different way.

Others on that side seized upon that, and it was the lead story the next morning. My life started to fall apart, I have to tell you. It made it exceptionally difficult for the member for Heysen as the leader. I know that she was under extreme pressure. Isobel and I met very early the next morning, and I tried to explain what had occurred and what I had said. I think Isobel was suffering overload too.

Ms Redmond: Absolutely.

Mr GRIFFITHS: Absolutely. It was the busiest period of our lives. It did not happen the way I wanted it to. At the hotel that night—where we all were hoping to celebrate but instead we were commiserating—there was a bank of TV crews and we were doing all these successive interviews. We were talking about our belief that we could still win, even though it was close in a few seats, but the background question always was what had occurred two days earlier.

As a person who was used to a level of success and never failure, be it with the love of my life, the family I am blessed to have, the sport I had attempted to play or the professional career I had attempted to have in local government, to have the psychological mind change occur within a short amount of time was a real kick for me. It made it exceptionally difficult for me. I am not proud to admit that in the period after that I became a person I did not like. The person I portrayed it to most was Donna, and I will be forever sorry for the way I treated her and the way I reacted to her. The fact I am still with her is because of her strength and her character. For you, I say a sincere thank you. Blessedly, though, eventually I again became the person I had always been.

To some degree, we went through the cycles that occurred after that. Donna and I were on a cruise and we got a message that distressed me immensely. That was about shadow portfolio responsibilities also. Then changes occurred later on. However, I was returned to the shadow ministry before the 2014 election, and I am very grateful for that. It has shown me that there is more to life than what occurs in this place and how it impacts on us.

Our life is committed to it and it takes away our life. I reflected earlier upon the challenge to retain friendships, let alone the relationship with your family. I know we all have similar stories. At times you manage to get a few short hours to spend time with friends and all of a sudden you have to leave early because you have to go somewhere else and read a briefing paper and get ready for something that is occurring the next morning. Your partner is equally impacted by it, and you regret that and feel sorry about that and you can never make up for that, but when we get out of this place we have to try to improve ourselves. I have always been lucky.

I have enjoyed the parliamentary debates that have occurred in here. If I reflect upon a reasonably significant number of pieces of legislation for which I have had responsibility in this place, it was the planning, development and infrastructure legislation that nearly did my head in. That was such a complex bill, with 230 pages and eventually 400 amendments and a lengthy debate. I know I was fairly repetitive in my 3½-hour contribution to the second reading, but the committee stage debate went on for 10½ hours. It was exceptionally lengthy. To minister Rau, the Minister for Planning, I say thank you for sitting there that whole time while we went backwards and forwards asking questions about the scenarios attached to individual clauses.

I say a sincere thank you to the member for Heysen for her contribution in the committee stage, with no prior knowledge. The member for Heysen has the capacity to read legislation and consider an issue about that. She was here for those first two hours at the very start, which gave me a bit of a break, but it was just about exclusively me asking questions, other than a couple of minor questions from some members. Being in the chamber until midnight with the sole responsibility to ask questions takes it out of you. The fact that the member for Heysen and others have done it for hours and hours makes me think that there are really smart people who come to this place. Not all people are, but some are very smart. There is no doubt about that.

Mr Pisoni: Name them.

Mr GRIFFITHS: Now is the time, I suppose. It is because of my nature of being a detailed person that I wanted the questions to be asked. I truly believe that we have not, in my time in this place, used the committee-level investigation anywhere near enough. It has been very disappointing. That is partially our fault; significantly it is our fault. We are the ones who are charged with doing that from an opposition perspective.

Because the planning legislation is such a contentious area and because it has the risk for litigation to be undertaken, involving significant dollars, it is important to put scenarios on the record and to get a response from the minister because I believe that becomes a guide not just for the regulations that come from the legislation but for future decisions that are made against it. I think we should do that a lot more. The planning legislation was debated for five weeks in the Legislative Council. It is just mind-boggling to me that it occurred that way.

This morning, the five retiring members from the Liberal Party had a photo taken. Unfortunately, the member for MacKillop was not here on time. We thank the leader for being available for it. We know that we five from the Liberal Party have served 77 years. I did a quick addition on the Labor Party members who are retiring, and I pay recognition to that, and I think they were 108 years or thereabouts.

There is no doubt that a significant level of corporate knowledge is being lost. I am empowered when I see the quality of the younger people who come into our side. I know they will become good ministers, but please never be afraid to pick up the telephone and ask sometimes. While we might not have had the chance to sit over on that side, we have been involved in lots of discussions and we know lots of historical stuff and lots of scenarios and we can give those younger members some good advice. Not only will a lot of historical knowledge be lost but also a lot of experience and skillsets will be lost.

In my parliamentary time I had the opportunity to be on a few parliamentary committees. I was on a work-life balance select committee and Donna said to me, 'Why are you on that committee when it requires you be away from home more often? Why are you on a work-life balance select committee?'

Members interjecting:

Mr GRIFFITHS: Yes, I know, and they do not know anything about it. We formed some good guidelines because there has to be more chance for the family nucleus to exist. In the modern times in which we live, where what has traditionally occurred in families is being disjointed now to some degree, it is really important for that connection to occur more often. I say to employers: that is part of the challenge; give your employees that chance.

I really did enjoy the sustainable agriculture select committee, too, and there are a few other members in the chamber today who were part of that. It is such an important part of not just the community in which I live but the economy of the state. One of the main questions I asked of those who were policymakers was about the imbalance in the interaction between mining and agriculture and I asked that because of the mining proposal on Yorke Peninsula.

I asked—these are my words, not theirs—what level of land should be sacrificed for that diversification to occur? There is no correct answer to that, and I understand that. It is a decision that has to be made based on needs. The problem is that, when you are a member of parliament and you interact with the community seemingly every day and you talk about mining for nearly nine years, it wears you down. So as much as the planning legislation did my head in, the mining debate that occurs on the Yorke Peninsula area in particular is one that I cannot even begin to explain how I feel about.

I am torn between the need for the state government to provide a forum and an opportunity for diversification to occur—that is a prime responsibility at a policy level—and the needs of a community that does not want a change to occur. How do you get the balance right? Many outside the immediate area reflect upon the fact that they want the changes and opportunities to occur and they see the investment that will happen that will make a leap forward in growth opportunities and many services. They want to see it occur, so it is part of our challenge. I know the mining bill is not going to get through the other place. It does include a lot of changes that are good, but I still voted against it because of exempt land versus restricted land.

I want to put on the record that I officially love all Liberal Party members who live in Goyder. I am sending out Christmas cards now, which is much earlier than I normally do, I can tell you. To those people, I owe a sincere vote of thanks. I cannot begin to explain the personal levels of support that I have received from so many of those people over the last 12 years. They saw this 42 year old come in and thought he could represent them. They gave him a chance and I hope that the return has been there for them. I have been very lucky.

Like many members here, I have a busy diary. For me, a lot of it has been based around community needs. I have always had the philosophy that I accept the first invitation, not necessarily the one that might be the bigger event that gives me the opportunity to promote myself and the party more. I like to pay respect to those who invite me first. It means that sometimes you will be with little groups, but so be it. They are all important and I learnt that very early on.

Politics has also given me the chance to meet so many great people and indeed to see the sad side of our society too. The thing I have always appreciated, though, is that it gives you an opportunity to connect with them and hope that the experiences you bring to the role give them a chance to get the level of representation they need and to know who you need to contact to get people to help them.

For those on the good side of the ledger, it is in abundance. There are challenges for those people, but the number of people out there I have spoken to every day who are willing to take up that challenge of growth because they want their family to be successful and, by association, want their communities and the state to be successful is inspirational, and it is reflected in the 140,000 small businesses that exist in South Australia. All power to them. Government policy needs to support them, reduce the workload that exists upon them and give them the greatest possible chance of economic return and viability because they are the ones who take the risks. They are great people.

Others will reflect upon school tours. Not all of us have the chance to do them and there have been some busy times when some groups of kids have come in, but I have loved it. I probably got better questions from the little ones compared to the older ones.

Ms Redmond: How do you change the light globes?

Mr GRIFFITHS: Yes, or, 'What is this button for?' and that sort of stuff. But in every tour I have done, there is a different question asked that I have never heard before. I have appreciated the member for Unley with his wooden swords and the talk about the blood line, and that sort of stuff. I have used the example many times.

The parliament has sat since 1857 and I believe probably close to 750 or 800 members have had a chance to be elected. Their portraits or their photos, where they exist, are on display in the members' lounge, so it is a very humbling thought to have had the chance to do this. It is a very select group. It is not just the ego and the chance to use the dining room or the car park that has been provided: it is the challenge that it represents with the community to be given that responsibility.

The Hon. P. Caica: And few of them would be as good a bloke as you are, Steven; that's true.

Mr GRIFFITHS: I am very grateful for that. I understand that leaving voluntarily from this place after 12 years is a relatively short period of time compared to most. Like many who come in, who see themselves as 16 or 20-year people, I always hoped I would be here for 16 years. I understand the decisions that were made earlier this year about changes, but they made me lose my desire. I always hoped that the level of what I thought others saw in me—detail, trying to get the right outcomes and being thorough in what I do—would give me a chance one day to sit on that side of the Speaker and one day to sit in the front. That was never going to be a chance for me after the decisions made earlier this year, so I made the choice to be selfish. That is what it came down to.

I did so on the basis that I believed I could run next year. I believed I would be successful, even though a challenging political climate exists, but I knew I would let my community down in that four-year cycle. You have to try to forward-project yourself and consider what sort of person you become, and I just knew that I would be a grumpy, frustrated old man who would complain about everybody. The community deserves better than that and I think the parliament deserves better than that, so that is why I saw it was time for a change. Donna does not necessarily like that answer from me all the time, but I knew I would become that if I stayed here for one more term. I think that is a bit of an abject lesson for all of us, to consider when is the end our of time and what it can be.

To colleagues on all sides of the house, I say a sincere thank you. Some have been really close, friendly relationships, I have to tell you, and for that I will always be grateful. I tell people back in the community that there are some Labor members I would happily go to the pub with and have a beer, and I would not say that about all of my colleagues either—that is just it. I am not sure what has been said about me behind my back, and I have been grateful for that. This morning was an interesting example of legislation going through very quickly because there was a need to create time for people such as me to have a chance to speak before we rise tomorrow night, but it is interesting.

Parking across the road, I have walked to North Terrace and looked at this building in a different way. For so many years, we would drive the car park, come in the back way and, going up the lift, 'Shit, I'm on the second floor again,' sorry about the swear word, 'but I want to move somewhere else'. At least when we park in Hindley Street we walk across the road and get to see the building, and I have reflected upon it in a different way—not just on my own end of term period that exists for me but indeed on the importance of the place. It is as though I have had a connection back to what I always thought it was: the people's place. It is the reason we exist and why we are challenged to do what we do, and I hope others do it also because it is a great honour.

To Parliament House staff I want to say a sincere thank you for the polite way in which they have dealt with me at all times and the quick responses that have always been given to me, and that is the full spectrum of staff, here and in PNSG. I would like to thank ministers' staff for briefing opportunities and the chance to ask questions. They have always been very responsive and really quick in responding. Health has been a bit of a challenge to get responses in reasonably short time lately, I must admit, but the Minister of Transport, for example, is always good, so well done.

To the staff I have been blessed to have, all I can say is that I have been very lucky, and that is just it. I will name them by their first names: Skye, Vanessa, Maddie, Emily, Diantha, Haley, Rachel, Rosemary, Holly and Kim. The one constant person in those times is Kim. To her, I say a really sincere thank you. Kim has made me appear to others to be far more intelligent than I actually am, I have to tell you. It is as though Kim and I started to think in the same way. The briefing papers Kim would help me prepare, or take the responsibility to prepare, were always as I liked them. It is not because I became lazy but because it reflected the way I thought. Kim is a wonderful person, a great asset to the people and the Goyder electorate office, and the parliament has been lucky that you have been working with us for so long, Kim, so well done.

In terms of the staff who have been with me—and Kim reflected upon this—people have not necessarily left me. She said, 'That is because of the quality of boss you are, Steven.' That is very nice of her to say so, but it is because I always say thank you to people, and that is part of my problem: I am too bloody polite. As politicians, you cannot be too polite all the time. To the staff who do things for me I have always said thank you, and I have been blessed in that 12-year cycle. Skye, for example, who was my first employee, was my PA at Yorke Peninsula Council. She left that role a month before she was eligible to get her pro rata long service leave to come and work for me and lost the opportunity of seven years' long service leave accruement. To her I say a sincere thank you, too. In the spectrum between Skye to who we are now, I have been very lucky indeed.

Friends have been a real challenge, I have to tell you. I reflect on how just prior to the 2010 election—two weeks beforehand—Donna and I went to Mount Gambier, to the wedding of a daughter of some of our best friends. I had to do radio in the morning, which interrupted the time we were spending with them. We had the wedding and the reception, and then we had to leave at 10.30 to drive back to Adelaide that night because the Liberal Party launch for the campaign was the next morning, or late the next morning or early afternoon.

We left at 10.30, and my friend was crying, not because his daughter was getting married but because he was grateful for the effort I had made to be there. I was humbled by that because I was there because I love him and his wife and his family—that is just it—but it is really nice to think that sometimes people think that we put ourselves out to do that. We all have to do that to retain those friendships; you cannot just say no all the time to invitations and opportunities. We have to try to find some really precious time within our diaries to actually be with people.

In terms of my own family, I have been very lucky. My son Tyler was only 16 when I was elected, and Tyler is now a wonderful young man of 28 and married to Katie, who is from Yorke Peninsula also. They live in Adelaide, and they have an 18-month-old child, Nate, so our family unit has improved tremendously. When Tyler and Katie got married I said, 'You improved the gene pool.' That is just it: tall, thin, smart. I could not ask for anything more than that, I have to tell you. And my grandson will be—

Ms Redmond: Tall, thin, smart.

Mr GRIFFITHS: He's smarter, yes. He will be very smart. My daughter Kelsey's husband, Peter, is a farmer from Yorke Peninsula, just a bit south-east of Maitland. He works hard. He really works hard. They farm about 6,000 acres, and they are leasing some more country, so they will be doing 7,500 next year. To me, he and his dad are examples of good people who deserve to be supported.

Pete and I have had a challenge, in that he has been very much against mining and I have had to be in the middle trying to get the process to be right and get the outcome right. I said at Peter and Kelsey's wedding that, while he and I do not agree on everything—there are some things, indeed, we do not talk about—I will always respect that as a young person of only 24 he stood up and became a voice for what he believed in. He got involved in high-level groups, took on chairing roles and deputy chair roles. He is chair of an egg bureau now and that sort of stuff. It is really fantastic to have young people stand up; my son-in-law is an example of that and I am tremendously proud of him.

I wondered how I was going to finish, beyond saying a real thank you to everybody, but I am a bit of a TV watcher from way back, and M*A*S*H was one of my favourite shows. Those who know the M*A*S*H series may know the last episode was called Goodbye, Farewell and Amen. For me, it is Amen.

The Hon. S.W. KEY (Ashford) (17:07): First of all, I would like to acknowledge that we meet today on the land of the Kaurna people and pay our collective respects to the elders both past and present. I am very proud that this has become part of our procedure in this house and at many functions and meetings we go to.

I finally summoned up enough courage to read my first speech in this place, which was on 4 December 1997. We had a bit of trouble in the office finding it because on the same day I also made a speech about unfair dismissal and my concerns about the changes that the then Liberal government were going to bring in restricting workers' access to unfair dismissal measures. One of the reasons why I was quite concerned about my first speech is that, as people know in here, when someone passes on, in the condolence motion bits of the first speech are quite often read out, and I thought, 'This will be dreadful!'

One of the reasons I had such reservations is that it had never been my ambition to be a member of parliament. Basically, I had filled in as a Labor candidate for Hanson a few months before the 11 October 1997 election, and I was not quite sure what I was supposed to do or say, having got in here. I had spent many years in this place before becoming a member of parliament, particularly as a youth, housing and environmental activist and as a feminist and a trade union official lobbying government, both federal and state and commenting on legislation and policy and demonstrating, particularly out the front of Parliament House. I must say these days I find it very strange demonstrating out the front of Parliament House when I am actually in here, but I am sure I will lose that concern shortly.

I had the opportunity to campaign in my other life on changes to the Equal Opportunity Act, the Occupational Health, Safety and Welfare Act as it was called, the Worker's Rehabilitation and Compensation Act, Disability Discrimination Act, and I had been (and still am) a very big campaigner against uranium mining and now dumps. My experience up until then was as a South Australian Housing Trust board member, a member of the Prime Minister's Advisory Committee on Women, on various industrial relations committees and inquiries, and in lobbying and campaigning.

I was told that the Liberal Party was delighted when I took over from the previous hardworking and excellent candidate for Labor, Mark Butler. They put out information describing me as a person who had a track record of being a feminist, a trade unionist, a socialist and an environmentalist. So while doorknocking and at many preselection functions and public meetings, I was asked if this description with the implied criticism was true, and of course I would answer yes very proudly.

I think it would be fair to say that despite the great support I got during the campaign, it was a shock when I won. It meant that my dear better half, as he calls himself, Kevin, made the decision to put his career aside in Canberra and come back to Adelaide. In fact, because he had not been involved in the election campaign, he was quite shocked to see a poster of his other half on the Stobie poles all the way from the Airport to where we were living in Mile End. It really was quite a shock for him. I am very proud of him and delighted that at least he got the opportunity to do his PhD at Adelaide University. I know he has been of great assistance to the wider labour movement and more recently with the Asbestos Diseases Society of South Australia.

My family, both the Purse and Key family, have always been supportive, even though these days we have an expanding clan and we have a couple of Liberal voters and also a couple of Greens voters. Despite this, they have always helped me in all election campaigns. I have to say that my friends have been outstanding in their support. I still have the same close circle of friends I had when I started, so I am very pleased, and I hope that continues. I have also made a lot of new friends, too.

After discussion with Kevin; my late mother, Ms Steve Key; and Ms Betty Fisher, now in her 90s, I decided that my only way of surviving in this new job was to have a clear agenda. The electorate office work was almost second nature, having always been working as an advocate. I love electorate work and following that, not in the same order, was my agenda when I started here. As other members have said, like them I was fairly unhappy coming into this place, my first couple of years in particular. I had gone from a job that I loved, being a trade union official and advocate, to coming in here and being not really sure that this was the place I should be.

Anyway, my agenda included matters that I have been involved in outside, which were improvements to the Equal Opportunity Act, particularly in regard to recognising de facto couples, same-sex couples, adoption and parenting rights. I was particularly keen to make sure that the rights of the child to know their biological origins was clear. Twenty years ago, it is interesting to look at some of the information that was coming out about reproductive technology, and I was very concerned about the fact that in some cases people did not have access to that information.

The rights and support for injured and ill workers were certainly on the list, as was parental leave. I had been successful as a union official in negotiating unpaid parental leave and adoption leave, but it was really the next step of getting financial support for parental leave that I was keen on achieving. There is occupational health and safety legislation, particularly in the areas of mental health, dust diseases and repetitive strain injury. Because of my work at the Transport Workers Union, I was particularly keen to see improvements for long-distance transport drivers.

I am a great supporter, and always have been, of the Public Service, and have lamented the number of things that have been contracted out, even to the non-government sector. I do not think that is a very good strategy, but it has happened. I am opposed to further privatisation. On housing and homelessness, I had the opportunity as a housing activist and also, as I said before, as a board member of the Housing Trust, to work in that area.

I am really concerned. If we look at the statistics that came out today, we still have too many people who are homeless and we need to do something about that. We also have a number of people who cannot get affordable housing. I think it is something that we can solve in SA, and I commend the Don Dunstan foundation. The member for Fisher and I have been working with them on their zero homelessness campaign. That is something that is achievable, so we really need to keep an eye on that.

I am one of those old environmentalists who thinks that opposing uranium mining and nuclear waste dumps is a very good idea. I know there have been different arguments about so-called job creation in that area but, sadly, my original view about job creation in that sector has come true. I joined very early on as a member of parliament the national politicians' group for a nuclear-free future. The only thing wrong with that group was that having convened a couple of the meetings here in South Australia with the Democrats, who were particularly prominent at the time, of the two days that we had for the meeting one day was spent on what we would call 'the group'. So I found that fairly depressing, but we did come up with 'Politicians for a nuclear-free future'. That is what we are and that is what we continue to be.

The other area that I feel quite passionate about, having benefited from adult education, is access to further education, TAFE, Workers' Educational Association and university. As someone who has benefited from that scheme, I feel very strongly about people having an opportunity, not just school leavers—obviously I feel concerned about them—but also people having a chance to educate themselves. Education is one of the most powerful things that one can do, particularly to change their circumstances.

I had a wonderful experience working for the Australian Council of Trade Unions as a disability advocate, which is really important. I also worked for the Trades and Labor Council on recognising different abilities and disabilities of people. In those days, I did not even dream about the NDIS. This is something that I know the member for Reynell and minister is going to follow through with, but it was beyond my dreams that we would even have that sort of agenda.

Boosting consumer rights is an area that I feel very strongly about. I had the opportunity to work with Ralph Nader, from the US, who was the campaigner in this area. His influence has always been with me. I also know that as much as I did not have a lot to do with Don Dunstan as the premier—he was certainly before my time at the Working Women's Centre—looking at consumer legislation was one of his areas, too. I know that Mike Rann was very passionate about this area as well.

What we now call advance care directives—we have a term—getting people to think about their arrangements, not just having a will, has been something that has been with me for a long time, too. I became a Justice of the Peace in my early 20s when I was at the Working Women's Centre, and I have seen a number of people needing to get their act together in this area. I commend all the people who have worked on this reform. This is something that I feel that I have contributed to. I think it still needs more work, but I would particularly like to acknowledge the member for Playford, minister Jack Snelling at the time, for carrying on and introducing that legislation.

I have raised the need for recognition of carers, from the experiences of both family and friends. I am really pleased that there is some recognition at this time later for both voluntary and paid workers in the caring area. Over the years, I cannot count how many people, particularly young people I know, who have been carers for their family and friends. This is an area that has now been taken up and looked at. We need to do more work, but certainly there have been some improvements.

An area that I could go on about for quite some time, but I will not, is my passion for promoting community arts projects of various types. I have had the benefit of being involved in many different projects myself both as a trade union person and also as a community activist. I had the honour of being on the Community Arts Network Board for many years, as a peak body, and note the great work that they did.

I have been involved and campaigned with a number of women's organisations. EMILY's List had just started and I am very proud to be a foundation member of EMILY's List. I am also a Women's Electoral Lobby long-term campaigner and also a long-term member of the Women's Abortion Action Coalition. In latter years, I am very pleased that, with the inspiration of the member for Florey, the Muriel Matters Society has done some fantastic work in the equity area and taken up a lot of the issues that many of us feel need to be promoted in the community.

Following on from previous members of parliament, one of the areas that I am really happy about is the women's caucus in the South Australian parliament. The Hon. Sandra Kanck, the Hon. Anne Levy AO, the Hon. Diana Laidlaw AO and the Hon. Carolyn Pickles were significant members of that early caucus. I think they had to be significant because there were not that many women in parliament. We managed to swell the numbers of women in 1997 and the Labor Party has had a commitment to do that ever since.

I want to pay tribute to them to make sure that new women coming into parliament feel supported. I am very pleased to say that, along with a number of my colleagues who are not here now, we have continued the tradition and it is alive and well. I say to members in this parliament and certainly the new parliament that the sisters are watching you, and there are a number of us who will be outside the parliament shortly who will be watching.

I have been committed to the reform of the sex industry in South Australia for a long time now, probably 30-odd years, having had the benefit of working with sex workers when I was at the Working Women's Centre, as well as through different trade union jobs that I have had. The Sex Workers Union, which was originally connected, in South Australia at least, to the Federated Clerks Union and then the Australian Services Union, as it is now, have been fantastic campaigners—unsuccessful ones, but fantastic.

I am very impressed with the opportunities I have had and the education I have had through Scarlet Alliance, SWAGGER and also our local group, the Sex Industry Network. They have done some fantastic work to support sex workers in South Australia and across the network through New Zealand and Europe.

Voluntary euthanasia was on my list, mainly because my parents were strong supporters of voluntary euthanasia and were hoping that this would become law a long time ago. I must say that as older children we were always very worried about our parents' advocacy in this area because we just imagined that one day we would go and visit them and they would have taken their own action with regard to voluntary euthanasia. Fortunately, that did not happen, but I always that that feeling of concern, because particularly my mother felt so strongly about people's right to be able to chose their own end.

It is probably good that I have not had the opportunity in the past to speak about my view on voluntary euthanasia, which I guess would be a very pure one. I think it is a person's right to decide their end, and I think it is also a person's right to decide whether they want to assist someone with that decision. I am very concerned about some of the legislation that has come forward. I have been involved in a number of bills in my time in here, but I would really like to congratulate the Victorian parliament on their decision today to pass what I think is reasonable voluntary euthanasia legislation.

I would also like to thank the colleagues who have worked on this legislation over time: the late Bob Such, the late Frank Blevins, Sandra Kanck, Anne Levy AO, John Quirk and Duncan McFetridge in particular. I thank them very much for the work they have done. I also mention the joint bill that I had with the Hon. Mark Parnell.

Others can judge how well my agenda has gone, but I have certainly had that in mind. It has been important to me because it is very easy to be drawn off onto other issues. I think there are enough issues there for someone to be pretty busy as it is.

I have also appreciated the opportunity to be a shadow minister, despite the complete lack of resources and support in those days. Not that I have ever had a problem with this, but it did provide a work discipline that made me read the estimates documents, the Auditor-General's Report and annual reports, and also take much more interest in what was actually being presented in parliament. I keep on saying, particularly to the member for Morphett, that it is good practice. I know the member for Morphett has since left the Liberal Party, but it is good practice, and if you are a shadow minister, it will make you a really good minister.

As much as he and I are good friends, he was saying that he would be very happy if I had not won the seat of Ashford in the last election because he really wanted to be a minister. I think there were a few others over there who said the same thing. Being a shadow minister did help with the rigours of being a minister, and I really appreciated the help that I received when I was a shadow minister. A lot of people were very excited about the fact that I had a number of different portfolios.

I cannot name them all, but I would really like to acknowledge the work particularly of some of the non-government organisations like SACOSS, SPARK, YACSA, the Working Women's Centre, Positive Life SA, the women's studies resource centre—that does not exist anymore; I will not go there—Community and Neighbourhood Houses, community centres, and SA Unions. I also acknowledge individual unions including the Australian Services Union, United Voice, Transport Workers Union, PSA, the Australian Education Union, and some of the housing organisations that I worked with, like Shelter SA.

I was very proud to become the social justice minister in 2002 and also a further education minister a bit later in the Rann Labor government. The portfolios that I had responsibility for at different times were women and youth, which I had for the entire time; ageing; disability; housing; community welfare; further education; employment; and higher education. I absolutely loved working in all those areas. I was greatly supported by other ministers.

The Speaker and member for Croydon talked about some of those early days in the first four years of our being in government. I had the best ministerial office. It was headed up by Mr Angas Story. The team, including our two drivers, who were fabulous, was a great group of people. I really appreciate all of them. I will not name them all because I think it is probably a career-limiting move on their part, but they were all terrific. We had a lot of fun, too. I think that they had more fun than I did, but it was a good place to be. At the same time, the long-suffering electorate staff, Geoff McCaw, Meredith Boyle, Carol Martinella and all the volunteer JPs, were excellent in supporting me to be able to be a minister as well as dealing with the electorate issues we always seemed to have in our place.

I have had the privilege of being on a number of parliamentary committees, including the Environment, Resources and Development Committee, the Parliamentary Committee on Occupational Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation (whose name has to change) and the Natural Resources Committee as a member and then as the Presiding Member of the OSRC and the NRC. I have found committee work to be educative, rewarding and fun. It has been a great opportunity to work across the houses of the Legislative Council and the House of Assembly and with members from other parties and Independents. I am proud of the committee work that has been achieved.

The staff supporting these committees have been excellent, and I thank them all for their research, support, advice and also patience in some cases. In mentioning the staff in Parliament House, I need to pay tribute to the fabulous labour force in this house. The care and support they show is really appreciated. To the catering staff, cleaning staff, building services, chamber staff—both in the House of Assembly and the Legislative Council—administration, Hansard, support services and all the other staff, thank you. You really are appreciated. All the parliamentary counsel have been helpful and patient over the 20 years, but I would especially like the thank former parliamentary counsel Richard Dennis and, more recently, Mark Herbst and his team for the work they provide.

Along with the constituents, I believe that Hanson and Ashford—Team Ashford—have had a number of wins, whether it is getting red-light cameras at local primary schools, negotiating a power or water bill or reopening a railway station like the Millswood station. I am proud of the work we have done at the Ashford electorate office. There are a number of people I have had the honour to work with, and I will mention them because it is fairly obvious that they are on the Labor side of politics: Manuel Chrisan and Michael Subacious, who were the first to job-share one electorate staffer position, Lindy McAdam, again when we had one person in the electorate office; Astrid Roth; Meredith Boyle; and then a whole series of trainees who came into the office.

The team we have at the moment is Geoff McCaw and Carol Martinella. They have been pretty constant. Our current trainee is Elena Kaipalexis. There have been a number of casual staff who have worked in our office, and we have had a number of JPs; in fact, every day we have a JP service with a volunteer, and I am very impressed that they take the time to do that.

We have a number of volunteers who are very happy to be letter-stuffers and also walk the streets of Ashford, and we have also had a number of staff who have helped on specific campaigns: the wonderful Anne Bunning and the work that she has done in particular on a number of issues, but certainly on voluntary euthanasia; all-rounder, the late Paul Martinella; and Mark Thomson, who is my partner in crime with all things community arts.

We are currently working on a big campaign with regard to the digital divide in the community, which we are really worried about. Former senator Anne McEwen has been a very casual electorate officer but wonderful part of the team. Penny Gregory used to work for the former member for Reynell, Gay Thompson, and she has turned up and been a fabulous help. There are also a number of other people who back up our staff, and if we can get them into the office we do.

I am very proud of the work done in the electorate office. I see our electorate office doing a good job, providing support and responding to requests and problems that come up in the electorate and in the area. The member for Kavel knows this, but I have also been the duty member for Kavel and, more recently, the duty member for Morphett. I would like to thank the sub-branch members in those electorates for all their work and also say that they have felt quite comfortable about going to their local member, despite being obvious ALP members, and I found the staff and the members to be very supportive, as we are and as we should be.

Over the past 20 years, I have had the pleasure (maybe 'pleasure' is not the word) of working with a number of local councils—to start off with, Charles Sturt and, more recently, Mitcham, Unley, Marion and West Torrens, and also the Local Government Association. I particularly valued the work and support of Jim Hullick and also Wendy Campana. I want to thank them for their input.

As an MP and minister, I have had an opportunity to work with or receive advice from—whether I wanted it or not—a number of federal members of parliament: former members Amanda Vanstone, Jennie George, Nick Bolkus, Simon Crean, Julia Gillard, Brendan Nelson, Anne McEwen and Peter Duncan. There are lots of others, but they are ones who stick in my mind in particular. I have had the wonderful opportunity to have advice from the late Gough Whitlam, Neal Blewett, John Cornwall (who was the state health minister here), Bob Hawke and, more recently, comrades like Linda Burney, Penny Wong, Tony Zappia, Mark Butler, Tanya Plibersek and Anthony Albanese.

I also need to acknowledge my first campaign manager, the now member for Hindmarsh, Steve Georganas and, of course, Wendy, and really the whole expanding Georganas family. They, the adults, are true friends and comrades both to me and to Kevin. During my last campaign, Ben Waters was the campaign manager. With his great skills and patience, he has now found his place working for a borough in England as a chief of staff and, before that time, being involved in general elections as an advocate for the British Labour Party, managing to return a Labour member of parliament in a seat held by the Conservatives. He was feeling pretty happy with himself. The member he supported was an openly gay man in the community, so he was very pleased that he was involved in that campaign. He is a great friend and I can see him going places.

In addition to my Labor colleagues, I have made some great friends in both houses. I feel particularly close to the women MPs in this place, but I was disappointed this morning to hear the Prime Minister being criticised on radio. You might think that strange coming from a Labor member of parliament, but our Prime Minister was being criticised for not being 'mongrel enough'. This is something that has always been an issue for me and probably a reason why I would never be a successful leader in the Labor Party, or in any party for that matter. I really dislike this part of politics.

I am happy to have a good debate; in fact, I am happy to have a good argument. I am also into the sport of being a member of parliament in this place and also the fun and some of the other things that happen in here, so I do not think I am a wimp by any means. I have been in situations, certainly as a trade union official, where if I had been a wimp I would not have survived. But I am not prepared to support bad behaviour or personal attacks on members of parliament by each other and especially not by the media. I have a very strong dislike of the media. When I first came in here, I was accused of lying.

The Hon. M.J. Atkinson: Tell us how much you won from The Advertiser.

The Hon. S.W. KEY: No, it is a confidential agreement, but you can guarantee that at least for the next six or seven years I did not get any publicity in The Advertiser as a result of winning that case. I also have put a ban on the ABC morning program and refused a number of times to go on there. They know why and they know that I have stuck to that. I will never speak to those journalists because of the way they slandered me on radio.

I do not mind being criticised for things I do wrong, but I object to having my work ethic questioned. Those two guys said on radio that I did not have a good enough work ethic and that it was amazing I had won the last election because of that lack of work ethic. Other than being called a liar, not having a work ethic cuts pretty deep with me, so I will never forgive them for that.

On a more positive note, I am really pleased to have such an impressive candidate for the newly named seat of Badcoe, Jayne Stinson. She is wonderful. She works really hard and her team is headed up by the equally impressive Bridget Atkinson. What a campaign manager she is. I think Jayne will be a great member of parliament and I wish her well. I also wish all the other candidates well who are going into the next election. I am very pleased I am not—very pleased indeed—but I wish you all well. On St Patrick's Day next year, I will go back to being a general activist and I guess I will have to draw up a new list.

Mr PENGILLY (Finniss) (17:43): It is a pretty hard act to follow in here this afternoon, I have to say. It has been most entertaining listening to other members' speeches, so I feel privileged to be able to make a contribution. In fact, I have always felt very privileged to have the opportunity to be a member of parliament. It comes to very few. We come under a fair bit of pressure, but that is how it is.

To quote a well-known book title, I consider I have had a 'very fortunate life'—and I am not planning to die yet I might add. My direct journey into this place came after an evening call on 9 November 2005. My predecessor and good friend, Dean Brown, rang me and told me that he was going to announce on the 11^th, Remembrance Day, that he was going and that I needed to consider whether I would have a go at preselection and journey on from there. I said I would discuss it with Jan, my wife. Jan said to me, 'If you have a go and lose, at least you have had a go. If you don't have a go, you will be a pain in the neck for the rest of your life,' or words to that effect.

With that encouragement, I decided I would have a go, and I was very fortunate. Bear in mind that it was only three months out from the election by the time I was preselected. I won the preselection against the sitting mayor of Victor Harbor, Scott Schubert, and also the member for Morialta, Mr John Gardner, who at that time was the president of my state electorate committee. One left the country, the other one is now a member of parliament. Anyway, that is life. It was a challenging election, as was pointed out here earlier. I had a redoubtable Labor Party candidate in Mary-Lou Corcoran who put in an enormous effort and was very active and did all she could to win the seat for the Labor Party. I also had an Independent—

The Hon. M.J. Atkinson: She tried too hard. She would have beaten you if she had not tried so hard.

Mr PENGILLY: I will retake the floor. Of course, I had an Independent National in Kim McHugh, who won 17 per cent of the primary vote. It went to preferences and I was elected member. I had gone to a community on the Fleurieu, which I knew, but with only 12 weeks to become known, so it was a lot of hard work. I have no doubt that without the contribution that Dean Brown made I would not be here, quite frankly. He was a huge asset and he is a wonderful man. Anyway, one thing led to another, and I entered this place.

I was enjoying life. I was in a role in another place and enjoying that role, so it was a significant change. Around July 2016, on a Sunday morning prior to a sitting week, my wife asked me, 'When are you going back? She always used to ask prior to that, 'When are you going away again?' When she asked, 'When are you going back?' I thought, 'It is about time I considered my position here.' We talked about it, and I made the decision that it was time to announce in due course that I would not be standing again for preselection. I announced that in December, and the rest is history. It was not an easy decision. A lot of things happen in one's time while in this place.

The Speaker indicated earlier that he has been here for a long time. I will have been here 12 years when we finish. I came in with my colleague the member for Goyder, who is leaving, the member for Hammond and also the member for Unley. In that time, my children have all been married and we now have four grandchildren, and I am never sure whether there is another one coming. I do not get told a lot. It is on a need-to-know basis, and Jan seems to need to know and I do not. The kids have gone their own way. Three years ago, I lost my mother. We all lose parents; that is a part of life. She was widowed at 52 and lived to nearly 91, so that was pretty remarkable. We miss her, but that is life as well.

I have loved my time, and I still do, as a member of parliament. I love the people side of it. I love doing things for people and being able to find my way through the maelstrom of bureaucracy and quite often achieve outcomes for people that are in their best interests. I am not going to suggest for one moment that I have enjoyed being in opposition my entire parliamentary career; in fact I despise it, but that is how it is, once again. There are some good reasons for that, of course, but we will not go into that. I would add that, in our leader, Steven Marshall, and deputy leader, Vickie Chapman, we have the longest serving Liberal team in the state parliament since the days of Sir Thomas Playford. That does not go unnoticed, and I think that paves the way forward.

I mention one thing I did learn when I came in here. I noticed the former member for Flinders, Liz Penfold, always read her speeches. I spoke to Liz one day about that, and she said, 'Well, I've been here nearly 13 years', or whatever, 'and I find that I can't do it without it. I just have to concentrate on it'. She acknowledged that it was very difficult for her. I thought, 'I'm not going to read speeches. I'm going to do it off the top of my head.'

In the time that I have been here I have read two speeches, as I can recall. One was my maiden speech, because I did not want to get that wrong, and the other one was a significantly poignant moment when I did a speech on the death of Sapper Jamie Larcombe, the son of friends of ours on Kangaroo Island who died in Afghanistan. I think that was the hardest speech I have ever made in here. I did not want to get it wrong, and I drafted up what I wanted to say, and my very, very good friend John Schumann tidied it up for me to make sure that I got it right. I am forever grateful for that. It was a significant moment for me and one that I will never forget.

I can only be very grateful to the electors of the seat of Finniss. As you know, the seat of Finniss—my current seat—has been carved in half, and I will come back to that a little later. They have been sensational; they are a sensational electorate. The people are just wonderful. I have no doubt whatsoever that I have the most attractive geographical electorate in South Australia. I do not care what anyone else says, and I think there is probably someone here who would well agree with me, sitting not far away from me, but that is my view on it. I have hundreds of kilometres of coastline on both the Fleurieu and Kangaroo Island.

We have some wonderful natural assets, but the people side of my electorate is very important to me. In a redistribution I took on Sellicks Beach in 2010. John Hill said to me: 'You won't do too good down there. You will poll about 20 per cent.' I thought, 'I've got a bit of a message for John,' so I doorknocked every single building in Sellicks Beach, every one, even the ones with large dogs and high fences and all sorts of—

The Hon. M.J. Atkinson: What about the one with the Buddha?

Mr PENGILLY: Well, the Buddha was up the road and John Hill and Paul Holloway and I had a bit to do with that, I might add. I did very well in Sellicks Beach and continued to do so, and I have worked it very hard. So I had outer metropolitan added. I did lose Goolwa. I lost it in a redistribution to the seat of Hammond. But I was there for four absolutely dreadful years of the Millennium Drought, and I saw the Goolwa people in a different light. They pulled together. They had their disagreements, but they were determined to keep their town going. They were determined to do everything, and despite the efforts of Mr Flannery, who said that the River Murray would never run again—there would never be any water in there ever again—it did rain, and a few months later it was running a banker. I remember going to a rally down at Goolwa with 4,000 people and having to speak to them.

Sitting extended beyond 18:00 on motion of Hon. C.J. Picton.

Mr PENGILLY: It is an interesting role, and the observation that you make as you go through the role of an MP is profound. I have always been a great supporter of our returned service men and women because my father was a returned serviceman and my grandfather was in the 9^th Light Horse Regiment and fought in the Battle of Beersheba. My godfather was in the 1^st Light Horse Regiment and then went back as a padre and did the Middle East and Kokoda in his 40s in World War II. I have had the RSL and whatnot drummed into me since I was knee high to a grasshopper.

When I first started, at the annual Victor Harbor RSL lunch after the service the entire large dining room of the Hotel Victor was full of people, and we had multiple numbers of World War II diggers who attended with their wives and families, but now we are down to the small dining room with just a handful. That is the passage of time.

I am a little frightened by the passage of time because when I went to boarding school—and mum and dad gave everything to get my sister and I through boarding school—I remember going to ANZAC Day and the Boer War veterans were still going down Rundle Street in jeeps. That ages me a bit, but I can remember that. Across my electorate, the numbers of old diggers who have gone and, more particularly, the ones I met originally in Victor Harbor and those on Kangaroo Island, including my uncle, are profound. The passage of time spares no-one, but it is something you have to deal with.

It is hard in opposition to achieve things, but we have achieved numbers of upgrades to schools in the electorate. I thank the government for that over the years. The redevelopment of the Kingscote Area School was much needed. As to the Victor Harbor High School redevelopment, I would have to say I conspired with the principal at the time through the public works process to get him to ask some very leading questions that we could get up in the Public Works Committee. We got that up. The Port Elliot school was completed. The TAFE centre was built, although Mary Lou Corcoran laid claim to that, but I will allow her that.

Returning to Mary Lou, she did not win in 2006 and then she gave me an undertaking that she would never stand again and then she popped her head up again in 2010 and I gave her a flogging. But there you go. I enjoyed that. She was a redoubtable candidate, as I said before, and she had a way about her that she took a lot of people with her, but 2010 was not an election that the state government did as well in as they did in 2006. She moved on. She worked up here and then suddenly left. I have not seen her for quite a while, be that as it may.

I have enjoyed my work on the Public Works Committee. I had 11½ years on the Public Works Committee in this place, and that has been a fascinating role for me. I got off it a few months ago for the reason that I was leaving and it was time to give someone else a go. I have had a great interest in prisons. I was lucky enough to be shadow for correctional services for a period of time, and one of my great disappointments is that there is not enough work for prisoners. There is simply not enough for them to do.

Anyone who has not had the opportunity, and it does not come easily I might add, to go into prisons and see what goes on in these places. There are a couple of thousand prisoners in South Australia. I shake my head because I have spoken to prisoners and said, 'What are you going to do when you get out?' They have said, 'We will probably go back and get on whatever we were going on before we came in here and then be back in here.' Some of them actually feel comfortable in prison because they get their three meals a day.

I do not suggest we go back to cracking rocks. I know that there is a level of thought in the current government that they need to do more as well. People I know and grew up with are in prison in the prison system, but the amount of work for them or the amount of capacity for them to do something is nowhere near enough. My observations of Port Lincoln Prison where they grow a multitude of vegetables and fruit and sell everything they can into Port Lincoln is great. You have lifers in there doing that. It is a great experience for them and they absolutely enjoy it. I have enjoyed the parliamentary Public Works Committee.

I had a term on the Joint Parliamentary Service Committee (the JPSC), and I must relate a small story to the house. Bob Sneath of blessed memory was the President. Those of us who know Bob know that he is a big chap—a former shearer and AWU rep—and did not stand a lot of nonsense. At the time the Oval was being upgraded, we got a letter from Adelaide city council to say that they were going to take back the car parks out the front of the building. Bob's words were along the lines of, 'Over my dead body,' but a little bit more flowery. He said, 'Get them in.'

At the next meeting, the CEO of the council and Lord Mayor Yarwood came in and proceeded to give us a lecture about how they were going to resume with car parks out the front. We all sat there as it went on and on and on: they were their car parks, and if they wanted them in traffic flows they were going to take them. They got to the end and Bob said, 'Any questions?' There were no questions. He then turned around and said, 'Right, you pair of buggers, have you finished?' They said yes. He said, 'Well, get out of here. We will legislate to get rid of Adelaide city council. The only reason it exists is because of the parliament. I never want to see you again.' We never heard another word about it. It was a salient lesson in how to deal with people who thought they knew better than the actions of the parliament. The parliament is just so important.

I need to move on to my staff. I have been blessed, as others have said with their staff. I have had fantastic staff. I inherited Joan Fogarty and Julie Wheaton (she is Julie Wheaton to me, but she is Julie McLaren now). I inherited them from Dean; I kept Dean's staff. Indeed, Julie is still there. She was the original trainee and she is still in my office. Joan retired. I was very fortunate in being able to appoint Leone Fitzgerald as the office manager. Leone is from Yankalilla and is a delight. Her work capacity, her knowledge and her ability are outstanding, and she goes far above beyond what she is meant to do. She has other roles, including councillor at Yankalilla council, and she does various other things. I am very indebted to my staff at Victor Harbor, including young Hayley Vowles, who comes in to assist and backfill from time to time.

On Kangaroo Island, Penny Wheaton was Dean's staff member and she stayed with me. The problem with Penny Wheaton and I is that many years ago she could not get anyone to assist her at the Rural Youth deb ball. I think I was 19 and she was not much older—only a few months older. So Penny and I go back to about then. She retired and I took on Stephanie Wurst. Steph Wurst happens to be Des Corcoran and Marjorie Jackson-Nelson's granddaughter. She became enlightened, saw the way and decided to vote Liberal, so that helped the job out no end. Steph is on maternity leave and Penny is back.

I cannot speak highly enough of my staff. In this job, you need a few people you can trust completely, rely on and bounce things off. Dean Brown is always there when I need him. He never interferes, but he is always there. I also pay tribute to Jackie Kelly, who is a former mayor on Kangaroo Island. We have had our differences in local government, but we always respected each other's position. I can ring up Jackie and say, 'What do you think of this?' or that or something else. She will give me a no-nonsense answer and I will formulate an opinion on that.

The other person I have relied on for so long is Mr Graham Trethewey of Penneshaw, but he is currently enduring some ill health. He has been the president of the Kangaroo Island branch of the Liberal Party up until earlier this year when ill health precluded him from going on, but he is still there. I would have loved for him to be here today. He has such a deep knowledge of Kangaroo Island and politics in general, and I am never stuck for advice from Graham. I ring him once or twice a month to see how he is and ask him what he thinks. You need to thank these people. I know that we need to get up eventually, so I will not go on for much longer.

I am very grateful to the Liberal Party for giving me the opportunity, as others have said about their respective parties, but I do not always agree with them. From time to time I could cheerfully blow the Liberal Party off the face of the earth, but one does not do those things. I get very frustrated, but it is there and it is a great party, as is the Labor Party, I might add.

When people say to me, 'You are no different,' I say, 'Yes, we are. As Liberals, we respect the rights of the individual and encourage the individual to move forward.' That is why I am a Liberal and have been a Liberal for a long time. I have actually been a Liberal since my father gave me membership when I was 21. He said, 'I have paid for this. You pay for it from now on,' which I did. I think the member for Flinders is probably in a similar position.

I feel that it is necessary to make a few points about where things are going. Obviously, as a third-generation islander and my wife being a sixth-generation islander, the island is very close to my heart. We have lived there all our lives and watched the activities take place. This is a bit self-indulgent, but I think you are allowed to do that in your final speech. I do get concerned and I have been concerned about aspects of some areas of where the island is going.

As fate would have it, not that long ago—I twigged this was happening anyway—a member of the Labor Party said to me, 'Of course, you know that the plan was for Mawson to be retained by the Labor Party, but to do that they had to win over Kangaroo Island.' I thought, 'Yes, well, I will sniff that out,' and it has been interesting to observe. There are a multitude of reasons that the people of South Australia will not support the Labor Party at the next election. The fact is that only one in four people in South Australia is showing an indication that they will vote for Labor, but that may change.

The people of Kangaroo Island have many reasons, as do the people in the rest of Finniss, not to support the current government. There has been a large amount of spin, nonsense and propaganda put forward by members of the government and, in particular, the Attorney-General. Members may remember the Commissioner for Kangaroo Island Act, which I vehemently opposed. I thought it was a complete waste of money, and I still do. It is not much more than a front for the government.

I have an article in the local paper over there this week where I state that I think they have put more spin on things, with a combination of a couple of well-known spin doctors from decades past. It concerns me. I do not believe that the current member for Mawson will get any traction on Kangaroo Island. They can hand out all the money they like and they can make big noises, but people are not stupid in that respect and they will not be sucked in.

The Hon. P. Caica: They voted for you for so long.

Mr PENGILLY: They voted for me, but they were very lucky, Paul, and they voted for me in increasing numbers every election, I might add. I spoke to one of my professional colleagues this week. Members may be aware that I have made the odd comment in here about the activities of the Kangaroo Island Council.

An Ombudsman's report has come out in the last week or so that is heavily critical of the council in relation to an aspect of the Whistleblowers Protection Act where a resident put in a complaint that her name had been displayed as a whistleblower in council documentation. She took it to the Ombudsman and the Ombudsman found in her favour. She sought to have her name retracted initially from the council minutes as a whistleblower. The Ombudsman has suggested to the council that they remove her name. They have not, and that disappoints me. I am all for proper process to be followed, and I think it is a distinct breach of an act of parliament for the council to have exposed this whistleblower.

The Whistleblowers Protection Act is there for a very good reason: to protect the person who believes that there is wrongdoing. There is wrongdoing at the back of this which will move on a bit further. I am really disappointed. We expect our public officers to do the right thing as far as process goes and not to make mistakes. A lot of them do very good work, do not get me wrong, but there comes a time when things go pear-shaped and need to be sorted out. I believe, as the parliamentary representative of, in that case, the people of Kangaroo Island, I need to put that forward. I am not going to let it go; it is not good enough. I believe the chief executive has failed dismally to do what he should have done. He will not be pleased that I have said that, but I cannot really be bothered about that. There have been a number of inquiries. I will probably move on from that.

Yes, I have thoroughly enjoyed the interactions with my colleagues, as have others in here. There have been a couple of people in this place who nobody has trusted but, by and large, I have trusted nearly all of my colleagues on both sides of the house, and I continue to do so. The member for Ashford and I enjoyed a bit of time away on a Commonwealth Parliamentary Association conference in Canada a couple of years ago. I had never been there before. It was no junket, I can assure you. We paid to go; our travel allowance is gone, etc. That is the way things are.

I would urge members who remain in this place, and those who come into this place, to stand up for their rights. I think it is sad that things have gone from members of parliament. To the general public, members of parliament are a target. Many members of the public make a blood sport out of attacking members of parliament. Those of us who are in here know how many hours and much hard work are put in. I have received phone calls on Christmas Day from people who do not have food or have nowhere to go, and I have been able to sort that out through the churches, particularly in Victor Harbor. Those are the things that you can do.

Members of parliament work exceptionally long hours and they work exceptionally hard, and they need to stand up for their rights and not be rolled over by ideology. I never came into this place for money. I never did that; that was not my aim, and that is just not me. I came here because I had the opportunity and because I thought I could help people. I thought I could do things for people. There is a huge amount of work that needs to be done in the wider community. I get concerned.

My view is that social media will take us all out eventually, the power of social media, Twitter, Facebook, whatever. People can write whatever they like. Quite often they cannot be identified, and—

Members interjecting:

Mr PENGILLY: No, actually, not that one. I think it will take us out. I was speaking to a well-known defamation lawyer around 12 months ago and he said 'It's going to get all of us eventually.'

The Hon. P. Caica: As you do regularly.

Mr PENGILLY: No, I don't, actually; that is not correct, Paul. But, it does concern me where it is all going with the media. I look back at my career in here. I have two newspapers in my electorate: The Times at Victor Harbor and The Islander on Kangaroo Island. When I came in, Carolyn Jeffrey was the editor of The Times, and she and I locked horns a few times. In the end, I said, 'Look, I've got my job to do. I know it is your role to do this and that, but we are not going to get far if we don't sort this out.' She was actually very good. If I had done something she did not agree with from time to time, she would have a crack. If I did something she did agree with, she would write it up.

Of course, the other editor was Shauna Black on Kangaroo Island. Many of you on the other side would know Shauna. She is a strong advocate for the Labor Party, let me say. Every time she could have a go at me she would go 'whoosh!' in the paper. I learned that I was not going to win that one, so I might as well keep rolling with it. It actually worked in reverse in the end. People get sick of that sort of thing. The media changes. The media is so strong, the radio stations are so strong, but life will go on. I will sit back and watch what transpires in the media.

I am hoping against all hope that we form government after the next election. I think it is time for a change in South Australia. I am a great believer in the idea that no-one should stay around too long and no government should stay there too long. I think that—

The Hon. M.J. Atkinson: Twenty years will do just fine.

Mr PENGILLY: You have opened your mouth, member for Croydon. I think that there can be a capacity to stay too long in this place. When you think that the world revolves around the parliament, it is time you got out. I have never thought that, but I do not believe in career politicians. It is no disrespect to some in the chamber who have been here a fair while; I just think that it is time to get out and have fresh blood coming in. You have five members over there who are going that you know of. There will be more members in here going who do not know it yet but will be going. We have five members who are going.

I think that the new blood coming into the parliament will refresh the parliament. They will have a lot to learn, as we did. The poor old Clerk of the house is rolling his eyes and thinking, 'How am I going to put up with a heap of new members?' I am very grateful to the parliamentary staff. The parliamentary staff across the building have been wonderful and I cannot thank them enough. Those of us who are here from the country know that when you come in, in our case on a Monday morning, you are here for the week, away from your families. The parliamentary staff and the catering staff are just wonderful. They are all good. One develops a great rapport with them. That is something that I want to acknowledge in the Hansard, that I respect and gratefully thank the parliamentary staff.

One could stand here and go on half the night if one wished to, but I am not going to do that. I know that there are other members ready to go, so I take the opportunity to wish every member and every member of staff a happy Christmas, and I hope you have a good new year. To those who are retiring, I hope they enjoy their retirement, going to the races and other activities they have planned. I am sure that we will run into one another from time to time. I am going to miss numbers of you. There are some I will not miss, but there you go—that is life.

Thank you very much. Once again, I thank the people of Finniss for the opportunity to sit in the parliament. I have learned a lot. I have not always got it right and, indeed, other people do not get it right either. That is just the way of the world. With those words, I thank you for your time and my self-indulgence, and I will sit down—period.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Before I call the next speaker, bearing in mind that you may need longer than 45 minutes, we need to extend beyond 7pm because we have an extra speaker. We need to suspend standing orders because we have one more speaker. The member for Wright is going to speak and the member for Kavel is going to speak, so we need to have an absolute majority, and we need to do it now rather than interrupt the member for Wright when she is on her feet.

The Hon. M.J. ATKINSON: Madam Deputy Speaker, I draw your attention to the state of the house.

A quorum having been formed: