I'm sure every single honourable member, and most Australians, will always remember exactly where we were when we heard the news about Helen Haines, as will I. I'm sure we will remember where we were when we heard the details that made it clear that this was not a terrible accident but a horrific incident. I'm sure, like all honourable members, my thoughts went immediately to: 'How could this happen, and why would it happen to Helen? Why would it happen to an MP who has the respect of all sides of the chamber and who is an absolute delight to talk to and work with in every single instance?' Of course, there is much more investigation and legal action to occur, but what today is about is our thoughts and prayers for Helen, her community and her family.

Much has been said about Helen's role in this House, and I can attest to that. Helen is a fierce advocate for her community. Having visited her community with her twice—Wangaratta and Yackandandah—having been through those communities, I have seen her love for the people of Indi and the love of the people of Indi for her. We all know why. It should be said that Helen Haines is the first individual in Australian political history as an Independent to replace another Independent. There have been times when Independents have won seats but, after their retirement, the seat has returned to the natural party that held that seat. It's a tribute to Cathy McGowan and Helen Haines that they bucked that historical fact, and it's a tribute to their combined representation of that beautiful part of the world.

Helen has been a fierce advocate for her community, talking to me about the need for renewable energy, which she strongly supports, and the need to bring communities with us on that journey. She has been a strong advocate for including home batteries in the small-scale renewable energy scheme. I well remember the call I made to Helen to let her know that we were about to do that—we were going to announce it the next day—and her joy on the end of the line. She had been advocating it for some time, a fact I've always freely acknowledged because she had been advocating it as we were considering it as a government. She's very proud of the success of that program. Indi has been in the top three electorates in Victoria for take-up of home batteries, which is something I know she's very proud of. I would regularly text her the figures. One sadder text was to let her know she'd been knocked off from No. 1, which she was not happy about at that point, but she's very happy that Indi remains in the top three.

For Helen and I, there's another element. Like most of us, I don't get much time to watch much television, but, somehow or other—I can't quite remember how or when—Helen and I worked out that we have very similar tastes in television. We would swap television recommendations via text and whenever we saw each other, and we'd compare notes. I very much look forward to Helen's return to advocacy in this House, but I also look forward to being able to talk to her about the latest episodes of MobLand, Fauda, Tehran, Slow Horses and the other shows we enjoy and have been able to recommend to each other over the years. I very much look forward to her ongoing return to the House for many years to come, and her representation of her community, which we value so much.

I do want to make one note about the tone of the debate. Other members have commented on it. Absolutely, there must be robust debate in this chamber. As the chamber knows, I can participate in that as willingly as the next person. I can give it out and I can take it. But this is not about robust debate. There is no place in this House, or anywhere in the media, for jokes, violent language or representations of violence, to make a political point. I understand that, in the heat of the moment, members and senators can say things which later, on cold reflection, they regret. It happens. They can be withdrawn. I understand that. But there is no place for it, and there is no place for premeditated comments about violence, whether it be joking about physical violence, whether it be using violent analogies or whether it be using emotive language like 'traitors' and 'treason'.

This is language which has no place in a robust modern debate. When people who may be undergoing mental health issues hear that sort of language, at the same time they hear a message that somehow gives them permission to think this sort of language is okay. So the Prime Minister is right to say we do need to take the temperature down. That is not a less robust debate. It is a fully robust debate on facts, views and substance, not personal abuse and not with violent imagery. There is no place for it, and I hope there is less and less of it in the Australian political debate.

I look forward to the day—hopefully in the not-too-distant future—when we rise as one as a parliament to welcome the return to the House of the great Helen Haines.