Page 1852 - Week 06 - Tuesday, 17 June 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
He served as the Chief Minister and, as my colleague the Leader of the Opposition has said, through several assemblies prior to self-government hitting the ACT in 1989. I had the honour and privilege to be about number four on the ticket when we selected 10 candidates to contest the first Assembly election. Members have said that Trevor was the obvious leader for the Liberal Party in that election, and I certainly agreed, although with some concern, because when I got into the party I was very close to his then deputy, Gary Humphries. But I did vote for Trevor, and I think he performed ably as Liberal leader in those incredibly difficult years of self-government.
Trevor brought all the benefits that a military background can give to someone entering a game like politics. He also brought considerable skills as a bureaucrat and considerable skills in life. Campaigning with Trevor was also quite entertaining and a joy. Whereas I found that some of our colleagues were somewhat awkward in dealing with everyday people, Trevor passed one of the great litmus tests I could think of in terms of being a politician—that is, getting on well with the bottom bar at Royals when we went there a couple of times in early 1989. He was the sort of bloke who could get on with everyone.
I recall talking to some trade unionists not long after Trevor had become Chief Minister. They were very surprised at how well they got on with him, as they felt he was some sort of conservative ogre. Trevor was always well dressed in a clipped, military style, and he exuded an old-fashioned conservative persona. But he was not. He was a very broad-thinking man. He was a great lateral thinker. He was a man of many parts. The unionists came away absolutely delighted that they had something in common with the new Chief Minister. His first job was cutting timber. He always wanted to work with his father and he was cutting timber for his first job. He told that story to these unionists and they were absolutely delighted with it. It broke the ice and they walked away thinking: “Here is a man we can certainly do business with. Here is a reasonable man. Here is someone we can actually trust and, indeed, like.”
Trevor certainly could get very cranky on occasions. He certainly was not the easiest person to deal with, but he was always straightforward. He was always open and honest. For the vast majority of the time, Trevor had a fairly laidback and very friendly style. He worked well with his colleagues. He worked well with the bureaucrats and the other coalition partners in the alliance government. Indeed, he worked well with the opposition.
One of his best friends in the first Assembly was Paul Whalan, whom he had met and clashed swords with in the old Advisory Council and House of Assembly. They were particularly good friends. Indeed, he would confide in Paul in relation to a number of issues of a personal nature that concerned him. I think they remained good friends until his death. He was the sort of bloke who transcended politics in terms of just getting along well with all sides.
They were tumultuous times. Trevor could get very angry, but he was very loyal. He would not hold a grudge. It is true to say that he and Gary Humphries had a lot of clashes. I recall one time in September 1989 when he stormed into my office after a very vigorous and aggressive fight with Gary in the party room over something. I have no idea what it was about. He said, “Right, I want you to be deputy.” I said, “Trevor, hold on, just as a result of this argument?” He said, “Do you reckon I went
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .