The exoneration of three Wivenhoe dam engineers accused of misleading Queensland’s flood inquiry won’t derail plans for a class action by flood victims, lawyers say.
The Crime and Misconduct Commission says John Tibaldi, Robert Ayre and Terry Malone won’t face criminal or disciplinary action over their testimony to the inquiry.
After a five-month review, the CMC said there was no evidence the engineers colluded to mislead the floods inquiry about how the dam was managed before Brisbane and Ipswich flooded in January 2011.
Retired judge John Jerrard QC, who conducted the CMC’s review, found the dam was operated in breach of its manual.
21.8.12
 |
| Wivenhoe Dam during the January 2011 flood. |
The exoneration of three Wivenhoe dam engineers accused of misleading Queensland’s flood inquiry won’t derail plans for a class action by flood victims, lawyers say.
The Crime and Misconduct Commission says John Tibaldi, Robert Ayre and Terry Malone won’t face criminal or disciplinary action over their testimony to the inquiry.
After a five-month review, the CMC said there was no evidence the engineers colluded to mislead the floods inquiry about how the dam was managed before Brisbane and Ipswich flooded in January 2011.
Retired judge John Jerrard QC, who conducted the CMC’s review, found the dam was operated in breach of its manual.
He said ambiguity in the manual provided an explanation for all of the engineers’ inconsistent statements and descriptions of what they did during the flood crisis.
"There is no evidence that I have seen which suggests that the conduct of Mr Tibaldi, Mr Ayre and Mr Malone relating to the preparation of documents surrounding the January 2011 flood event, and oral testimony given to the flood inquiry, evidences offences against the Criminal Code or official misconduct under the Crime and Misconduct Act 2001,’’ Mr Jerrard found.
In line with the flood inquiry’s recommendations, the CMC’s probe was limited to documents the engineers prepared about their actions, and their oral testimony to the inquiry.
It did not look at whether their management of the dam’s gates during the flood crisis could amount to a criminal offence or official misconduct.
"There is no evidence that I have seen which suggests that the conduct of Mr Tibaldi, Mr Ayre and Mr Malone relating to the preparation of documents surrounding the January 2011 flood event, and oral testimony given to the flood inquiry, evidences offences against the Criminal Code or official misconduct under the Crime and Misconduct Act 2001,’’ Mr Jerrard found.
In line with the flood inquiry’s recommendations, the CMC’s probe was limited to documents the engineers prepared about their actions, and their oral testimony to the inquiry.
It did not look at whether their management of the dam’s gates during the flood crisis could amount to a criminal offence or official misconduct.
During flood inquiry’s hearings earlier this year, much was made about a final report by dam operator Seqwater, primarily written by Mr Tibaldi, with input from Mr Ayre and Mr Malone.
The Seqwater report dealt with the timing of the engineers’ escalation of water releases from the dam.Counsel assisting the commission Peter Callaghan doggedly questioned the men about inconsistencies in their version of events.
He eventually accused them of colluding to write a fictitious final report for Seqwater, after the fact.In March, flood inquiry Commissioner Catherine Holmes found there was evidence the engineers had colluded to pen a misleading report.
She recommended the CMC investigate whether the men had deliberately misled her inquiry, something the CMC has now roundly dismissed.
IMF, a litigation funder for law firm Maurice Blackburn, says the CMC’s findings won’t derail plans for a potential class action on behalf of more than 4000 flood victims against Seqwater and the state government.
IMF says the CMC’s findings don’t deal with whether Seqwater, which is government owned, was negligent.
"Unfortunately, none of the inquiries to date that have been state-sponsored have addressed the state’s potential liability," IMF executive director John Walker said.
He said IMF was awaiting reports from experts in the United States about the dam’s operation and potential negligence.
He’s expecting to hear back within four weeks.
www.BrisbaneTimes.com.au
The Seqwater report dealt with the timing of the engineers’ escalation of water releases from the dam.Counsel assisting the commission Peter Callaghan doggedly questioned the men about inconsistencies in their version of events.
He eventually accused them of colluding to write a fictitious final report for Seqwater, after the fact.In March, flood inquiry Commissioner Catherine Holmes found there was evidence the engineers had colluded to pen a misleading report.
She recommended the CMC investigate whether the men had deliberately misled her inquiry, something the CMC has now roundly dismissed.
IMF, a litigation funder for law firm Maurice Blackburn, says the CMC’s findings won’t derail plans for a potential class action on behalf of more than 4000 flood victims against Seqwater and the state government.
IMF says the CMC’s findings don’t deal with whether Seqwater, which is government owned, was negligent.
"Unfortunately, none of the inquiries to date that have been state-sponsored have addressed the state’s potential liability," IMF executive director John Walker said.
He said IMF was awaiting reports from experts in the United States about the dam’s operation and potential negligence.
He’s expecting to hear back within four weeks.
www.BrisbaneTimes.com.au
21.8.12
