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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 10 Hansard (Wednesday, 25 August 2004) . . Page.. 4239 ..

It is not an unrealistic conclusion to come to after hearing his answer to my question on 5 August, again from Hansard:

Mr Speaker, my question is to the Chief Minister. Chief Minister, yesterday you advised the Assembly that you were in the north of Canberra on 17 January 2003. Where, precisely, were you in the north of Canberra on the evening of Friday 17 January 2003? What exactly were you doing on that evening to prepare for the oncoming bushfire?

The Chief Minister simply said:

I’ve answered the question previously, Mr Speaker.

After Mr Smyth rose to make a point of order that was not accepted by you, Mr Speaker, I asked the Chief Minister a supplementary question:

Chief Minister, is your failure to answer the question—your shyness—an attempt to avoid an issue going to the heart of whether or not you failed in your duties on 17 January 2003 to warn this community about the oncoming bushfire approach?

His answer was:

No.

The Chief Minister has a duty both to members of this Assembly and the Canberra community to disclose his location and activity on the evening of 17 January. His consistent arrogance and lack of detail is a mark of disrespect towards the Assembly and the community about very serious matters that go to the heart of the good governance of the territory and the management of an emergency.

We all know that there was a lack of warning given to the Canberra community by the government about the January 2003 bushfires. Frankly, if there was an appropriate emergency management plan in place and the government allowed sufficient time to warn the community, the loss of over 500 houses and the loss of four people, could have been minimised.

Again, this is also the salient issue when speaking about the Chief Minister and his decision to declare a state of emergency. Although the Chief Minister has said in the Assembly that it has to be a serious incident to declare a state of emergency, what could be more serious than the circumstances that existed, certainly on 17 January, if indeed not on 16 January, given the level of bushfire and weather intelligence available? Could it be that the Chief Minister failed to ask obvious and necessary questions that any government leader should have and would have asked that would allow him to better understand the situation developing at that time?

I put it to you that this was one of the Chief Minister’s chief failings. He lacked the inquiring mind that a leader needs to have. He did not put pressure on his minister, or the senior managers of ESB, to provide accurate information. Or, if he did, and they provided timely and accurate information about the developing situation, he chose not to warn the community. Which is it? It is my considered view and it is our considered view

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