Fight on to make sure southeast Queensland's beautiful subtropical trees don't leave as Goodna's Jacarandas survive three floods

Chantal Jacobs rides past jacaranda trees at
the University of Queensland's St Lucia campus.

THE brilliant reds, purples and shade of the southeast's subtropical trees have formed part of the region's spring and summer landscape for more than a century in some cases.

However in the face of a recent run of dry weather and the increasing age of some trees, the battle to preserve them is a constant one.

The magnitude of that fight hit home in Ipswich this month, when two 80-year-old jacarandas came crashing to the ground in Brisbane Tce and George St at Goodna during a windy day.

With Goodna's annual Jacaranda Festival due to go ahead next Friday, Councillor Paul Tully said Ipswich City Council had plans to replace the fallen trees and would make arrangements to ensure the iconic jacarandas did not disappear for good.

"They were planted 80 years ago this year, and they have survived three floods," he said.

"The old trees, I do think some of them are on their last legs. We are going to swing into action now with a plan to plant a new jacaranda in between each of the existing old ones."



Brodie Bannister enjoys the shade
of a Moreton Bay fig in Kelvin Grove.



Cr Tully said council had a responsibility to weigh up issues of public safety against preserving the environment.

He added he was increasingly aware of public concerns about large trees, particularly older eucalypts.

"It really is a difficult issue, because you might have a really magnificent tree.

"They don't last forever and people might think they will but they get old, they lose branches, they get rot in them and diseased sooner or later but it is important for councils to replenish trees to ensure that you don't just cut out the old ones and leave nothing."

While the sight of a blooming jacaranda or poinciana are familiar to many, the reason for their abundance in Brisbane may not be.

 

BIG REDS: Blooming poincianas in a St Lucia street.

Introduced poincianas and jacarandas have featured in Queensland parks for more than a century, but it was Harry Oakman, Brisbane's superintendent of parks from 1945 to 1962, whose vision left a lingering impact.

His mission to adorn Brisbane in the flowering trees, as well as Moreton Bay figs, can be witnessed annually as the fruits of that labour bloom.

With almost 800 trees of varying species located in and around the Brisbane CBD alone, and hundreds more dotted through the city's suburbs, Brisbane's City Council's team of arborists seeks to preserve this legacy by replacing "like with like" where possible, as the trees reach the end of their natural lives.

The recent big dry has also presented challenges as council officers conduct regular inspections of the city's foliage to address threats posed by weather and old age.

A spokesman for Lord Mayor Graham Quirk said while some smaller trees were suffering in the drier weather, most were faring well.

 

RELAXING ATMOSPHERE: Andrew Greenhalgh and
Christina Rucker lounge in the sun against a jacaranda at St Lucia.

Council has a number of processes for collecting information on the city's trees, which include regular inspections of parks, problem trees and trees located in the CBD," he said.

"Council does have records of most of the city's oldest trees but none of these are of concern due to the current dry conditions. These trees have survived many droughts and generally have very deep root systems."

"Most are located in council's older parks such as the Botanic Gardens, and as such, are watched very closely by Councils gardeners. The CBD contains a number of very old fig trees. These trees have deep root systems and are highly resilient to drought."

www.CourierMail.com.au

20.10.12

Ebbs and flows of riverfront sales along the Brisbane River

 

Patrick Dixon, a doyen of riverfront sales,
on the balcony of a St Lucia home. 

PATRICK Dixon spent his formative years beside the Brisbane River, having mud fights with the neighbours and looking at the flying foxes' evening migration up river every sunset.

But the river has been more important for him as an adult, where he has become Brisbane's leading property agent for riverfront property since the river gained cachet as a place to live in the past two decades. He even has written a book about housing on the Brisbane River.

Now, nearly two years after the floods put some of Brisbane's best waterfront real estate under the water, he sees a recovery in some parts of Brisbane's riverfront market. "Two years isn't really enough to deaden the pain, but the discount that people were demanding after the floods is already decreasing," he says.

He argues that the riverfront property market in Brisbane has been hit in the past few years by a double whammy: first, the global financial crisis, which affected the top end of markets everywhere, and second, the floods of January last year.

Floods have marked Dixon's career. His first job in real estate was at Ray White in Brisbane's CBD in 1974, exactly the same time as Brisbane's other big flood of modern times.

"When showing houses 10 years later, people's first question was about the flood. This time around they're coming back a lot quicker. There's a perception that the flood was caused by bad management of Wivenhoe (Dam), and if that can be fixed up, then waterfront living is fine again.

"But also the river brand is a lot stronger now than it was after 1974. There's been a whole change in Brisbane in attitudes to living on the river now compared with what it was then."

For most of Brisbane's history, the breezy hilltops with their cooling winds were the most desirable places to build, while the river was seen as being on the flats. Dixon traces the change in attitude to 1988, when the Expo was held at a large site beside the Brisbane River directly opposite the CBD, and locals as well as visitors suddenly saw the big advantages of a lifestyle beside the river.

As Brisbane grew quickly throughout the 1990s and 2000s, property fronting the Brisbane River became particularly desirable, with many of the newly rich moving there rather than the high hills of suburbs such as Ascot.

Mining billionaires Clive Palmer and Peter Bond live on the river at Fig Tree Pocket, while Australian Rugby League Commission chairman John Grant, who is also a successful businessman, lives on the river at Chelmer.

But the flood made a big psychological impact. The 1974 flood hit far more of Brisbane than last year's flood did, and suburbs below the CBD were hardly affected last year although those farther upstream were probably affected more.

The impact of the recent flood is seen from activity in waterfront housing. In 2007, there were 49 houses sold on the river; 29 in 2008; 34 in 2009; and 38 in 2010. But last year, the year after the flood, there were only 20 houses sold. There is a slight recovery evident this year. In the first eight months, 18 houses were sold, so between 27 and 30 should be sold across the full year. While movement is returning, activity is still well below pre-flood levels.

This is not solely because of the flood, as the entire top end of Brisbane's real estate market has trended downwards in the past few years, as indeed it has all across the country.

Dixon says that even before last year's flood, people were prepared to pay a premium of 5-10 per cent for a flood-free block - that is, one that did not go underwater in 1974. That premium rocketed up last year, but Dixon says it has now come back to about 15-20 per cent.

Straight after the floods, some people sold their houses complete with mud and debris, while others restored them to the state they were in before the flood. It's the latter group that will be coming on to the market in the next few years and the longer the time distance from the floods, the better the price will be.

"The interesting thing is that it's the former group who generally did better, as competition by builders and amateur home renovators resulted in premiums not experienced by sellers who restored their homes," Dixon says. "The latter had buyers worried about a recurrence of the flood while the former had anxious buyers looking to secure a low-entry price foothold on to the Brisbane River."

Already this year, there have been four sales of more than $5 million for riverfront property, but these were all on non-flood-affected sites. The real test will come in the next 12 months when renovated flood-affected properties come on the market.

www.TheAustralian.com.au

18.10.12

Guide to purchasing best insurance to cover all bases

A good insurance adviser will have
an eye for your personal situation.

INSURANCE is one of those things that we don't miss until we need it.

Sure we bemoan the monthly outgoings for a "just in case" but there is usually a sigh of relief if the unfortunate situation does eventuate.

The six main forms of insurance, well in Australia at least, are policies for motor vehicles, home and contents, businesses, mortgage protection, workers compensation and travel.

There are hundreds of companies offering insurance products to consumers with each product having its own set of exclusions and requirements.

It is difficult to know where to start.

Motor vehicles

As with any insurance policy the best one is the one that best suits your needs and circumstances.

Motor vehicle insurance is usually made up of a number of components including bodily injury liability, property damage liability, medical payments, uninsured motorist protection, collision coverage and physical damage.

It is vital that you don't choose your cover on price alone as being underinsured is sure to cost you in the long run but in this competitive market you can have a policy tailored to your specific needs.

All drivers must have compulsory third party insurance but then it's up to you as to what else you want included.

Prices differ according to the type and age of the vehicle you own, where it is stored, if it is used for business, which is driving it and whether it has been modified.

So consider your circumstances and think out of the box.

If you don't drive your car that often you may consider a "Pay as you drive" policy or if you have retired maybe look into companies that support a specific age group.

Most insurers also offer multi-policy discounts when you hold other policies with them.

 House and contents

Your home is very likely your biggest asset and the treasured possessions within will be difficult to replace without insurance.

If you have taken out a mortgage to secure your property the bank will insist on insurance but don't feel pressured to go with the broker they suggest.

Shopping around may net a better price.

You will have to decide whether you want "total replacement" cover or "sum ensured" cover but use accurate estimates of the rebuild cost of your home as this will affect the price and it is often better to slightly overvalue your contents than opt for the other end of the scale.

 Keep in mind that if your home is destroyed you will need money not only to replace it but for supplementary costs like alternative accommodation, removal of debris and lodging plans with council.

 Often insurance companies will cap the amount valuable items are covered for so for example items like jewellery or electronics may have a maximum payout of $5000.

 If you have items that are quite valuable consider insuring them separately.

Be sure to check on flood coverage and what constitutes a flood for the sake of the policy and also things like whether your home is covered if you are away for long periods of time.

If you work from home you will need to have a separate business insurance policy to cover damages in your home office.

Take photos of your possessions, particularly in the room in which they are placed as this will help support any claims you may make, if you lose them or they become damaged.

Health

If you do not have private insurance with hospital benefits and you earn over $84,000 ($168,000 for couples, families and single parents) you will have to pay an extra 1% Medical Levy Surcharge in addition to the 1.5% you already pay in your tax.

That and an overextended public system are just two reasons to consider health insurance.

Most people tend to opt for hospital and extras cover which will look after services like dentistry, physiotherapy, optical and alternative therapies.

There is great variation in what is covered and the rebates involved so make sure your research is thorough.

If you have already had your family for example you could exclude maternity care while young healthy singles may have little use for hip replacements.

Also, you can use a different provider for your hospital cover from the one you choose for extras depending on which offers the services you need.

There are so many providers on the market now that it wouldn't hurt to do comparisons.

Did you know?

There is documented evidence that Chinese and Babylonian traders began to protect themselves against risk as far back as the third century BC by spreading their goods among multiple vessels to avoid chances of complete loss.

In later years, ship masters in Great Britain reasoned that if 100 ship owners each chipped in money the money collected could be used to repair or replace the few boats that were damaged or lost.

Extreme losses following the Great Fire of London in 1666 led to the creation of the world's first actual insurance company, The Insurance Office, or The Fire Office.

In the US, the first insurance company was started in Charleston, South Carolina in 1732. Benjamin Franklin is recognised as helping to make insurance popular and to standardise the practice of insurance.

www.IpswichAdvertiser.com.au

18.10.12
 

Sony Foundation funds Salvos Youth Centre in Goodna

Denis Handlin AM, Chairman and
CEO of Sony Music Australasia

By Paul Cashmere

The Queensland town of Goodna has a brand new facility built with thanks to funding from the Sony Foundation.

After the floods of 2011, Sony Music released the Flood Relief album with money raised going to the Sony Foundation.

The Sony Foundations selected the Salvation Army as the benefactor of the money raised and the state-of-the-art Sound Point facility in Goodna, Queensland was built with the proceeds.

Sony Music Chairman and CEO and Sony Foundation Governor Denis Handlin was in Goodna yesterday for the official opening of the new centre where Sony artist Pete Murray also performed.

600 homes in Goodna were affected by the Queensland floods. It was decided to build the Sound Point facility for the benefit of the whole community.

In 2009, following the Victorian bushfires, Sony raised $1.7 million from the sale of the benefit album ‘Bushfire AID’ for the Sony Foundation to distribute. Denis also drove that project.

The Sony Foundation is the charitable arm of the Sony group of companies in Australia.

The Foundation has contributed over $12 million to charity over the past decade.

 

www.Noise11.com

 

 

COMMENT: On behalf of the people of Goodna and surrounding flood-affected suburbs, I sincerely thank Denis Handlin AM, Sony Music, the Sony Foundation and the Salvation Army for this tremendous facility.  Your generosity and assistance will never be forgotten.  Cr Paul Tully - PaulGTully@gmail.com

 

5.10.12

Suncorp ripoff continues as flood victims suffer

Suncorp may have won the PR war in the wake of the 2011 floods but their insurance premiums have skyrocketted in the aftermath of their apparent "good guy" generosity.

 

One young Goodna couple got the shock of their lives when their annual Suncorp premium jumped from $1400 to $3565 - more than two and a half times the pre-flood quote.

 

Suncorp - and the rest of the rapacious insurance companies - have done very, very well in the 37 years between the 1974 and the 2011 floods, yet cry poor when they have to make one big payout.

 

Those same companies have very few payouts for bushfires in Queensland and relatively infrequent destructive cyclones mean that their payout levels are quite low overall.

 

But come one big flood event, Suncorp pays out, jacks up premiums to world record levels and even refuses to insure the entire population in some Queensland towns.

 

The Federal Government talks tough on cracking down on the insurance industry but then tinkers at the edges and, in reality, achieves the usual political goal - something between bugger all and nothing.

 

There needs to be a Royal Commission into the insurance industry in Australia with sweeping changes so that the profit hungry insurance companies have a dual and equal responsibility to both their shareholders and their policy holders. At the moment, they put company profits ahead of fair and equitable insurance policies and payouts.

 

Until major reforms happen, gouging of customers by insurance companies in Australia will continue unabated to the detriment of honest, hard-working Australians.

 

.............................................................

If you know of any insurance company
which provides full flood insurance at
competitive rates, please contact:
PaulGTully@gmail

 

6.10.12

Clear skies the focus for Goodna following the 2011 flood



Pete Murray perform at the opening of the
Sony Foundation and The Salvation Army
Goodna Youth and Community Centre.



AWARD-WINNING artist Pete Murray hit the stage at Goodna yesterday to help the community celebrate a brighter future after the devastating 2011 floods with the opening of a new youth and community centre.

In partnership with the Sony Foundation, the Salvation Army's state-of-the-art facility opening was headlined with a set by Murray and also included performances from local dance acts and Murwillumbah beat box artist Bonnie Van Tiel.

After a three-song performance that included the hit single Seen Better Days, a relaxed Murray said he had been involved with the Salvation Army for a few years and was happy to be a part of the healing process for the community.

"When the floods hit, Denis Handlin, who is the boss of Sony, got in touch with me and it seemed like a great way to help," he said.

"I'm happy to be a part of this great opening and just happy to help."

Joining Murray in the festivities was Major Neil Dickson, of the Salvation Army, who was extremely happy with the new facility, which was built with the funds raised by the Sony Foundation.

"Goodna was severely affected by the 2011 flood, with 600 homes and units sustaining damage. We believe this is a great spot for the new centre. We also are striving not to distinguish between those who have been affected by the floods and those who were not. This is for the whole community."

Goodna resident Natasha Kiely was just excited to see her favourite artist.

"I can't believe Pete Murray is playing here, I love him," she said.

The new centre, which has been officially named Sound Point, in honour of the Sony Foundation, will play a central role in combining other community services already located in the area including Lifeline and Goodna Youth Services.

Sound Point will offer services including youth education, recreation, arts and counselling, plus legal advice and personal support for all local residents.

For more information call Sound Point on 3280 8800 between 9am and 4.30pm.

www.QT.com.au

5.10.12

Floodlines exhibition hits the road across Queensland

An interactive exhibition profiling the memory of Queensland's 2011 floods and cyclone has hit the road to tour 60 regional centres in Queensland.

A vast collection of contemporary digital media and historical articles from the State Library collection have been compiled for the State Library of Queensland's (SLQ) exhibition Floodlines: a living memory.

Curators of the exhibition collaborated with number of organisations to create an interactive showcase of the stories before during and after as told by the community members themselves, local storytellers and the media.

Executive Manager of Learning and Participation with the SLQ Linda Pitt says one of the exciting features of the exhibition is the interactive flood mapping, which allows users to assess the levels of flooding across suburbs of Brisbane, and towns devastated by Cyclone Yasi, Cardwell, Tully and Ingham using a smart phone device.

The SLQ have worked closely with a company specialising in technology called 'augmented reality mapping' - to develop an interactive reflection of the affected centres before, during and after the disaster events. Users can scroll through the timeline to see suburbs of Brisbane, and various regional towns at different stages of the flood.

Ms Pitt says although the focus has been on the Brisbane River when the exhibition was on display at the State Library, the touring exhibition includes more developed mapping data to include towns affected by the widespread flood event.

"We think that it's a Queensland first to develop augmented reflections. This takes the existing map and terrain data from the 2010/2011 flooding to simulate the flooding in [selected] areas."

"People will be able to bring their personal devices (smart phone, or smart tablet device) - download the free 'floodlines' app from the app store and use that to reflect on the flooding in their suburb or town."

Curators from the State Library also collaborated with ABC Open for their 'Wall of Stories' feature of the Floodlines: a living memory exhibition, which featured content created by ABC Open producers for the Aftermath project.

Ms Pitt says it was important to draw on the wealth of knowledge and skill in the community for the exhibition to make it authentic.

The exhibition also draws on the collective memory of Queenslanders by way of a photo contribution to the Flood and Cyclone Mosaic.

The artwork was conceptualized by digital artist Jason Nelson and the State Library team, but is being built by the cameras of Queenslanders.

"A lot of people took photographs of their neighbourhood, and so we've used that as a platform to capture some of those stories," Ms Pitt says.

She says people who visit the travelling exhibition or view it online are welcome to contribute photos to the mosaic.

"We didn't want to delve into any sort of disaster porn images, but to really look at the stories on the ground and the people who have shared their very intimate moments with us.

"It's about community spirit, and the exhibition is to learn, understand and empathise."

"This is a snapshot of the Queensland story, and we want to make it about the people and about communities," she says.

After being on display at the State Library of Queensland for 5 months, Floodlines has hit the road and will tour the following regional centres in Queensland.


2012

Gordon White Library 2 October - 2 November
Moranbah Library 14 - 27 November
Clermont Library 30 November - 13 December


2013

Middlemount Library 25 January - 7 February
Dysart Library 12 - 22 February
CityLibraries Aitkenvale 9 - 19 March
Hinchinbrook Shire Library, Ingham - 28 March - 10 April
Cardwell Library 19 - 27 April
Dorothy Jones Library Tully 1 - 13 May
Kuranda Library 24 May - 5 June
Mareeba Library 11 - 22 June
Atherton Library 27 June - 8 July
Malanda Library 13 - 24 July
Ravenshoe Library 1 - 10 August
Herberton Library 19 - 23 August
Dimbulah Library 29 August
Chillagoe Library 3 September
Croydon Library 20 September - 2 October
Normanton Library 18 - 29 October
Karumba Library 2 - 12 November

www.ABC.net.au

3.10.12

Salvos and Sony open new Goodna Youth Centre

Denis Handlin, CEO of Sony Australia
at the official opening at Goodna
 

Denis Handlin Head of Sony Australia at the opening of the Salvation Army Youth & Community Centre at Smiths Rd Goodna this morning.

Sony donated $2 million after the 2011 flood to establish the Centre.

The Centre is situated in Smiths Rd Goodna, adjacent to Crazy Clarks, opposite St Ives Shopping entre.

4.10.12
 

Flooding worse than 2011 a real possibility

04 Oct 2012 Letter to the Editor of The Queensland Times Cr Paul Tully AS USUAL, Ken Alderton completely evades the central point of the Wivenhoe Dam debate (QT 1/10). The question of whether the dam was operated negligently in the days leading up to the flood on January 11, 2011, will be a matter for the courts, with the evidence of engineers and hydrologists tested before a Supreme Court judge. The standard of proof in a civil case is on the balance of probabilities, which means the evidential onus in any class action instituted by Maurice Blackburn Lawyers might be more easily met by the plaintiffs. I should place on record that Mr Alderton does show a modicum of perspicacity in acknowledging that former Premier Joh Bjelke-Petersen’s claim in 1985 of the end of Brisbane River floods following the commissioning of the Wivenhoe Dam was a total political furphy. Former Ipswich City engineer Bob Gamble once described the flooding characteristics of the Bremer and Brisbane River systems as "the most complex in Australia" and consistently predicted future major floods in Ipswich and Brisbane. Irrespective of the outcome of any class action, I agree with your correspondent that we must look to the future to avoid the widespread complacency in the community which crept in during the decades following the 1974 flood that it would never happen again. One only has to look at the 1893 flood which was six metres higher than last year’s flood to realise that far worse floods than 1974 and 2011 remain a real possibility. CR PAUL TULLY Goodna www.QT.com.au 4.10.12

Lawyers stand to gain from compensation if Newman Government makes ex gratia payments

Wivenhoe Dam

By Michael Madigan

THOUSANDS of Queensland flood victims risk losing a large slice of any compensation payouts even if a planned multibillion-dollar class action never reaches a courtroom.

Lawyers trying to extract taxpayer compensation for Brisbane flood victims stand to gain up to 30 per cent even if the Newman Government bows to pressures and makes ex gratia payments.

Law firm Maurice Blackburn's backers IMF Australia stand to pocket tens of millions of dollars if they succeed, with the government payout likely to be in the hundreds of millions.

Up to 5000 victims are believed to have signed up to a class action despite a US Army report released last week that backed the actions of the Wivenhoe dam engineers.

The $15 million flood inquiry earlier this year found the engineers had breached the manual.

Pressure is expected to build on the Newman Government to make some ex gratia payments to avoid a public backlash in the lead-up to the next election.

Flood victim David Stark, who estimates the flood cost him close to $250,000 and who has repeatedly linked the management of Wivenhoe Dam with the floods, said litigants had to take care.

"I am not necessarily anti-Maurice Blackburn, but I would urge all flood victims to look at all options before signing anything," Mr Stark said.

He said it was unlikely the Government would settle victims' claims for compensation without a courtroom showdown, but it was not an impossible scenario.

Maurice Blackburn principal Damian Scattini said there was only one pressure point applied to the Newman Government to pay flood victims compensation and that was the class action.

"You can join the class action or you can get 100 per cent of nothing," he said.

"Because that is what the Government has promised you - nothing."

Mr Scattini said it was standard procedure for a company funding a class action to be recompensed.

He said backers would not expect any slice of the payout if the Government announced a compensation payout clearly unrelated with the pressure applied by the class action.

IMF Australia has made it clear in section 13 of its agreement summary if claims are settled "or there is an ex gratia payment received by you" IMF would be repaid a fee of between 26 and 30 per cent of the gross amount.

If the class action reaches resolution on or before before June 30, 2013, the fee is 26 per cent off the top of the first $1 million. If the resolution is reached after June 2013, the fee is 30 per cent off the top.

The Government has refused to comment.

A spokesman said that Premier Campbell Newman had made the Government's position clear when he said: "People who have a complaint, they will have to look at these things and make a judgment, it is a free country".

But Mr Newman has dodged questions on whether his Government would act as a model litigant as pledged by former premier Anna Bligh.

A model litigant is required to fairly assess the claims and mediate the claims wherever possible.

Ipswich Councillor Paul Tully, whose own home was flooded, said the prime impetus for the Government to settle claims came from the class action.

www.CourierMail.com.au
3.10.12

Wivenhoe Dam report debacle - US Army Engineers off the track

The US Army engineers' report differs
from the findings of the commission.

IT should be no easy feat to turn the serious, damning, evidence-based findings of a $15 million royal commission-style inquiry -- one that nailed an egregious cover-up - into a glowing endorsement barely six months later.

But that is precisely what a group of US engineers, asked to review the performance of another group of engineers - those in control of Wivenhoe Dam's massive releases of water in January last year, water that became most of the Brisbane River flood - have managed to achieve.

Yesterday, Premier Campbell Newman, whose government faces multi-billion-dollar class actions over floods that deluged thousands of homes and businesses, authorised the release of a new report that his bureaucrats have been holding in its draft form for the past fortnight.

The report comes from a team of officials from the US Army Corps of Engineers and the US Department of Interior. It is being warmly welcomed by the Newman government.

For this report, the US experts were asked by the Queensland government to review an earlier, highly controversial Wivenhoe report produced last year by the dam engineers to explain how they managed the dam and the floods.

The Wivenhoe report became spectacularly controversial for this remarkable reason: a Supreme Court judge would subsequently find in March this year that it was a "false" presentation of the dam engineers' performance in the flood. The Wivenhoe report was a "facade of precision".

It is instructive to compare and contrast some of the findings.

Before returning to her role on the Supreme Court of Appeal, Catherine Holmes, as commissioner of the Queensland Floods Commission of Inquiry, spent 12 months scrutinising the Wivenhoe engineers and their actions. In her final report in March, on page 508, she says: "There are several things that may have motivated the three engineers to present the false flood report, including a wish to protect their professional reputations from the damage that would be caused by a disregard of the manual, or the maintenance of (dam operator) SEQWater's immunity under the (relevant legislation)."

Yesterday, the US engineers said this about the same document, following a behind-the-scenes review lasting two months: "The flood engineers should be commended for producing this extensive, well organised and very readable document in six weeks, while the region was recovering from the flood event."

The US engineers omitted the official adverse findings of the inquiry, airbrushed out of existence despite being published in more than 100 pages of the final report.

When the US engineers received the Newman government's precise terms of reference for their review, they expressly excluded the findings of Queensland's $15 million public inquiry.

The contradictions in these documents are plentiful and they could not be more stark. They make a mockery of the taxpayer-funded processes and fuel the concerns of flood victims and their lawyers. With potentially billions of dollars at stake, only a prolonged court case before a senior judge may resolve the issues.

Yesterday's report is but the latest instalment in the continuing, complex and emotionally charged saga over Wivenhoe Dam - and its contribution to the flooding of greater Brisbane when Anna Bligh was still premier, Newman was lord mayor, and complicated operating strategies for the most important and dangerous infrastructure in the state suddenly became crucially important.

Because of its tone and findings, the latest report is good for Newman as he tries to protect Queensland's debt-ridden balance sheet from the compensation claims being prepared by class-action specialists Maurice Blackburn lawyers on behalf of several thousand people.

The US report states that "based on the contemporaneous information, the flood operation engineers made correct release strategy decisions"; and that "as with any (dam) operation, there were instances where an alternative operation could have been used, however, without the benefit of perfect foresight, there still would have been a risk that the outcome could have been worse as well as better"; and "there were no instances identified which violated the intent of the flood operations' primary objectives".

The report's conclusions should be embraced by the dam's government-owned operator SEQWater and the three engineers - Rob Ayre, John Tibaldi and Terry Malone - who were found by the Holmes inquiry to have engaged in a deliberate and dishonest cover-up of the truth. The engineers repeatedly and strenuously deny wrongdoing.

In their section on acknowledgments, the US engineers express thanks to SEQWater and the flood engineers for hosting them on site visits and to meetings, and "answering our detailed questions on modelling, forecasts, gauging, processes etc".

Six months ago, the same engineers were accused by the inquiry of lying. Their referral to the Crime and Misconduct Commission for consideration of perjury-related offences led to retired judge John Jerrard recommending last month that a criminal prosecution would be oppressive.

But for flood victims such as Tegwen Howell, one of many who lost the family home and hold out hope of being compensated for their losses, a life without a home is oppressive. The report yesterday is another bitter pill. "The bureaucrats may think everything is back to normal, but as someone walking the walk, I can tell them that it is far from normal," Howell tells The Australian.

"The social and economic impact of the floods will last a very long time. We find ourselves 20 months post-flood, still without our own home, the building still hasn't started as we still don't have a builder and we are fast running out of time.

"As for the social impact, a neighbour recently told me my children should just move on and have no right to be upset about the fact that they still don't have a home. With views like that, how are we supposed to feel comfortable in our own neighbourhood?"

Context and a chronology of key events is important in the fiasco over the management of a dam that was storing too much water at the onset of a particularly intense La Nina-driven wet season. It was a wet season that weather forecasters had been increasingly warning would be likely to produce serious flooding. When the rain came on top of a dam above full supply level, the dam's engineers had to release massive volumes quickly to protect Wivenhoe's structural integrity.

Nine months ago, as a direct result of a series of stories in The Australian highlighting the evidence of a cover-up that had been overlooked by the floods inquiry, Holmes decided to restart public hearings and resume investigations. An inquiry that had effectively completed its year-long assignment, save for the release of a final report yet to be printed, went back to work. Flood victims saw a glimmer of hope that their concerns of a man-made disaster, or at least a disaster that could have been minimised with a more prudent dam operation, were justified.

The decision to restart public hearings would have immense fallout, politically and economically. State and local government elections were delayed to give the inquiry time to test the new revelations and do its job properly, albeit late in the piece, while flood victims, insurers and their lawyers weighed the financial implications of adverse findings.

One of the most important pieces of evidence for the inquiry and its investigating teams to test for accuracy and truthfulness was the official document that the Wivenhoe Dam engineers had produced in the immediate aftermath of the flood.

Known as the March 2011 Flood Report, or Wivenhoe report, this document - heavily relied on by Bligh and her cabinet, the media, the wider public and the floods inquiry - presented an account of how the dam was operated at crucial stages during the disaster in January last year.

But the comprehensive report that was produced by the dam's engineers, adopted by their managers at SEQWater, and accepted as fact by the Queensland government, had a fundamental flaw - it was found to be false in its most critical parts because it presented a bogus explanation of how the engineers had performed at key stages of the flood. In this way, it misled everyone into believing, wrongly, that the dam had been operated in accordance with its strict operating manual.

Holmes, in her findings, highlighted "after-the-fact rationalisation" by the engineers. She ruled that they presented a "facade of precision".

In reconstructing their possible motives for producing the false flood report, Holmes found that "the evidence does not suggest that (the engineers) were especially confident" about how they had performed in the flood event. They feared their performance was deficient.

On the question of collusion, Holmes ruled "the evidence leads inevitably to the conclusion that, in addition to their own knowledge about the misleading nature of the March flood event report, Mr Tibaldi and Mr Ayre were each aware of the other's state of mind in this regard".

The problem for the Newman government as it contemplates the potential financial hit is that those findings stand. Nothing has altered them. They were not appealed or challenged by the Bligh government, the incoming Newman government or the engineers themselves. No amount of woolly, lazy analysis by gullible sections of the media alter these findings.

The findings that the engineers breached the manual during the flood by failing to select the correct operating strategy, and by failing to take into account forecast rainfall, are well understood by the legal teams laying the groundwork for the compensation cases.

The consequences of the breaches in terms of the impact of the flood remain uncertain. Some experts are adamant there would have been a significant reduction in the flood height; others are equally adamant there would have been little difference.

Holmes concluded in her final report: "The model results are purely illustrative. They do not demonstrate the outcomes for the infinite range of possibilities that exist. Ascertaining the practical result of acting more quickly also

is subject to the uncertainties inherent in the modelling, but again, the possibility exists of at least some improvement in the flooding outcomes for Brisbane and Ipswich."

It may be instructive that the US engineers did not do any modelling or, as they called it, "post-flood sensitivity evaluation of the actual releases made during the event" to inform their report. They attributed their decision not to do the modelling to the terms of reference received from the Queensland government. In the absence of modelling, it is unsurprising the report from the US engineers states: "There is no indication that had the flood engineers taken a different path, materially different outcomes would have resulted."

As Queensland has seen since January last year, the experts on floods will come and go. Millions of dollars more will be spent before the cases of flood victims are concluded. And the performance of Wivenhoe Dam and its engineers will be highly controversial for a long time to come.

- Hedley Thomas

www.TheAustralian.com.au

25.9.12

 

Wivenhoe flood stance creates problems for Campbell Newman

Campbell Newman, then lord mayor of Brisbane,
during the clean-up after last year's floods.

CAMPBELL Newman looked down the barrel of a television camera in early June. In one crisp sentence the Queensland Premier laid the groundwork for a revision of official facts and findings on which the ink had barely dried. More important, they are facts and findings on which the futures of many people depend.

Newman's statement flagged a very different interpretation of some of the vitally important circumstances surrounding one of Australia's worst disasters: - the devastating flooding of Brisbane and surrounding suburbs in January last year. It is a gambit striking for its audacity.

For Newman personally, it is also shaping as a serious political mistake. The flood occurred on the watch of his predecessor, Anna Bligh. Her tired and inept Labor administration shared responsibility and blame.

But as a result of Newman's bold public position since the March state election, he now owns the problem. He is accountable as his government seeks to minimise legal and financial exposure to flood victims in what is looming as the country's largest class action. How severely will a premier, if seen to be spinning findings and potentially compromising a fair go for victims who lost everything, be punished in the court of public opinion, and the civil court, when these matters are litigated?

Newman said in June: "There was a royal commission which had no finding, no adverse finding, against the SEQWater organisation, the operation of the dam, and so now people believe that they have a (legal) case. Well, it is a legal matter and that's all I'm going to say about it."

To flood victims, engineers, lawyers, journalists and anyone even vaguely familiar with the unambiguous findings just three months earlier of the $15 million royal commission-style public inquiry (which had spent a year examining Queensland's Wivenhoe Dam and its operator, SEQWater), Newman's statement could not be more patently absurd.

When Inquirer put this to Newman in a series of formal questions yesterday, he would not discuss the matter. In a brief written reply he neither affirmed nor withdrew his June statement, and declined to be interviewed. When his senior media adviser Lee Anderson was subsequently asked if Newman still stood by his claim that there was "no adverse finding" by the inquiry, he replied, "Yes, absolutely." Anderson later added that Newman had intended to convey that there was no finding of "negligence" (which is a legal construct).

Six days ago, the release by the Newman government of a Wivenhoe Dam desktop review - commissioned from engineers in the US who were given six weeks for the task - was marketed as a thumbs-up on the dam's operation. The underlying terms of reference stipulated by Queensland government lawyers a month after Newman's statement about "no adverse finding" expose the low value of the US engineers' review.

Contrary to the recommendation in the final report of the year-long floods inquiry, the terms of reference are explicit in restricting the US engineers from factoring in the serious adverse findings and evidence about the cover-up that the Wivenhoe Dam engineers were found to have concocted.

When Inquirer raised this with Newman's office yesterday, his spokesman said: "He stands by the way in which the independent review of SEQWater's report was undertaken. He has no further comment."

Newman has long had a keen professional interest in flood risks in Australia's third largest city. In the weeks before Brisbane was submerged, leading to a national levy for all taxpayers, Newman as lord mayor had taken the rare step of issuing public warnings (unheeded by SEQWater and the Bligh government) that the intense La Nina-driven wet season of late 2010 presaged a repeat of the 1974 flood disaster.

The Bureau of Meteorology's forecasters, similarly concerned, gave emergency briefings to Bligh's cabinet in the days before last year's flood. Those warnings were to no avail - the Wivenhoe Dam was maintained at its full supply level, and higher, even as flooding rain deluged an already saturated catchment.

As a former engineer who monitored the subsequent public inquiry's year of evidence, and particularly its scrutiny of dam management, Newman is in a better position than most to appreciate the gravity of the findings in the final report of Supreme Court judge Catherine Holmes in March this year. Those findings weighed the complex evidence about huge flood-causing releases of water from a dam. The findings distilled this into tangible information for the public, bureaucrats, lawyers, politicians, journalists and the thousands of flood victims.

But something else is going on now. And senior Newman government officials have confirmed to Inquirer that the post-flood strategy is being tightly controlled at the highest levels by the lawyers, as they and Newman fear a financial king-hit from the unchallenged findings of Holmes.

The $15m inquiry headed by Holmes found that the operator of the Wivenhoe Dam breached the operating manual in relation to water releases at a crucial stage of the flood; that three of the four engineers covered this up; and that there could have been "at least some improvement in the flooding outcome for Brisbane and Ipswich" if the engineers had responded with the correct strategy in the manual.

The engineers, who have strenuously and repeatedly denied wrongdoing, almost achieved the cover-up by way of their misleading post-flood 1000-plus page official report of their actions, known as the March flood event report.

When Holmes and her inquiry examined it earlier this year, the evidence showed how three of those engineers in charge of "the most valuable and dangerous piece of infrastructure in Queensland" retrospectively reconstructed a false account of when the key water-release strategies were adopted. This was the most critical part of their false account of their conduct in the March flood event report.

The questions over what the lawyers call "causation" - and of how the mismanagement and breaches of the manual contributed to the scale of the flood - remain unanswered. But it was obvious there would be no point in trying to cover up a perfect performance. It follows that the engineers could have been motivated to mislead after the event because they were concerned that the breaches of the manual may have had a role in significantly compromising the dam's capacity to manage the flood.

As Holmes stated in her final report: "The commission has drawn its conclusions from the contemporaneous documentary evidence, the engineers' evidence given orally and by way of statement, and the attempts subsequent to the (flood) event to document strategy choices. That evidence, taken as a whole, points overwhelmingly to the findings which follow."

The inquiry found: "There are several things that may have motivated the three engineers to present the false flood report, including a wish to protect their professional reputations from the damage that would be caused by a disregard of the manual, or the maintenance of SEQWater's immunity (from legal action and huge payouts) under the Water Supply (Safety and Reliability) Act.

"Mr (Rob) Ayre, Mr (Terry) Malone and Mr (John) Tibaldi each had a level of understanding that the report was misleading. Each of them, in his own way, contributed to acceptance of the report. The evidence leads inevitably to the conclusion that in addition to their own knowledge about the misleading nature of the March flood event report, Mr Tibaldi and Mr Ayre were each aware of the other's state of mind in this regard."

The inquiry found that the engineers exhibited a "striking unanimous and collective collapse of memory" about other evidence and documents at odds with their version of their conduct.

"All of them supported the accuracy of the flood event report and provided an account of what they had done in the event, consistent with the (March flood event) report. Had any of them mentioned that any of those (other documents) or suggested in any way, at any time, that there was an alternative history of strategy selection, the misleading nature of that report might have been exposed."

The inquiry found that the engineers were aware that the "particular aspect of compliance with the manual was something which would, after this event, be examined as never before. And they knew that in this regard their efforts were deficient. There was, in this circumstance, an obvious motive to present something which conveyed a document which was accurate and precise.

"The evidence is such as to warrant a recommendation that the appropriate law enforcement agency investigate the conduct of Mr Malone, Mr Tibaldi and Mr Ayre."

Aside from the cover-up - which the Crime and Misconduct Commission determined last month would be oppressive to criminally prosecute - the inquiry's findings that "Wivenhoe Dam was operated in breach of the manual from 8am on 8 January 2011" for at least 34 critical hours is the most serious.

From the perspective of the damage that was caused to properties from the dam's releases of water, this breach - and another breach in which the engineers did not take into account forecast rainfall - will make the legal action case being run for flood victims by Damian Scattini, of Maurice Blackburn lawyers.

Scattini, who has been spending much of his time in the US taking expert advice from engineers agog at the detrimental role of the dam in a flood that could have been largely avoided, describes the conduct of Newman and his government now as a PR exercise.

"The facts are straightforward and do not change," he says. "They breached the manual and they were caught out, and we are moving full-steam ahead."

 

- HEDLEY THOMAS, NATIONAL CHIEF CORRESPONDENT

www.TheAustralian.com.au

29.9.12

Premier Newman's Wivenhoe Dam probe flouted key call of Justice Cate Holmes

 THE Newman government flouted a key recommendation of the $15 million floods commission of inquiry by insisting on restrictions that led to a distorted review of the operation of Queensland's Wivenhoe Dam, The Australian can reveal.

As a result of this high-level decision in Brisbane, American engineers were engaged to perform a costly six-week review based on a misleading premise, after the floods inquiry's serious adverse findings in March.

The US Army Corps of Engineers and engineers from a US government department were told in their terms of reference that the year-long public floods inquiry was "not within the scope of the review".

The floods inquiry head, Queensland Supreme Court Justice Catherine Holmes, had already found the flood engineers did not properly take into account forecast rainfall to determine the appropriate release strategy from the dam, did not use the correct water-release strategy and deliberately covered up their breaches of the dam's operating manual.

The flood engineers, who have repeatedly and strenuously denied wrongdoing, were referred to the Crime and Misconduct Commission in March. It determined last month there should be no criminal prosecution, which would have been "oppressive".

Most of the adverse findings made by the floods inquiry revolve around the Wivenhoe engineers' 1000-plus-pages flood event report, their official account of what they did in the flood. The floods inquiry's findings described it as a "false report" and a "facade of precision" that was designed to mislead the public and the inquiry into believing that the dam was managed correctly.

Justice Holmes stated in the final report that a subsequent review of this controversial false report and how the dam was operated "must involve an examination of how the flood engineers exercised their powers; and a failure to appreciate what those powers were because of a failure to recognise the appropriate strategy must be relevant in that regard".

But two months ago the terms of reference for the review by US engineers specifically prevented this requirement. This came a month after Premier Campbell Newman wrongly claimed the floods inquiry had made "no adverse finding" about the operation of the dam.

The US engineers who conducted the six-week review of documents praised the false flood report and the operation of the Wivenhoe Dam, as described by the dam engineers in their controversial report, which the floods inquiry had been told was "fiction".

Senior government insiders confirmed to The Weekend Australian yesterday that ministers and bureaucrats were adhering to strict legal advice because of the risk of a massive damages payout due to the mismanagement of the dam, following the inundation of thousands of homes.

Asked why the floods inquiry's recommendation was not followed, a government spokesman said yesterday: "The Premier stands by the way in which the independent review of SEQWater's report was undertaken. The Premier now wants the legal process surrounding issues of liability to progress unhindered."

Maurice Blackburn senior lawyer Damian Scattini said the Newman government was embarking on a deliberately misleading campaign in an attempt to limit its potential multi-billion-dollar legal liability to flood victims.

 

- HEDLEY THOMAS, NATIONAL CHIEF CORRESPONDENT

www.TheAustralian.com.au

29.9.12

Engineers "Cleared" But Wivenhoe Dam Saga Continues




A massive release from Wivenhoe Dam

Although this week’s release of the US Army Corps review of the SeqWater Flood report brings to an end the formal review of matters surrounding the 2011 Queensland Floods, the saga appears set to continue with a massive lawsuit possibly in the works.

The report does bring relief, though, to the engineers accused of not doing all they could to prevent the disaste, and to Engineers Australia Queensland president Steven Goh, who has been steadfast in supporting them.

“The events surrounding the floods have been thoroughly examined by the Queensland Flood Commission of Inquiry,” Goh says. “They found that the engineers involved in the operation of Wivenhoe Dam achieved as close to the best possible outcome as could be expected.”

Goh added that the Crime and Misconduct Commission conducted a thorough investigation into the conduct of the three engineers involved and cleared them of any wrongdoing.

“Over the last 18 months, the actions of the Wivenhoe Dam engineers have been placed under the microscope,” he says. “After this exhaustive review process, it is clear that the professional engineers involved performed their role admirably under trying circumstances.”

The report did contain some damning information, noting that the dam is far more dangerous than previously believed. It also further reinforced previous criticism of the dam’s manual, warning that the collapse of dam walls at either Wivenhoe or Somerset would lead to a large death toll in the southeast.

Despite the engineers being cleared, personal injury law firm Maurice Blackburn Lawyers said the report was immaterial to the flood victims’ compensation case. That case implies the dam was overburdened before operators went into a panic and drained it. The number of people with a “complaint” was now approaching 5,000, the law firm said, adding that they had international experts preparing their own reports on the flood event.

Former Labour Premier Anna Bligh had indicated the government and dam operator Seqwater would potentially negotiate some compensation claims but new Premier Campbell Newman was less clear on his government’s position.

“People who have a complaint, they will have to look at these things and make a judgment,” he said.

“It is a free country.”

Newman also ruled out reducing the dam to 75 per cent capacity to increase the flood compartment after weather forecasts downgraded fears of a La Nina, which brought torrential rain in recent years, saying only an average rainy season was expected.

 

www.designbuildsource.com.au

 

COMMENT: Engineers Australia Queensland president Steven Goh would be well-advised to await the outcome of any class action in the Queensland Surpreme Court as his robust defence this week of his engineer "brothers" may ultimately prove to have been a trifle premature. - Greater Goodna Flood Group

 

27.9.12

Whitewash by US Army Corps of Engineers compounds Wivenhoe Dam debacle

QUEENSLANDERS who remember the 1974 floods that claimed 14 lives in the state's southeast understand a vital point that has eluded many of the naive journalists who have written about the 2011 floods and their aftermath. That is, Wivenhoe Dam was built for flood mitigation as well as to supply drinking water to a growing region.

The fact that Wivenhoe Dam was operated in breach of its manual in the days before last year's floods and that three of the dam engineers responsible produced a false document to cover their tracks was established by the year-long royal commission-style inquiry. As Supreme Court judge Catherine Holmes said in her final report in March: "There are several things that may have motivated the three engineers to present the false flood report, including a wish to protect their professional reputations from the damage that would be caused by a disregard of the manual or the maintenance of SEQWater's immunity (from potentially massive damages claims)." The engineers were referred to the state's Crime and Misconduct Commission, which found no evidence of criminal offences or official misconduct.

Against that background, this week's report by US army engineers, which The Australian Financial Review and Brisbane's The Courier-Mail claimed "backed" and "cleared" the SEQWater flood engineers, should be viewed with extreme scepticism. Based as it was on the engineers' false report, it was unlikely to be anything other than favourable to them -- especially as Campbell Newman's government briefed the US team to exclude consideration of Justice Holmes's findings about the false flood report.

No doubt the cash-strapped Queensland government hopes the US report will help it save on compensation payouts to thousands who could sue for damages for their loss of property and livelihoods as a result of the floods. This is no excuse, however, for Mr Newman to play down the findings of such a significant inquiry. At this stage, he is getting away with it because too many journalists and editors are content with once-over-lightly coverage of a complex issue deserving of the most thorough and sophisticated reporting. As well as disclosing how much money was wasted on the US report, Mr Newman must be pressed to explain why the US team was hamstrung by such narrow and absurd terms of reference. The resulting whitewash, lauded as an "independent review" by the AFR, has as little credibility as a hypothetical review by an overseas government exonerating corrupt former Queensland police commissioner Terry Lewis based on his testimony to the Fitzgerald Inquiry alone, while ignoring its findings that he was responsible for serious corruption. Unfortunately for the public, the business tabloid and other media have allowed their coverage to be skewed by their frustration that, unlike others who accepted the official line, The Australian's Hedley Thomas raised pertinent questions about releases from the dam in the lead-up to the floods, when Wivenhoe was allowed to soar from 106 per cent on Friday, January 7, to 148 per cent on Saturday, January 8, to peak at 191 per cent on Tuesday night, January 11.

Combing through official documents, Thomas later uncovered contradictions between official records and what the engineers told the inquiry. As a result of his reports, Justice Holmes re-opened hearings at the inquiry, later concluding that the Wivenhoe Dam had been mismanaged -- a finding that was not subsequently appealed or challenged by the engineers or government, and that is no way diminished by the US report. News that Thomas had been named the 2012 Queensland Journalist of the Year for his investigation was reported by the AFR under the fatuous headline "Soggy ending" -- which sums up much of the coverage of the issue.

Another factor that has received scant attention is the false alarmism, rife for years before the rain-soaked summer of 2010-11, that water shortages had become a permanent part of Australian life. At least in part, authorities were reluctant to release water from the dams after years of severe water restrictions and warnings from Climate Change Commissioner Tim Flannery, among others, who predicted in 2007 that Adelaide, Sydney and Brisbane would run out of water and warned Australians to "stop worrying about 'the drought' -- which is transient -- and start talking about the new climate". Such matters are again pertinent, with Brisbane's dams close to 100 per cent as the wet season approaches. The aftermath of the floods, and the importance of avoiding a repeat, highlights the importance of public interest reporting.

 

www.TheAustralian.com.au

 

COMMENT: The integrity and professionalism of the US Army Corps of Engineers is under serious question as as result of their so-called "independent" report into the 2011 Brisbane River flood. The US Army Corps was specifically prevented by its terms of reference specified by the Queensland Government from considering the report and findings of the Floods Commission of Inquiry that the engineers involved had created and provided a false flood report.  Given that the US Army Corps was so hog-tied in trying to unravel the truth of the entire event, resulting in their grossly-lopsided report, they should have declined the brief and said to the Queensland Government they would not be party to such an elaborate cover-up which prevented them from going to the very core of the issue.  The US Army Corps of Engineers has shown itself to be less than professional over their conduct in this matter and have forever blemished their record of professionalism and integrity. - Greater Goodna Flood Group

26.9.12

"Independent" Wivenhoe Dam flood report will count for nothing

By Chris Merritt
Legal Affairs - The Australian

FOR those people whose homes were damaged in last year's Brisbane flood, this week's "independent report" on the operation of Wivenhoe Dam will soon be seen for what it is: a distraction that counts for nothing.

Within weeks, the findings of the US military engineers will be consigned to history.

Their report exonerating the operators of the dam is based on a report by the operators of the dam.

It will soon be swept aside when law firm Maurice Blackburn unveils what could be the first real step towards compensating at least some of last year's flood victims.

For almost a year, litigation funder IMF has been bankrolling a team of lawyers from Maurice Blackburn who are investigating whether to launch what could be a massive class action.

Their goal has been to determine whether they can prove in court that someone was responsible for operating the dam in a way that caused damage - and then to extract compensation.

IMF's John Walker and Maurice Blackburn's Damian Scattini were in the US this week consulting experts who might play a critical role in any future legal action.

And the odds on some form of legal action are shortening.

Scattini says Maurice Blackburn will make an announcement "within weeks". He also says "we are now more confident than we have ever been".

"From the night I went with my wife to rescue my mother-in-law from her house at Rocklea, I have never been so confident in the outcome of this proceeding," Scattini says.

"Within the next few weeks we will make a public announcement."

Scattini's team has been working on this project for almost a year. Every day costs money. So the mere fact Walker has not yet pulled the plug indicates how things are going.

From the state government's point of view, this increases the chance of some sort of payout down the track.

But, in one sense, a court case could provide the government with political cover when it comes time to write cheques.

If liability is determined independently, compensation would be a legal obligation, not charity.

At last count, IMF had signed up about 4500 flood victims who have agreed to pay the company between 20 per cent and 30 per cent of any damages award or financial settlement. In March they had just 2000.

There is no provision for class actions under Queensland state law, but Scattini says there are other ways of bringing this matter to court.

www.TheAustralian.com.au

COMMENT: There has been an enormous amount of spurious media comment this week that the Wivenhoe Dam engineers have been exonerated in their role in the days leading up to - and during - the Brisbane River flood of January 2011.  This article in The Australian puts all of this hogwash into perspective and brings a little reality back to the situation.  It behoves the Premier Campbell Newman and the rest of his Cabinet to put all of this misguided claptrap behind them and face up to the reality of the situation which can be crystallised into one simple issue: Was the 2011 flood event negligently managed by Seqwater, resulting in unnecessary flooding of Ipswich and Brisbane?

If the Supreme Court ultimately finds against Seqwater, all of the public posturing this week by Seqwater CEO Peter Borrows  is likely to lead to calls for him to fall on his sword. One way or the other, the flood victims of southeast Queensland will eventually be forced to move on from the dark days of 11 and 12 January 2011.  If it's with a billion dollar court-enforced payout, Peter Borrow's continuing role as the head of Seqwater would become untenable. After all, the buck would have to stop somewhere and you could bet London to a brick on, that Premier Newman would make sure it's not with him! - Greater Goodna Flood Group

 

28.9.12

Seqwater ventures into murky political and legal waters

Peter Borrows CEO of Seqwater which has
now entered a political and legal storm
with its ill-timed media statement.

 

Seqwater has been at the centre of a political and legal storm since the great Brisbane River flood of January 2011 which destroyed thousands of homes and businesses in Ipswich and Brisbane.

 

The Floods Commission of Inquiry under the brilliant stewardship of Supreme Court Judge Cate Holmes reported on 16 March 2012:

 

 

"There are several things that may have motivated the three engineers to present the false flood report, including a wish to protect their professional reputations from the damage that would be caused by a disregard of the manual, of the maintenance of Seqwater's immunity (from damages payouts).

 

"It follows that Wivenhoe Dam was operated in breach of the manual from 8am on 8 January 2011 until the evening of 9 January 2011."

 

 

This is a clear, unequivocal finding by the Commission which has not been overturned by either the subsequent CMC investigation or the hog-tied findings of the US Army Corps of Engineers.

 

To add insult to the injury of thousands of flood victims, Seqwater issued its own ill-timed media release on 26 September 2012 which read in part:

 

 

"Seqwater has always taken the view that the operation of Wivenhoe Dam during the January 2011 flood event and the release strategies adopted by its engineers significantly mitigated the flood. The independent expert retained by the Commission, concluded that, in light of the information available at the time and allowing for the limits of the strategies in the Wivenhoe manual, the flood engineers achieved close to the best possible flood mitigation result for the January event.

Furthermore, four other highly respected independent experts who appeared at the Commission support Seqwater's view that releases actually made by the flood engineers were appropriate and reasonable.

Seqwater is confident that its position will be justified if the matter ever comes before a court."

  

With a class action pending against the Queensland Government and Seqwater, this is an extraordinary leap by Seqwater propelling itself into the political and legal quagmire which has engulfed the state for the past 20 months.

 

Seqwater's CEO Peter Borrows is a highly-respected and highly-qualified engineer whose professional integrity and engineering skills are well-known.  But when it comes to embroiling Seqwater into the murky political and legal waters ahead, Peter Borrows should tread warily.

 

Highly selective use of Floods Inquiry evidence - while disregarding its key findings - is not conducive to the level of professionalism expected of Seqwater.

 

It is to be hoped that Seqwater leaves the public debate on the 2011 flood to the public and politicians and whether or not it acted negligently in the lead-up to the flood, to the courts.

 

It is not appropriate for Seqwater to continue to engage in selective self-serving public debate to justify its actions in January 2011.

 

Seqwater's website states:

"We hope the Seqwater web site provides you with a greater understanding of the significant challenges we face as well as the many innovative solutions and collaborative approaches we are developing to deliver long-term water security for South East Queensland."

 

CEO Peter Borrows has a duty to stop these public shenanigans and get on with Seqwater's job of managing our dams in southeast Queensland.

 

With the stance now taken by the State Government, it seems the legal issues in this matter will be determined in the Supreme Court of Queensland - where the negligence or otherwise of Seqwater will be decided by our legal system and not via media releases, ill-timed public utterances and extraordinary self-justifications.

 

27.9.12

Crisafulli on the front foot: Race to be flood safe before the big wet hits Queensland

SOLAR-powered cameras will monitor remote river systems and hundreds of flood gauges will warn of rapidly rising rivers as Queensland arms itself for the 2012 wet season.

The early warning systems backed by hi-tech communication devices are being rolled out to improve public safety and reduce loss of life in the event of a repeat of the 2011 floods.

Local Government Minister David Crisafulli will today announce $500,000 in funding to help regional councils across Queensland meet the vital safety upgrades recommended by the flood inquiry.

Councils had been demanding more state funding to complete crucial work and had warned that flood-weary communities might not be ready for another summer of heavy rain. New measures to be rolled out include solar-powered cameras with week-long back-up batteries.

As the State Government yesterday extended the life of the Queensland Reconstruction Authority to continue the recovery process, Mr Crisafulli said the practical measures would decentralise control from Brisbane and allow locals to take the lead.

"We wanted to see an end to the one-size-fits-all, George Street approach to handling the wet season," Mr Crisafulli said.

Solar-powered cameras will be installed along isolated river systems in the far north Carpentaria Shire and rely on satellites to relay images of flooding roads to a council website available to the public.

Further south, Hinchinbrook Shire Council will receive more than $50,000 to improve digital communication, including outdoor message boards, while the Burdekin will receive more than $10,000 for a new flood-monitoring system.

Bundaberg will receive $57,000 to assist in the installation of five river-height warning stations on the Burnett River, while at Moreton Bay Regional more than $26,000 will go towards six two-way radio base stations, 30 two-way hand-held radios and five laptops.

Mr Crisafulli said the cameras would be crucial in helping the far northern Carpentaria Council warn residents and travellers of rising floodwaters that impact on other settlements further down the rivers days later.

"In the past the council has been hampered by a lack of reliable information Normanton and Karumba are regularly isolated for long periods each year," he said.

Local Government Association of Queensland spokesman Greg Hallam said progress in flood mitigation since the inquiry's interim report in August 2011 had been extraordinary.

Mr Hallam said a mood approaching hysteria was in the air in the lead-up to the 2011 wet season. But councils had now established a firm grip on a new, 21st century approach to floods and cyclones.

"There has been tens of millions of dollars spent on new technologies mainly concentration on monitoring systems and the communications tools that run off the back of those monitoring systems," he said.

"Councils are grateful for the money coming from the state and federal governments but the fact is a lot of this money is being spent by councils themselves they are doing it off their own bat."

Mr Hallam said a single high-tech river gauge secured in concrete or stone on a river bed and recording not merely river height but temperature, flow rates and turbidity could cost more than $30,000.

More than $5 billion has so far been spent across the state on reconstruction, 75 per cent of it drawn from federal coffers and 25 per cent from state.

Deputy Premier Jeff Seeney yesterday announced the Government would extend the role of the QRA to June 2014.

However, he criticised the pace of the recovery, saying the Government would demand that the QRA deliver within established time frames.

"All of the QRA's resources, personnel and activities must be focused on its core business of completing the task of rebuilding affected communities," Mr Seeney said.

www.CourierMail.com.au

27.9.12