Last week’s resignation of CFA chief Russell Rees is yet another scalp claimed in the reputation-shredding climate that saw former Police Commissioner Christine Nixon well and truly forked over her revelations that she had more on her plate than what was on her mind.
But is the Royal Commission really properly investigating the appropriate issues?
Tomorrow, Emergency Services Commissioner Bruce Esplin will step up to the plate.
In February 2, 2009, I sent an email to Emergency Services Commissioner Esplin, dated February 2 — four days before Black Saturday — warning him of communications breakdown.
Some years ago, I acted as a whistleblower in the 1999 Intergraph scandal under the Kennett regime.
My company had been engaged by Intergraph Public Safety Pty Ltd to handle its crisis management. We did not rely on the work of predecessors and conducted our own forensic (communications) investigations only to come to the horrible conclusion that corrupt activities had taken place.
A nightmare period ensued, but the incoming Bracks government appointed a Royal Commission, for which I was the first “in camera” witness. It also was to emasculate the Commission by removing those clauses relating to corrupt activities. Later, it was revealed that the head of the RC, Lex Lasry QC, wrote to the then Premier to voice his concern at this.
That background is relevant in terms of my history in crisis management (communications) and for what it taught me about the systemic potential for utter communications systems failure — no cohesive effort — no shadowing or mirroring — and in the years since, little has changed, I can assure you. The RC needs to revisit all of this aspect. No question.
In 2008, I had two scheduled meetings with Esplin — to discuss possible breakdowns in communication in the event of a crisis such as massive bushfires — and both were cancelled. They were never rescheduled.
I was compelled to contact Esplin after being approached by concerned personnel within emergency services, distressed at the parlous state of communication systems.
I then followed up with this email from 2nd February 2009:
From: TESS LAWRENCE <XXXX@XXXXXXXXXXXXX.com.au>
Date: 2 February 2009 8:07:00 PM
To: oesc@justice.vic.gov.au
Subject: Current Crisis: Meeting and ReportPlease forward to:
Mr Bruce Esplin
Emergency Services Commissioner
Dear Bruce,
The New Year hasn’t got off to a good start but undaunted, I wish you, indeed all of us, a better and peaceful 2009. It’s not too late!
Recent and continuing events encourage me to write to you.
You may recall the several meetings with you last year that were ultimately cancelled — you had a hospital appointment on one occasion and on the last occasion, I think you had to change the schedule to a date that meant [name withheld] wouldn’t have been able to attend. The fates seemed determined to thwart us, however …
One of the matters I’d hoped to speak with you about was the critical issue of communications and crisis management, a field I’d researched in the Middle East quite soon after the first Gulf War ended. I also wanted to speak with you about some preliminary grassroot findings in favour of an investigative report I wanted to conduct in Victoria.
The preliminary findings indicated a communications meltdown in certain scenarios. Our predictions have just manifested and exposed the endemic flaws we warned of, in those early assessments.
I am keen to discuss with you a commission to work on the report. You would know from your own investigative reports in the past that it is important to get in there whilst the embers are still hot — and I mean that both metaphorically and in fact.
I’ll call your office tomorrow, in the hope we can organise a meeting as soon as possible.
Yours Sincerely,
Tess Lawrence
Tess Lawrence Media Services Pty Ltd — specialists in crisis management and strategy and forensic investigations (communications)
I never heard back. I also sent a copy of the email to the Prime Minister’s Department, twice. Again, I did not hear back.
I was just gutted at the subsequent deaths, injury, destruction and the entire communications debacle, and my (prior) discussions with Esplin’s department was also on the basis of a critical incident basis — man-made or no, for example, an air crash, terrorist/bomb attack and certainly, certainly bushfires.
In the months following the fires, I was approached in confidence and asked if I would be prepared to give evidence to the Royal Commission.
Of course I said I would be prepared to do that. I was told to expect to be called. I now believe I was basically conned into not providing a submission. I was never approached to give evidence.
In the days following the fires, I sent the following emails to Anthony Byrne, Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister, also the Chief of the Co-Ordination of Counter Terrorism, Science and Technology Unit.
At the time I was also dealing with Byrne and the Prime Minister’s Department in relation to another matter:
From: TESS LAWRENCE
Date: 11 February 2009 8:01:52 PM
To: Anthony Byrne
Subject: URGENT:URGENT: CONCERNS RE STRATEGY AND STRATEGIC CRISIS REPONSE [sic] AND NEGLECT OF THOSE WITH DISABILITIES**********************
BUSHFIRES CRISES
I’ve already expressed to you my concerns about aspects of communications and strategies in terms of emergency services and logistics and tactical response in Victoria – but many of these aspects would be endemic in other States and Territories.
I should also inform you that I had voiced some of these concerns to the Emergency Services Commissioner last year, and twice, through circumstance, two scheduled meetings with him did not take place. Ironically, I wrote to the ESC only a few weeks ago, again expressing my concerns and seeking a meeting.
Sources within his Department — and sources within other pertinent Departments have voiced their concerns to me in confidential interviews about the capabilities and various strategies of their various Departments, including communications strategies. This in no way reflects upon the wonderful calibre of people who work in these areas. They are good people stymied by circumstance and bureaucracy. And that is the truth.
….
More recently, I have warned people in authority about the inadequacies still inherent in the OOO Emergency despatch system — try it yourself one day.The system became overloaded during these bushfires — we have been interviewing people affected by the fires — who had to wait for ages, or just gave up.
This system has to cope with the Nation. Not just a State.
My experience and investigation into Intergraph/OOO and its operations, and earlier experiences on the ground in the Middle East soon after the first Gulf War honed my research and analysis for forensic communications & crisis management issues.
More recently, I have embarked on research, factoring innovative, contemporary and inter-active technologies, including GPS. We have the talent in this country to do this and the opportunity of paying tribute to the people who died in the fires, by producing innovative, ground-breaking technologies that can, in the future, help to save lives — not only in Australia, but everywhere, in all manner of crises.
We have the opportunity here, not to simply follow — but to lead.
It is our hope to commission technologies designed to fit our outcomes — not the usual way — have the equipment, then adapt the strategy.
Several years ago, on my then radio show, Talk the Talk with Tess Lawrence, on Vision Australia, I interviewed one of the Fire Chiefs and discussed the horrendous plight of the deaf, vision impaired and disabled in the event of a critical incident and bushfires, etc. There needs to be a dedicated program deployed for this section of our community. All Plans need to be inclusive and not exclusive. I will not measure the horror of not being able to see, hear, or understand the molten wall of fire that is approaching, let alone be pinned in a wheelchair to await your horrifying death. This is a death sentence that we – the rest of the community – impose upon our brothers and sisters.
Similar considerations should be paid to the elderly — and people who live alone. Nor should these considerations be confined to bushfires of course, but should be inherent in our communications systems. Moreover, there has to be a uniform compliance of these new technologies, regardless of the carrier.
It’s all certainly all do-able. Someone just has to say ‘ do it ‘ and ‘ get cracking. ‘
As for people for whom English is not the first language — it’s very difficult for them in an emergency. And kind of emergency.
I have long been concerned about the implications and false security inherent in current stay and defend campaigns. There are better crises response models that we should discuss and consider.
I ask for your direction as to whom we should approach — whether Christine Nixon’s new Unit — or an existing organisation. I think it is important to work independently but still be part of a group and to report to that group — whether it is a State group or a National Group, I know we will all be working together.
Yours Sincerely,
Tess Lawrence.
and:
From: TESS LAWRENCE
Date: 12 February 2009 8:31:54 AM
To: Anthony Byrne
Subject: Remedial and RehabilitationDear Anthony — didn’t finish last night’s email to you — worked nightshift re fires.
You would have heard this morning’s ABC AM program re Telstra and emergency phone alerts — there is more that could be done with that technology — but that’s part of what we put to authorities several years ago — and more recently.
* Remedial and Rehabilitative Communications/Strategies. In many ways, this aspect is the more tenuous of all programs deployed after major disaster/trauma.
They have to be done NOW whilst the community (I include here everyone) is still enduring the immediate crises. There will be various waves of response from victims and authorities, including frustration, anger, relationship breakdowns, etc. Organisations and institutions now pledging support — often break away once the immediate profile of the incident starts to slip off the media radar. People will feel alienated, forgotten, discarded, yesterday’s news. Depression, psychological disorders will abound. As will the guilt of the survivor. Blame and counter-blame will ensue.
It is critical that remedial programs be started now — but not with an aim to ingratiate State and Federal Governments — but with a common aim to help us all move forward as a Team — as a people — as a nation family.
It is essential that everyone is pinned down and understands this is a long, long, long term issue — and that all the support systems now being put in place will be there for that long haul.
I want to help and to be part of that long haul.
Yours Sincerely,
Tess Lawrence
I remain increasingly concerned at the direction the current inquiry is taking. It is inadvertently becoming a forum for payback and not-so hidden-agendas.
Chief of the Co-Ordination of Counter Terrorism, Science and
Technology Unit at the
Really interesting. Do you realize that in a major crisis, the Premier of the state and / or the Prime Minister will miraculously become Crisis and Emergency Management Experts and spokes people. You won’t be able to get the real experts to set the real agenda under these conditions as they and their expertise are sidelined for political expediency and Media attention.
This might explain to some extent why even the Emergency Service Minister and Commissioner as well as the Police Commissioner are sometimes missing in action under such circumstances so as to leave the “limelight” to the Political attention seekers and self-appointed experts.
I am sure if Emergency Services people were to have a say, they would not allow politicians into the emergency control center as they only can confuse things and get in the way. I am sure that real emergency services people can choose better spokes people.
Dear GOODBOY, you’ve obviously been doing your homework. I have to say that since Crikey published this story several emergency personnel have been in contact to say that in fact Christine Nixon, Chief Commissioner of Police at the time, as well as being responsible for operational co-ordination, was in fact under such constraints ( as well as other factors ) – and that’s why she left her post. Mind you, where was Bob Cameron at the time ? If what you and others are saying, that emergency response protocols deemed respective Premiers and Prime Minister become sole commentators as well as ‘Commanders in Chief ‘ for no other reason than political expediency and worm teasing, then we the people deserve to know the truth. Of course, there could be great merit in such singular leadership in some critical emergency situations – along with the imparting of a clear and decisive message. The upshot was, we had neither. But if you’re going to masquerade as John the Baptist to pave the way, you better be sure that who you nominate to play Jesus Christ is ridgy didge. You decide.
Hi Tess,
Not sure I’m across all of the issues in this matter, though of course I am concerned/hopeful that we might learn from what happened, hear from a variety of people with differing expertise and ideas, so as to try to prevent the tragedy of February 7th 2009, that surely, as Tess you point out, will affect many lives well into the future. It is puzzling to me that a) you made several attempts at trying to alert the appropriate people about a crisis in communications based on your expertise, and these meetings did not eventuate and your emails were ignored, and b) you were told you would be called to give evidence at the Royal Commission and were not. I wonder why this was so.
Is it too late for you to give evidence to the Royal Commission? It seems to me that what we have been doing to date hasn’t worked, at least in catastrophic situations. We are learning of things that in hindsight maybe should have happened – isn’t hindsight wonderful? We MUST learn from this disaster, so that it is never repeated again. Blame is not useful, but ‘learning’ is very useful. In Australia, with so many people living in high fire danger areas, we need to anticipate, and plan for such disasters, so that lives can be saved, and much human suffering spared. As a psychologist, I know that there is much suffering from such a disaster, and lives/relationships/families destroyed by the aftermath of such tragedies.
Tess, I hope you get the opportunity to contribute to the collective wisdom that will protect lives in the future.
Dear MOLLY, as with GOODBOY, I very much appreciate the thought that has gone into your comment and I have thought a lot about how to respond to you.
As a psychologist you will know that determining both the extent and repair of trauma remains ultimately an inexact science. But with some known knowns, to quote that creep Rumsfeld.
The reality is, there are no absolutes are there ? I wonder what you make then, of what we collectively do as a grieving and hurting community, to publicly manifest an intent to find out the truths of the Bushfires, whatever they may now be – and
to ensure that we never repeat the same mistakes and yet ‘ move on.’ But we
mere mortals have the propensity to forget, long before we remember what it is that has to be forgiven. Take the Bushfires Royal Commission. From a community remedial point of view it can be helpful. But I am uncomfortable with what I perceive to be an imbalance in the inquisition of Ms Christine Nixon, compared with the tamer questioning of the men in suits and uniform. Am I wrong ? Senior Counsel assisting the Commission, Ms Rachel Doyle thrust her well-sharpened Lance into the quarry she had so deftly cornered. And that’s okay. Ms Doyle is wearing our colours. We the people. I want her to take it to the wire. Show no mercy. But I want that same Lance thrust into those other dudes who are equally responsible for our guardianship. And thrust with the same velocity and with the same intent and intensity. Why are they hiding behind Christine Nixon’s ample skirt ? And why aren’t they held to account with equal force ? This is not about drawing blood. It is about Justice. Justice meted equally. Justice for the dead and for those who loved them. And for the walking wounded. And the walking wounded in our midst. What do you think Molly ?
Is the Royal Commission simply a contemporary version of a colluseum ?
And as such, does it provide some sort of public salve ? Or is it a political device
called upon to appease the masses. To think so would do insult to the good and earnest intent and integrity of all involved. And I do not think so.
You say that ‘ blame is not useful. ‘ But I think that accountability is critical. And already I can see the hand of the revisionist historian at work. Those of us who protest will be accused of being part of the blackened armband bushfires brigade.
So be it. Do we ever get over it Molly ? Or do we just learn to live with it.
We don’t want to wallow in grief or continuously revisit those scenes in our
minds – but how do those who were there exorcise those terrible visions that were not visions – and may,in fact, have been the last mindphoto of a loved one. And somehow, people feel as if they are betraying their loved ones if they don’t let
these terrible visions visit them – or visit them in turn. I have spent some long
hours listening and talking with people. And there is nothing I write here that
has not been said to me in some way or other.
Gosh Molly, now look what you’ve done ( blame transference ) . Can I get off the couch now ? Do you bulk bill ?
Hi Tess,
I think when we try to blame, to make ‘someone/something/some organisation accountable’ we put up red flags that make people want to protect themselves, no matter the cost – and that seems to lead to less honesty, and more defense, more ‘spin’. I think it is much more helpful to encourage people to admit to errors in judgement, or even down-right mistakes, ‘without’ impunity (unless the error was so obviously forseeable/negligent) so that we can all learn from that error. When we as a community try to blame, find fault with another, we encourage people’s defences to come to the fore, and we encourage the apportioning of blame to ‘some other’. I think it would be more useful if we could say, ‘yes, i/we made a mistake, we should have, or could have done something different, but in the heat of the moment, we were human’. If there were no punishment to fear (and look at the ‘punishment’ poor Christine Nixon has endured), people, politicians, seniour people in organisations, might be more open in their thoughts about what happened, and may in fact be able to contribute something of real value to the review of what happened on Feb 7th 2009. When people are forced do protect themselves, they lose sight of the bigger picture. Maybe we should adopt a policy of what happens in hospitals these days – ‘incident report forms’ – where people are encouraged to outline what happened in a particular incident, without impunity, so that similar incidents don’t happen in the future.
My guess is that Christine Nixon, Russell Reese, and all those working on the 7th Feb 2009 did what they thought was right, within the parameters of the information they had. It doesn’t help to apportion blame. It would help if they could honestly tell us what they thought went wrong, and how they think the same mistakes could be avoided in the future.
I wonder if this ‘culture’ of ‘open enquiry’ might have made it easier for you, and your knowledge and expertise, to have been heard. I like to think this might have been so.
Keep up the good work. I hope your voice, and expertise, gets to be heard by those who a) need to hear and b) can influence changes that will make our world, even in just the part that is Australia, safer.
🙂