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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 05 Hansard (Thursday, 13 May 2004) . . Page.. 1790 ..

various parties in inquests from other points of view in a number of coronial inquests in the ACT and in the state of New South Wales.

Neither I nor other legal practitioners I have spoken with have seen so many otherwise competent, experienced and learned people experience such significant memory losses as we have seen in relation to these events. It is as if they have all been given a memory curse by Gilderoy Lockhart. This is especially pointed when one considers the very clear evidence given by other persons who can recall the events of the day—be they professional people, other public servants, police officers, firefighters or lay members of the public doing a job under the most stressful conditions and often in life-threatening situations. They have been able to give pretty good recollections of events that occurred and indeed, where need be, conversations.

When giving evidence in court, if a person does not recall what happened and continues to say, “No; I just can’t recall,” even though others around them in very similar situations can recall events, their credibility comes into question. In my time I have known a number of bureaucrats who made very detailed notes of important events that occurred. They could pull out a notebook and tell you exactly what happened. I have seen that occur on numerous occasions over the years and it is an essential process for a senior bureaucrat. By doing that they cover their backsides when need be. However, there has been a lot of amnesia about the bushfires—and a lot of lost notebooks.

It defies credibility that senior public servants such as Mr Keady cannot remember crucial events and crucial conversations. I hope that he and others have sudden memory rejuvenation. Indeed, I hope the same for everyone involved in this terrible mess. I await that with interest. I also find it amazing that a man with intellectual capacity such as the Chief Minister can forget significant events. I have known him for many years. I was at the legal workshop with him and have heard him on many occasions—in this place and in other places. He has always struck me as a person who has a very good ability to remember things, and a good eye for detail. I find it unbelievable that he suddenly has a complete memory loss on so many crucial issues.

The Chief Minister has told this Assembly that he is sorry—that he “fessed up” to the extra phone calls that he cannot remember as soon as he was advised of them. However, I feel a sense of amazement that he does not seem able to recall these events: either that or he is totally unwilling to tell the truth about what occurred. It really does not seem very credible at all. Also I suppose that, if he is genuine, the question of his medical fitness to do the job he is doing comes into play.

I am especially disappointed because the Chief Minister is also the first law officer of this territory. If he has deliberately misled this Assembly, as the opposition submits is the case, he has failed abysmally in his role as Attorney General and first law officer. The evidence is clear. The Chief Minister has misled this Assembly more than the once to which he has admitted; he has failed to live up to the high standards expected of him as Chief Minister and first law officer.

We are not necessarily concerned here today about statements made in other places such as to the coronial inquest and to the general public. Of major concern to this Assembly are the actions and the misleading in this place, no matter how important other actions outside it are. Before this Assembly he is a politician; he is the Chief Minister. He has set

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