The Orroral Valley fire inquiry was years in the making but it offered transparency
But during the Black Summer bushfires of 2020, this small New South Wales community between Canberra and Bredbo hit the news when a bushfire swept through, destroying homes, farms and livestock in a single day.
I watched the flames myself, from Bredbo, as they crept quickly along the hills, sending embers ahead over great distances, igniting patches of dry grass in the surrounding paddocks.
The residents who fought the blaze that day would have had little sense of the greater battle still being fought five years on.
Some are still re-building after years living in caravans on their land, without even basic facilities like a flushing toilet.
The findings of an inquiry into the fire by the ACT's Chief Coroner Lorraine Walker brought down yesterday included an apology.
"This matter has taken far too long to be finalised," Chief Coroner Walker said.
"I offer my apologies to those affected by the fire and its aftermath."
It was the first time the hardship suffered by the residents had been officially acknowledged.
This bushfire was no act of nature, it was started by an army helicopter across the border in the ACT.
It's now well known the aircraft made an unplanned toilet stop on a hill in the Namadgi National Park at the head of the Orroral Valley.
A hot searchlight underneath the helicopter ignited the dry grass, and the pilot hastily took off.
The crew said they were focused on safety because they thought the helicopter was damaged.
It would be at least 35 minutes after the fire started before Defence told the local firefighting authorities of the exact location of the blaze.
The focus of the inquiry was what happened in those minutes.
There had been other calls for an inquiry into the fire.
It not only caused serious damage to Bumbalong, it also burned through 80 per cent of Namadgi National Park, and even threatened Canberra's southern suburbs, as it burned for five weeks.
At the time, Chief Minister Andrew Barr said he didn't want a "witch hunt", so the ACT's Chief Coroner set up her own inquiry.
In the end, yesterday's findings were mild.
She found there had been an "error of judgement", finding also it was not plausible that none of the crew thought to tell local authorities about the fire immediately.
But there was still great value in the inquiry.
The identities of the crew were suppressed, but they were compelled to give evidence.
This produced a clear picture of how the events unfolded, including the conversations between the crew members which were recorded and played to the court.
The inquiry facilitated a transparency that hadn't been there before.
Before that, events had come to light slowly after questions from the ABC, revealing the helicopter crew never called in the fire during its flight back to Canberra Airport.
Later, pictures taken by the crew emerged.
The inquiry also revealed details, including that it was more than nine hours before the Emergency Services Agency Commissioner Georgina Whelan was told a Defence chopper was the cause of the fire.
Interestingly the Chief Coroner found the delay in reporting the fire had little impact on the response by local authorities.
The smoke had already been spotted from a fire tower within minutes, and firefighters called in.
But as Chief Coroner Walker said, reporting the fire earlier would have been beneficial.
"Failure to report the fire earlier, and failure of the Commonwealth to accept the overarching need to do so, does raise an issue of public safety," Chief Coroner Walker said.
The Bumbalong residents were relieved to hear the Coroner's findings, saying at least someone has been found responsible.
They are hoping the findings will help in their next round, a battle in the Civil courts with the Commonwealth over compensation for their losses.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

ABC News
30 minutes ago
- ABC News
Labor seeks to legislate to protect penalty rates for award workers
Workers employed under the award system could not have penalty or overtime rates bargained away under new government legislation to be introduced in the House of Representatives today. The bill is a response to a proposal from the retail employer lobby to allow some low-paid retail managers to opt out of those entitlements in exchange for a 35 per cent pay rise, a matter currently before the Fair Work umpire. The Albanese government took the unusual step of making a submission to Fair Work, arguing that pay loadings in awards were a safety net for low-paid workers and should be protected, and had foreshadowed legislation to override the matter. The bill would prevent Fair Work from varying any award to reduce or substitute either overtime or penalty rates, which Workplace Relations Minister Amanda Rishworth said would protect the "safety net" for Australia's 2.6 million award workers, roughly one in every five of the total number employed. "Hard-working Australians rely on penalty rates and overtime rates to keep their heads above water, which is why this bill is so critical," she said. The award system, which sets out minimum pay and conditions for all workers in certain sectors, has declined in usage over time as the alternative approach of bargaining has grown, but it remains common for staff in retail, hospitality, and the care sector. The proposal to vary the retail award applied to store managers earning between roughly $54,000 and $62,000, and was backed by Coles, Woolworths, Kmart, and Costco. The legislation is likely to draw frustration from industry groups and support from unions and the Greens, although a party spokeswoman told the ABC it had not made a decision yet. Shadow Industrial Relations Minister Tim Wilson said the Coalition had been briefed on the bill, and is not yet guaranteeing his party's support either. "When it comes down to it, we have concerns about making sure it doesn't hurt small businesses. "When the Minister was asked whether it was going to have impact on small business, she gave a very explicit firm commitment that it wouldn't. "But we are not going to know that until we have a clear consultation with small business." The issue also dovetails with ongoing discussions about how workplace contracts should accommodate working-from-home rights. Fair Work is considering that question in the context of the award for clerical and administrative workers, and business groups have argued that those given the right to work flexibly should not be entitled to overtime or weekend pay loading, since they can choose when they want to do their work. Unions have instead suggested the right to work from home should be presumed unless an employer can offer a compelling justification for refusing it. Depending on the details, a bill protecting penalty rates and overtime rates in all circumstances for award workers could prevent Fair Work from adopting the business groups' suggestions. The government has given some indication that it may consider legislating work-from-home rights, but has not suggested it favours any particular model for doing so.

ABC News
30 minutes ago
- ABC News
Albanese wants childcare to be his legacy but the problem is bigger than access
It was during the election campaign, at the ABC's leaders' debate, that Anthony Albanese declared the political achievement he'd most like to be remembered for: "the universal provision of affordable childcare." For parents facing the frustration of trying to find a childcare place and the money to pay for it, elevating this issue to the stuff of prime ministerial legacy-building was no doubt welcome. A sign of Labor's seriousness. Albanese described his vision for a world in which "it is as natural to have your child have access to childcare as it is to have access to a public school". But this was also a limited goal. The focus on improving access is only one part of the problem when it comes to childcare, as the government has discovered. Improving safety and quality standards has now become an even bigger immediate concern. The ABC's Adele Ferguson has been exposing systemic failures in childcare standards for months, but it was the case revealed three weeks ago involving shocking allegations of abuse by a childcare worker in Victoria that finally spurred state and federal governments into urgent action. In the first Question Time of the new parliament yesterday, there was a concerted show of bipartisanship to lift standards. One of the first bills introduced aims to strengthen powers to carry out spot checks and strip funding if centres aren't meeting minimum standards. Further steps will be taken next month when the Commonwealth, states and territories meet to discuss a national register of childcare workers, mandatory child safety training, and the roll-out of CCTV cameras. Details are still to be thrashed out, but there's now widespread acceptance the system is broken, regulation has been too loose, and a range of steps must be taken. Spot checks, funding threats, and greater transparency around the work history of staff will all help. But will it be enough to fix a sector that's evolved (or devolved) into a confusing mess of not-for-profit and stock-exchange-listed operators, regulated by different state and federal bodies, and largely funded by taxpayer-funded subsidies? "They will likely have a positive short-term impact on safety and quality, but they won't address the deeper, systemic problems that got us to this point," says Andrew Hudson, CEO of public policy think tank the Centre for Policy Development, which was chaired by Sam Mostyn until her appointment as governor-general last year. Hudson gives the government credit for its efforts to guarantee families three days of subsidised care, improve the pay of childcare workers, and provide $1 billion to expand services where they're needed. But ultimately, he says, the government must "stop treating early learning as a market — and start building it as a universal public service". That means "directly funding providers" rather than relying on subsidies to parents that "inflate costs without improving outcomes". It means "stepping in to establish public or not-for-profit options in communities where access is limited". The idea is not to completely ban on private operators. Rather, it's about the government playing a much more direct role in funding low-fee, high-quality providers. But the think tank isn't the only one identifying the profit motive as a problem in childcare. The government's own newly appointed Minister for Early Education Jess Walsh agrees, at least in part. "There are some repeat offenders who continue to put profit ahead of child safety," the minister said yesterday. Indeed, Walsh has repeatedly made this point since taking the portfolio. She is acknowledging the profit motive is, in some cases, putting child safety at risk. Education Minister Jason Clare, who's responsible for childcare at the cabinet level, says "overwhelmingly higher levels" of quality are found in the not-for-profit sector. But he's not yet flagged any move to push profit makers out of the industry. More than 90 per cent of the centres opened over the past decade are run by providers trying to make a profit, chasing taxpayer funds now worth $16 billion every year. This is what makes the childcare sector nothing like the public school system. The prime minister wants improving access to childcare to be his legacy. Andrew Hudson from the Centre for Policy Development reckons he could be far more ambitious. "This is the moment to transform early learning from a patchy, profit-driven market into a universal system — one that delivers affordable, high-quality care for every child, in every community". David Speers is national political lead and host of Insiders, which airs on ABC TV at 9am on Sunday or on iview.


West Australian
an hour ago
- West Australian
Robert Carruthers: WA merits a spot at Jim Chalmers economic reform roundtable
There's just over a month until Treasurer Jim Chalmers' highly anticipated economic reform roundtable. The guest list is still being finalised, and the agenda has evolved to tackle ever-growing 'pillars' of reform. Whatever the roundtable's name or shape, the problem statement is clear: Australia's prosperity is under the gun, and we need to become far more match-fit. That's precisely why more key players from WA's dominant resources sector should receive a call-up. Australia's largest exporters are clearly critical to Australia's prosperity. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has spoken of his Government's mandate to make lasting change. Indeed, alongside his Treasurer, there's the opportunity to become generational reformers in the mould of past Labor luminaries. But here's the rub: consensus-seeking cannot be the singular objective. We're right to be wary of well-choreographed, Canberra-centric thinking and an invite list that is too narrow. Without strong representation and leadership, we risk ending up with a well-rounded table but a flat agenda. WA has produced world-beaters across medicine, tech, and sport — and last week, a boy from the Wheatbelt ascended to the top job at Rio Tinto, one of the world's largest diversified mining companies. Yet of the 24 formal invites issued, to date only one has been summoned from WA. There is no doubt former WA treasurer Ben Wyatt will be a strong voice and wears many hats, including board roles with major resources companies. Still, a solitary voice is not sufficient from a State that contributes more than half of Australia's export earnings. Resources Minister Madeleine King deserves credit for convening sector leaders in a series of mini roundtables in Perth last week, with identified priorities to feed into the broader Canberra roundtable. It's a measure of the respect that Minister King has earned for her ongoing engagement and support for the sector. It just makes sense to extend more invitations to WA's industry leaders to accompany her in making the 3000km journey east. Successive governments have shied away from tackling broad-based tax reform. The net result is an overly complex system reliant on a proportionally narrowing base, akin to a death by thousand cuts labyrinth. The Albanese Government was elected with a mandate for lower taxes (with the notable exception of superannuation tax). Yet, concerningly, the Treasurer has taken to flying kites in recent weeks to test support for introducing new taxes. Any move to increase resources-based taxes should be called out for what it is: a shakedown on WA. The allure of low-hanging revenue measures must not substitute for meaningful rationalisation of the tax system across all levels of government. As former WA premier Colin Barnett argued, not even the GST distribution should be off-limits in the quest for meaningful reform. Ask global resources companies who have recently invested in North or South America what welcome mat measures were rolled out to secure their investment in those jurisdictions. You can bet it was streamlined and designed to incentivise investment and job creation — not a confusing queue of overlapping requirements. WA's mining leaders can share firsthand what Australia is getting right, and what we're getting dangerously wrong. Any serious economic reform agenda must tackle the red tape holding back major projects across the nation. This is fundamental not just for WA resources projects, but for the infrastructure and energy transition projects that are vital for future generations. It's noteworthy that Dr Ken Henry, architect of the last major template for tax reform, is now championing environmental regulatory reform as the single greatest opportunity to lift productivity and protect Australia's environment. It's a conundrum I'm equally passionate about. For two decades, there's been broad agreement on the need to reform the EPBC system which is contorted, cautious, and far from certain. New Environment Minister Murray Watt has taken an encouragingly proactive and pragmatic approach, openly acknowledging that not everyone can be happy with every aspect in the pursuit of meaningful reform. The proposed framework for streamlined environmental regulatory approvals — with standards set nationally and ideally implemented by the States under a single pathway — should have top billing at the roundtable. No conversation on productivity is complete without addressing industrial relations. It's the elephant in the room. The IR system had sizeable chunks re-jigged during the first term Albanese Government, but these reforms broke the link to productivity and international competitiveness. The roundtable presents an opportunity to hardwire productivity back into Australia's IR landscape. Past Labor governments have succeeded in striking accords between employers, employees, and unions to share responsibility for both delivering efficiency and sharing the benefits. Cyclical industries like the resources sectors need the flexibility to adapt to changing conditions. There are good global examples, including in US heavy industries, where these kinds of flexible workplace agreements have become a foundation for shared resilience and job security. We simply must get these settings right to secure Australia's competitiveness. It is puzzling that Australia's largest export industry did not make the first cut of invitations to the roundtable. The Prime Minister outwardly acknowledged the sector's central importance when he invited senior iron ore executives on his recent high-level state visit to China. WA's wealth-generating industry deserves more than a sideline role in shaping national economic reform. If the NSW Treasurer can secure a seat at the roundtable, surely our world-leading mining CEOs and WA's Premier warrant their place too. Robert Carruthers is Principal at CSA Ltd