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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 05 Hansard (Thursday, 13 May 2004) . . Page.. 1815 ..

I am interested in Ros Dundas’s amendment because I do think that it is of concern that there was not greater attention paid by the Chief Minister after the event to clarify exactly what had transpired over those days. The opposition’s focus in question time on communications between him and public servants should have been a trigger for careful checking of phone and conversation records, particularly as under stress the human reaction can be to forget things.

Jon Stanhope, having experienced the frightening incident of the helicopter accident, as well as the fires themselves, was, as were many people, under a lot of stress, but particularly so, I would suggest, he was under stress because of the helicopter incident. This lack of care has led not only to a misleading of the Assembly but also a lot of distress in the community, as illustrated by the comments I read of Richard Arthur. I will support the expressing of grave concern about this oversight.

I want briefly to comment on Mrs Cross’s rather sarcastic and unpleasant comments on the effects of trauma; in particular, her claims that Jon Stanhope was appearing buoyant and basking in the glory after the helicopter incident. I recall asking him how he felt after this incident and the comment he made was far from buoyant. I hope that he does not mind my saying that, but I remember that conversation very clearly.

Basically, he said that he was devastated, that he felt that he should have known more about CPR and lifesaving techniques, and that he would do a lifesaving course. I understand that he has done that. He said that he was extremely uncomfortable with the label of hero and actually felt more than anything that he was inadequate in this situation. (Extension of time granted.)

I return to Richard Arthur’s comments and the need for there to be moral support for the fire-affected in our community. I put it on the record that I believe that, despite the different views held in this place today regarding this motion, we are all aware of and empathise with the struggle that is still the reality for many as they deal with the consequences of the fires; that we understand that, reasonably for many, closure requires an understanding of what went wrong; that the current daily reports in the paper, on television and in radio reopen wounds; and that we regret that it takes as long as it does to find answers to the questions through the coronial process.

I am sure that we all sincerely hope that the coronial inquest will bring about answers to the questions that we all have and that we can work from there to ensure that, as much as is possible, we have an emergency services response in place which will prevent such a tragedy occurring again.

MRS DUNNE (3.45): Mr Speaker, I am overwhelmed by the lack of support the Chief Minister has from his own members, who do not have the fortitude to stand in this place and support him. Today we are witnessing the birth of a phenomenon and any wrong decision we make will go down in history as the Stanhope defence. When we asked why the citizens of Canberra were not told they faced an imminent threat from the bushfires, we heard what might be called the Stanhope defence, mark 1—“I didn’t know, I wasn’t told and I didn’t speak to anyone.” This is a fairly standard political dodge.

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