Page 445 - Week 03 - Tuesday, 13 March 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
That leaves in the air—unfortunately for everybody who is looking for a full suite of answers on this—the unfortunate fact that the coroner chose not to include in her report any analysis or investigation of the McIntyres Hut fire, which was shown quite clearly on the Four Corners show to have been the fire which created the devastation. Its omission from the report leaves an enormous gap in our understanding.
MRS DUNNE: Mr Speaker, I have a supplementary question. Given Mr Lucas-Smith’s sworn evidence that he painted a worst-case scenario to the best of his ability, why did you and other members of cabinet not ask more questions when you received that briefing?
MR STANHOPE: I have explained on numerous occasions—as have all of those others that have given sworn evidence in relation to this matter—that there was at no stage during that briefing any suggestion by the head of the Rural Fire Service and the head of the Emergency Services Authority, Mr Peter Lucas-Smith and Mr Mike Castle, that they expected or anticipated that the fire would burn Canberra. That simply was not the nature of their evidence.
This was raised quite significantly and directly most recently in relation to the fire of a couple of months ago at Tumut, which burnt of course through the very extensive New South Wales state forest to the north of Tumut—a fire which was essentially just to the west and south of the McIntyres Hut fire. During that particular fire exactly the same scenario was painted.
I read about it here in the Canberra Times in exactly the same terms. It was the same view of our firefighting experts and authorities: that fire had the potential to impact on the urban area of the ACT. If a certain situation occurred, then the Tumut fire of two months ago—in certain eventualities; if it burnt to the east, which is where it would have burnt—would have impacted on the urban area of the ACT. And the same question would have been asked: which areas of the ACT would have been most exposed had the Tumut fire burnt to the ACT? The answer was: Dunlop and Weston Creek.
It is the same answer. It is the answer that was given to cabinet regarding a range of worst-case scenarios or eventualities. The briefing on the 16th was given without any understanding—I would assume—of the fact that the New South Wales authorities were intending to firebomb, as we saw most graphically described last night on Four Corners. And we have New South Wales Rural Fire Service personnel essentially accepting responsibility for the fact that it was through the firebombing—in an attempt to back burn on the day before—that the fire escaped its containment lines and burnt to the ACT.
That was the evidence given last night on Four Corners by New South Wales Rural Fire Service officers, who unfortunately did not have the opportunity to provide that evidence to the inquest here in the Australian Capital Territory. The scenario was the same. If, two months ago, the Tumut fire had escaped its containment lines, had burnt towards the ACT—if it had done that; if it had reached the urban edge—the suburbs most at risk of being impacted were of course the western suburbs, the most exposed suburbs of Dunlop and Weston Creek.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .