Page 3963 - Week 10 - Thursday, 28 August 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Self-government, in the views of most Canberrans, had been foisted on the people of the ACT. There had been a referendum—only one, not two—where a large majority voted against it. In 1986, the federal government—then the Hawke government—started cutting finances and turning the taps off, which effectively made self-government inevitable. Most of the population did not want self-government, but over the years I feel that it has worked quite well—indeed, far better than if we continued to be ruled by a public service federal bureaucracy that was not responsible to the people of Canberra.
When we first started, in May 1989, we were stuck in a very poky little area in the Nara building, with little three-quarter partitions. Of course, the First Assembly sat in the Nara building. If those of you who were not there then think that this chamber is intimate, that was very intimate: you could virtually touch people across the table.
Despite being called the Italian parliament—because the First Assembly had five political groupings with 17 members, which soon became six different groupings after Michael Moore left the Residents Rally—it fundamentally worked well. Many good decisions were made there that helped steer the ACT in the right direction as we embarked upon the path of self-government.
I pay tribute to founding members like Rosemary Follett and the late Trevor Kaine. Trevor in particular—helped by the first Auditor-General, Jim O’Neill—played a big role in setting the financial parameters and getting us on the right footing in setting up those processes.
There were some wonderful characters in the First Assembly who I miss greatly. There was Craig Duby. Craig certainly was a bit of an opportunist, and he was seen as such, but he was a particularly good minister. He was very decisive, and he was a great bloke to have a beer with. Craig stood in the second election as the Hare-Clarke Party, because we were having a referendum on Hare-Clarke. I fondly recall him saying to me one day: “I’ve got a great team, mate, a great team. I’ve got myself, I’ve got a Buddhist monk, and I’ve got Fiona Patten from the Eros industry: drunks, monks, and spunks.” I said: “Craig, that’s great. Do you mind if I tell the media that? That’s a good line.” He said, “Go ahead, mate.” In those days we had a column 8 type thing on page 3 of the Canberra Times written by, I think, Marion Frith. She gleefully wrote that down and Craig was absolutely delighted. I still keep in contact with Craig.
We had Dennis Stevenson. Who remembers Dennis? Dennis was an interesting character. I would not say he was colourful, but he was certainly very interesting. He lived in the Assembly at one stage. He served in the Second Assembly and then bade his farewell, not being re-elected for the Third Assembly.
It was an interesting experiment being in the Alliance government, but, as I said earlier, we achieved quite a bit. Another colourful character who contributed a lot was Bernard Collaery. Bernie was a guy who could be absolutely frustrating at times but who it was impossible to actually dislike. He was very intelligent and passionate about what he believed. I had the pleasure and the excitement of working with him not only as his executive deputy but also, later, in private practice in the law.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .