Page 2809 - Week 09 - Wednesday, 17 August 2005

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


I might also point out to you that, when we were last in government, we, along with the DPP, opposed the inquiry that is occurring now. We ceased to be the government. You then, I understand, supported this inquiry, which has still to be concluded, in relation to that matter. So do not try to use that one either, Mr Stanhope.

Mr Quinlan: So only some people have rights under your rules.

MR STEFANIAK: I think fair is fair, Ted; and I think you have to look at the main right here, which is the right of the people in this particular coronial inquest who have suffered. These are the 500 or so people whose houses were burnt. That is what we are concerned about. People want answers in relation to that. You have a duty to ensure that that occurs.

I do not think this motion is at all unreasonable. You have said, effectively, that you are not going to do anything further yourself. I think you have said you have a grave reluctance to look at funding any further appeals these nine individuals might make. There is clear angst out there in the community amongst fire victims that you still might take action that causes further delay. Any individual, of course, has a right, if they are involved in a court action, to appeal. But the question is: should they be funded by government? I would like you to show me any other precedents where anything like this has occurred and the government continued to fund actions taken.

Mr Quinlan: I think he did yesterday.

MR STEFANIAK: I do not think he has. You, Chief Minister, have indicated you are unlikely to fund any further actions by any other individuals. Here is a chance to categorically say today that you will not do so. That is something that the opposition wants you to say.

The Canberra Times also, in its balanced editorial today, made some other very good points. I will read them out:

After the fire, there was a natural call for a searching inquiry into what occurred. The demand was not, generally at least, actuated by any desire for a witch-hunt but for answers to legitimate questions people had—particularly in relation to warnings to the public—and a desire that this city never face such a nightmare again.

It went on to say:

Mr Stanhope did not resist such an inquiry; perhaps, indeed, he was somewhat restrained by the insistence of some of our coroners that additional inquiries could in some manner be in contempt of the inquest. In any event, it became settled that the public’s search for answers would be focused on the inquiry. Despite the bruised feelings of some of the bureaucrats and the paranoia of the Chief Minister, there has been no evidence that the inquisition has gone off track, jumped to judgment, or formed any unreasonable prejudices about witnesses. There are searching questions waiting to be asked.

What the public wants is that the inquest recommence, that it continues steadily, and that it comes down with a report. It has been slow enough in any event, even


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