Richard Colbeck (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to lend support to this motion moved by Senator Abetz and to associate myself with the comments of other senators around the chamber who have paid tribute to Senator Judith Adams and her work here. Sometimes we think that the comments on or our contributions to these debates might not be adequate to actually provide a full and proper tribute to a colleague but I think that, as so often is the case in the committee work in particular, which Judith loved so much, the contribution of the whole actually does paint the picture that between us all we want to paint on behalf of a colleague like Judith, whom we have just lost.

It has been mentioned here today that Judith was not a high-profile senator, and that might be the case, but those that needed to know Judith did know Judith; they did know the work that she did and they knew that they could go to her to get the representation they wanted or needed in respect of a particular issue. She could often appear unassuming but, once you got to know her, you knew that to take that unassuming nature for granted was a sincere mistake, because she would pursue something with all her being until she got the result she was looking to achieve. Her interests were particularly around issues that involved people in rural and regional communities. Like others, I can recall being in estimates and committee inquiries while she discussed in deep detail the workings, failings or otherwise of the patient assisted transport system, or how better to operate it. I think that is one particular thing. Anything to do with rural health and with women's rural health was important to Judith—and rural education also, something that has not been mentioned here. I have been on backbench committees and heard her discuss quite passionately the requirements for people in regional and rural Australia to access the sort of education they need or the requirements for getting to centres for a high-quality education for their kids. She was really very passionate about that.

Judith's practical knowledge was one of the things that she brought to debate and discussion; she had a practical knowledge. Colleagues have talked about the experience she brought to her role. That practical experience allowed her to assess how things might work and to interrogate departmental officers on the practicalities of making a particular program work—or, as she would have liked to have seen it, work better—in the interests of her communities. It did not matter whether you were talking about health issues, education issues or issues of rural importance to her. There has been discussion about the single desk today, but she would talk about issues for wool growers, wheat growers and graziers generally; it really did not matter. She brought a strength of opinion when talking about those particular matters and also a practical understanding.

For Judith, the issue was important. She could play the politics as hard and as well as anybody, and examples of that have been demonstrated in comments that have been made about her love of campaigning and doorknocking in seats where she had particular responsibility. She did that in a way which I think is an example to any aspirant to politics. In fact, it is an example to anybody who is involved in politics and really wants to make sure that they cover all the bases and campaign to the nth degree, which is what Judith did. But she did that not only as a matter of course; she did that, as we have heard a number of times today, on the back of quite severe illness and without any comment or expression of concern. She saw that as her job and she was not going to let anything get in the way of her objectives, whether they be on policy or in the context of campaigning in a marginal seat to make sure that she got the result that she wanted.

Judith's unwillingness to allow her illness to impose on her work has been a theme of colleagues' comments today, which I think is more than appropriate because she was not going to allow that to occur. I do not think I need to repeat what has been said by other colleagues, but I want to add my weight to those comments because what gave us the perspective of Judith as a woman and as a Senate colleague is the fact that she was prepared to put herself behind the role that she had been given, and the responsibility and the privilege that she had been given, to serve in this place in the context of looking after her constituents and of her role within the Liberal Party. Judith was someone who was vitally connected to her constituency, and that is why I made the comment I made earlier: she might not have been high profile, but in the communities where she was working she was certainly very well known. Obviously, in her home community of Kojonup she was loved and respected, and I think that is a real measure of her and a demonstration of the way in which she was connected to her community. She knew them well, and that is why she was so good at doing what she was doing in her committee work in this place. Not only was she connected to her communities but she knew them. She knew what they needed, she knew what they wanted and she was able to represent those things in this place.

I do not think there is any fear in saying that Senator Judith Adams represented all of those communities and all of those interests in an absolutely exemplary fashion. She served her state, she served her party and she served this country with absolute distinction. In that context, I would like to associate myself with the remarks of my colleagues here today across the chamber, send my sincere condolences to Stuart, Robert and her extended family and say to Judith, 'Congratulations on your service to the country. You served this country and this place in an exemplary fashion. I hope sincerely that you rest in peace.'