Mr HOWARD (Prime Minister) (2:22 PM) —I move:

That this House expresses its deep regret at the death on Saturday, 16 January 1999, of the Honourable James Robert McClelland, Chairman of the Royal Commission into British Nuclear Weapons Tests in Australia from 1984 to 1985; Chief Justice of the Land and Environment Court of New South Wales from 1980 to 1985; Judge of the New South Wales Industrial Court from 1978 to 1980; Minister for Labour and Immigration and Minister assisting the Prime Minister in matters relating to the Public Service from June until November 1975; Minister for Manufacturing Industry from February until June 1975; and Senator for New South Wales from 1971 until 1978; places on record its appreciation of his long and meritorious public service, and tenders its profound sympathy to his family in their bereavement.

It is ironic that, on this very first day that parliament has resumed, we should be involved in condolence motions concerning two people who were very heavily and directly involved in the very active and dramatic political events of 1975.

Jim McClelland, I know, would want to be remembered for many things, but he would not want to be remembered as somebody who indulged in humbug or hypocritical utterances when it came to people in public life or people in political positions. It is indeed interesting, when one thinks of the character, the attitudes and the disposition of Jim Cope and Jim McClelland, how very different they were as people. They may have had some origins in common, but in style, demeanour, attitude and deportment I cannot think of two people in the Australian Labor Party, or indeed in any political party, more dramatical ly different than the late Jim Cope and the late Jim McClelland.

Jim McClelland was a great hater. He was a passionate believer in the things that he supported and he was a passionate and vitriolic opponent and critic of any philosophy or person with whom he disagreed. I read his column in the Sydney Morning Herald from time to time. He was absolutely consistent in his unrelenting criticism of the Liberal Party, of me and of just about all of the positions that I held in political life. Let me say that the compliment, whilst he was alive, was robustly returned. Jim was not a person whose views I shared on just about anything, and I make no bones about it. I do not think—and I know he does not think for a moment that he is listening to me—he would respect me for saying otherwise or pretending otherwise.

He was, of course, somebody who had a very long association with some of the most vigorous and significant battles within the trade union movement of Australia, such as his fights with the Stalinists within the Federated Iron Workers Association. His animosity for many years with the late B.A. Santamaria after the Labor Party split of 1955 was I think marvellously reconciled in life, you might say, in that very interesting interview both of them conducted on Lateline a couple of years ago.

The most legendary of his hostilities was his bitterness towards his former ally in trade union fights, the last Sir John Kerr. That has been very heavily rehearsed over the years. I simply record for the House a personal exchange that took place between me, Jim McClelland and Bob Ellicott, the former Liberal member for Wentworth and Attorney-General in the Fraser government, on the night of 11 November in King's Hall in the old Parliament House. The passion and the character of the exchange indicated the depth of feeling that he had on that particular issue.

He fell out with his long-time friend Neville Wran, even though Neville had appointed him to the Land and Environment Court. Not wanting us to think we were alone, he expressed great disappointment in Bob Hawke and his government. He held very passionately to his abandonment of Catholicism and his embrace of atheism. He was a person who believed very strongly in the role of the arts within the Australian community. I think it is fair to say that even his fiercest critics would acknowledge the contribution he made in the years since he left politics towards assisting the arts, particularly in Sydney.

Jim McClelland was born in Richmond, Victoria, on 3 June 1915, the son of a painter employed by the Victorian railways. He was a conscientious student and he earned scholarships to study at St Kevin's College with the Christian Brothers and, later, at Melbourne University. He completed a Bachelor of Arts degree while being active in the Melbourne University Labor Club and working as a builder's labourer and, later, as an ironworker. He served Australia during World War II, from 1943, in the Royal Australian Air Force as a radio operator. After he was discharged from the Air Force in 1946 he completed a law degree at Sydney University.

I first met Jim McClelland not in parliament but in 1966 at a hearing of appeals into a redistribution of electoral boundaries in New South Wales, presided over by a late judge and two other members. Jim McClelland was representing the New South Wales branch of the Labor Party and he was instructing an up-and-coming QC by the name of N.K. Wran. I was representing the New South Wales division of the Liberal Party. I had the opportunity, during a period of about 10 days, of exchanging political ideas and arguments about the rightness and wrongness of electoral boundaries and how outrageous it was that lines should be drawn in particular areas. I saw a person who was very meticulous and very committed to his client and the Labor Party cause.

Jim McClelland played a very significant role in two very important policy issues: the introduction of FM radio and Lionel Murphy's Family Law Bill, of which he was a passionate supporter. I might say that I voted against a lot of that too in 1975. The support that Lionel Murphy and Jim McClelland gave to the Family Law Bill invoked enormous and passionate opposition from within the Australian Labor Party. It was one of the few issues that I can remember in 25 years on which the Labor Party was allowed a completely free vote on an issue of great significance. Being liberated from the caucus constraint, I can assure you that many of the opponents of Murphy and McClelland gave very strong vent to their feelings.

He was a significant figure within the Labor Party. As I said earlier, on many subjects he held views that I totally disagreed with, but I respected the passion with which he held those views. I thought he had a very interesting and productive post-political life serving as a judge, as a royal commissioner, as a part-time columnist and as somebody who involved himself very heavily in the art scene in New South Wales, particularly in Sydney.

On behalf of the government I extend to his wife Gillian and his family our very sincere sympathy on the loss of Jim McClelland.