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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 12 Hansard (24 November) . . Page.. 3600 ..


MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

and practical reality for the reasons previously stated. I do not accept the proposition that Mr Kaine was shut out of the project. The evidence seems to me that he was always at liberty to communicate and place his views to the Chief Minister.

Again, elsewhere, on page 442, he says:

It is an inescapable fact that as the weeks and months progressed towards the demolition dates Mr Kaine received no briefings on the Acton demolition, not even on the technical aspects of the project. There is no evidence to suggest otherwise. It was certainly curious.

And again:

I am unable to agree with the views reached by Counsel Assisting the Inquest in what he argues is the position in respect of client control and the exclusion of Mr Trevor Kaine MLA.

There are also very strong comments made by the coroner with respect to evidence given by Mr Woolley, who was then Mr Kaine's senior adviser. I quote:

There is no other evidence to suggest that Mr Kaine endeavoured to engage himself in the project.

That is the finding on page 445. The coroner talks about Mr Woolley's supposed concerns about the way the thing was progressing and he says:

Yet if Mr Woolley's concern was as alarming as he would have one believe his inaction and failure to advise his Minister to take appropriate steps to intervene or at least obtain a briefing is inexplicable.

Again, on page 451 the coroner says:

... why did Mr Kaine remain inactive if there were issues which were exciting the concerns of either himself or his political adviser, Mr Woolley.

Mr Kaine might have views to give us on those matters when he gets up to speak and that is fine, but, with great respect, it seems to me, contrasting those two sets of direct quotes about particular members of this place, that there is more criticism in this report of Mr Kaine directly and personally than there is of Mrs Carnell. This statement of exoneration which the coroner applies expressly to Mrs Carnell, of no direct or personal involvement in the death of Katie Bender, contrasts with the statements about Mr Kaine where he says he cannot understand why he was not more involved in the project. The quote expressly says that, Mr Speaker, and yet the irony is that we are debating today a motion of no confidence in the Chief Minister. I think that is proof of two things: First of all, that the Opposition had a predetermined view about this matter, and, secondly,


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