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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 12 Hansard (24 November) . . Page.. 3585 ..

MR SMYTH (continuing):

That is curious, Mr Speaker, because the coroner actually commended the Government and the civil servants for the work that they had done and acknowledged that the Government, even before the implosion, had started the reform process of WorkCover.

It was disappointing that Mr Stanhope quoted selectively and tried to portray that there is only one side to the coroner's report. It is a shame that he does not acknowledge both sides. Where the coroner does point out failings, he also then determines whether or not those failings contributed in some way to Katie Bender's death. It is quite clear that he says in respect of WorkCover that, yes, there were failings, but he goes on to say that he did not believe that they actually contributed to Katie Bender's death, and he said the Government and the civil servants are to be commended for taking such a positive and immediate response to her death.

It should be stated that the need for such reforms was seen shortly before the tragedy and steps were being taken to implement change when the death occurred. So what we have in the introduction to Mr Stanhope's speech is that the Government has failed to respond. Really, Mr Speaker, again Mr Stanhope quoted selectively, or he failed to read the report adequately, because the coroner clearly says that the Government and the civil service are to be commended for the steps that they have taken.

This is interesting because it is very important that we get from Mr Stanhope his definition of ministerial responsibility. Mr Stefaniak made our position quite clear, but we do not get from any of those opposite who have spoken already any indication of what they see as ministerial responsibility. Mr Stanhope said several times that there was this interference from the Chief Minister's office, yet, curiously, last week, if I recall, Mr Stanhope was also saying that Mr Moore should have interfered in the tender process for the hospice because he was not happy with the way it was being handled. You just cannot have it both ways, but Mr Stanhope wants to have it both ways.

Mr Stanhope then went on to address WorkCover. He said that one of the clear failings, one of the clear systemic failures, was that of WorkCover. He mentioned it a bit, but he failed to finish off with the coroner's final summation of WorkCover's place in this, which was:

So the systemic failures that Mr Stanhope seeks to put before this place today are in fact rebutted by the coroner. The coroner has said, "I am not persuaded that WorkCover inspectors contributed to or had any direct connection with the death of Katie Bender". So what do we have here, Mr Speaker? We just have politics. The Opposition have played it for two years. It is the only game they know. It is the only game they have because we do not know what they stand for. We certainly do not know what their definition of ministerial responsibility is. We do not know what their policies are and we do not know what they would do were they in government. Why? Because they do

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