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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 05 Hansard (Thursday, 13 May 2004) . . Page.. 1764 ..

We need to recognise that the current Chief Minister has lost substantial credibility and standing through this affair. That in itself is a serious matter for him but more so for us. The question, “What if we had been warned?” resonates among thousands of Canberrans. There is a strong undercurrent in this community that in some way this government failed them by not warning them. No-one has yet been able to pin down the truth, but the sense that they were failed by their leaders remains. The Phoenix Association wrote to me a few days ago. A single short paragraph of their letter sums up this mood. It says:

As they think “What if…?”, they will again wonder why they were not warned. Not to know the answer will make them feel hurt and frustrated. To think that there is someone who knows the answer, but will not disclose it, will deepen the hurt…

And that turns frustration into anger. We need to answer that need and we, as community leaders, need to make political sacrifices, if necessary, to spare from further torment those who have already lost so much. Yet, by his continuing political defence, the Chief Minister is choosing his own selfish needs over those of others.

This Assembly has some power to override Mr Stanhope’s personal failings and do right by the people of Canberra. We are here today to subject the Chief Minister to the very high level of scrutiny that a parliament should apply to ministers. Our obligation is to protect this institution—the Assembly—by acting with just but relentless discipline. As I have said, the fact that this Assembly has been misled is not in dispute. On several occasions Chief Minister Stanhope led this Assembly to believe that no contact had taken place between him and the officials of our emergency services between the very unusual cabinet meeting on Thursday 16 January and around 12.40 pm on Saturday 18 January, a gap of two days.

This fact was highly important for the minister’s political standing. He has used this claim on countless occasions to avoid the people of Canberra accusing him of neglect. If the public knew that he had more advanced knowledge, there would be little excuse for the failure of leadership and public warning that took place that day. By denying such knowledge, Mr Stanhope acted to protect his political reputation and protect his own personal position. No other public purpose and no-one else’s interests were served when he clothed himself in the illusion of ignorance.

Indeed, we need to recognise that this level of ignorance is unacceptable in the holder of a vital public office at a time of public emergency. The picture Mr Stanhope presented over more than a year is not the true picture. Mr Stanhope has misled the Assembly, as he has perhaps misled the inquiry of the Coroner’s Court and as he has misled the people of Canberra, because we now know that there was communication between Mr Stanhope and his officials. The stories told to the coroner leave an overwhelming impression, despite the amnesia defence being put up, that this communication did advise him on the state of the fires and create for him the opportunity—and the obligation—to show leadership.

What emerges from this story is that this Chief Minister failed to do his part to communicate adequately with his officials and carry out the essential elements of his ministerial duty which, on those days, included being Minister for Police and Emergency

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