Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 12 Hansard (24 November) . . Page.. 3582 ..

MR HARGREAVES (continuing):

known that such persons do not possess the technical expertise, and not suggest that expertise is obtained and such letters resubmitted, is beyond belief.

But, Mr Speaker, this is exactly what happened. Mrs Carnell trusted Mr Walker, who, incidentally, as an apolitical public servant has been found to have inserted the political content of the reply to the HSUA. He trusted Mr Hopkins and Mr Dawson; it appears he trusted everyone. It has been found that none of these people had any technical expertise and all trusted Mr Lavers, who also had none.

But at least one of the Chief Minister's advisers knew there was no technical expertise, because the fact that she knew that it was non-existent indicated that someone had told her so. Who was that adviser? Heaven only knows. So if she knew about the lack of expertise beforehand, why did she neither ask for the expertise to be obtained nor discipline her advisers for presenting a letter which was so patently misleading and false? Indeed, the coroner put his finger on the reasons for this glaring omission. He said:

Counsel assisting the coroner said:

and he defined the occupier as the ACT Government, the head of which is the Chief Minister -

The coroner said that the decision to promote the implosions as a public event was made by the media adviser to the Chief Minister with her full authority and approval. And, oddly, Mrs Carnell said herself in evidence that she would not have expected Mr Dawson, the media ringmaster, to satisfy himself about safety issues before authorising the public event. You just have to ask yourself: Why not? What is more important - the magnitude of a public event or the safety of those participating in it? It really inspires confidence in the new year celebrations, does it not? Where there were 100,000 around the lake for the implosion, there will be in excess of 200,000 around the lake on New Year's Eve.

Now, Mr Speaker, who was responsible for the decision to hold the implosion as a public event? Clearly it is the Chief Minister herself. As the coroner said, Mr Dawson reported directly to his employer, the Chief Minister, rather than to anybody else in the Chief Minister's office or the Chief Minister's Department. Paraphrasing the coroner, he said Mr Dawson's decision imposed on the Territory a duty to ensure the implosions

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .