ir The Hon Dr Anthony Lynham MP

Queensland Minister for Natural Resources, Mines and Energy Government

MO 7684/20 1 Wilram Street Brisoane PO Box 15216 City Past 4002 Austra ia 15-MAY-2020 Telephone +61 7 3718 7360 Email nrm@min:steria5.old.gov.au www.dnrm.qid.gov.a^ www.dews.oic.Qcv.au The Honourable MP Speaker of the Legislative Assembly Parliament House Queensland Legislative Assembly George Street Number: BRISBANE QLD 4000 Tabled 0” JUN 2020 By Email: [email protected]

Clerk's Signature:.

Dear Mr Speaker

I wish to draw to Mr Speaker’s attention a matter of privilege arising out of a statement made during a speech on Matters of Public Interest on 22 April 2020 by the Member for Nanango, Mrs .

Mr Speaker, I submit that in making the statements to which I refer, the Member for Nanango has deliberately misled the House and is in contempt of the Queensland Parliament, in particular Standing Order 266 of the Standing Rules and Orders of the Legislative Assembly.

There are three elements to be proven in order to establish that a Member of the Legislative Assembly has committed the contempt of deliberately misleading the House:

1. The statement must have been misleading; 2. The Member making the statement must have known, at the time the statement was made, that it was incorrect; and 3. In making the statement, the Member intended to mislead the House.

Section 37 of the Act 2001 sets out the meaning of contempt of the Assembly thus:

(1) Contempt of the Assembly means a breach or disobedience of the powers, rights or immunities, or a contempt, of the Assembly or its members or committees. (2) Conduct, including words, is not contempt of the Assembly unless it amounts, or is intended or likely to amount, to an improper interference with— (a) the free exercise by the Assembly or a committee of its authority or functions; or (b) the free performance by a member of the member’s duties as a member.

standing Order 266 of the Standing Rules and Orders of the Legislative Assembly sets out examples of what might constitute a contempt of the Queensland Parliament and, whilst not limiting the power of the House to the matters contained therein, includes a reference in sub­ paragraph (2), to: deliberately misleading the House or a committee (by way of submission, statement, evidence or petition).

As outlined, there are three elements to be proven in order to establish that a Member has committed the contempt of deliberately misleading the House. I will address each of these in turn.

1) The statement must have been misleading

Mr Speaker, on 22 April 2020, the Member for Nanango, during her contribution stated:

“It makes no sense to spend $100 million on lowering Paradise Dam when independent experts say it can be fixed for Just $25 million. ”

These statements are a record at page 762 of the official Record of Proceedings which can be access at:

https://vvww.parliament.qld.gov.au/documents/hansard/2020/2020 04 22 DAILY.pdf

As the Member for Nanango stated the essential works to lower the Paradise Dam wall have been estimated to cost $100 million. No independent expert has suggested the dam could be entirely fixed for just $25 million and the Member for Nanango has misled the House.

The Paradise Dam spillway will be lowered due to the safety risk identified through an independent technical assessment by Gutteridge Haskins & Davey (GHD). This assessment was reviewed by Sunwater’s Technical Review Panel (TRP), the Government’s Chief Engineer, the Dam Safety Regulator and independent international experts in roller compacted concrete (RCC) dams.

The technical reports confirmed potential stability issues with the dam in the event of an extreme one-in-two-hundred-year weather event similar to the 2013 cyclone and flood. All thirteen national and international experts agreed with Sunwater’s decision to lower the spillway and the works are to be conducted urgently during the dry season window this year.

The essential works are urgent and crucial to ensure the safety of the downstream community of Bundaberg. No works suggested, that can rely upon existing information to fix the dam, including those suggested by the Member for Nanango, can better ensure the safety of Bundaberg within the same timeframe.

The Member for Nanango has relied upon the below extract by an independent expert. Dr Paul Rizzo of Rizzo International Inc., who in his report compares the issues with Paradise Dam to Bagnell Dam in the United States:

5.4.3. The cost of the Dam Safety Improvement Program was $52 million USD, all in cost, including 67 high-capacity anchors. Spillway re-facing, concrete infill, new drains, and new instruments. The cost per anchor of the anchorage task was roughly $250,000 USD per anchor, including the difficult access of working off a barge, QA/QC, anchor head installation, double corrosion protection, jacking and the exceptional high cost of grouting/redrilling/ regrouting/ redrilling to assure a dry borehole before inserting the anchor assembly.

If one uses the cost at Bagnell as a benchmark, the 63 anchors recommended by GHD for Paradise would have an indicative cost of the anchors at Paradise at $15,750,000 USD. https://paradisedaminouirv. old, oov. au/wo-content/uoloads/2020/04/Assessment-of-Dam- Safetv-lssues-ReDort-Fullv-Executed.pdf t

Dr Rizzo’s statement does not suggest Paradise Dam could be fixed for $15,750,000 USD, however outlines costs associated with anchors serving a purpose in remediation of the dam. Dr. Rizzo also notes in 5.4.1 that post-tension anchoring in RCC dams is iimited which, in combination with concerns relating to anchoring capacity of the foundations, adds uncertainty in both costs and outcomes. Therefore, the Member for Nanango has misquoted Dr Rizzo’s report by suggesting anchoring could totally fix the dam for $15,750,000 USD or $25 million AUD.

As the extract above from Dr. Rizzo’s report mentions, the Dam Safety Improvement Program cost $52 million USD to address the multiple issues with Bagnell Dam.

While all dams are unique, Paradise Dam also has multiple risks identified through its Dam Safety Improvement Program (the Program). The $100 million essential works to lower the dam wall is part of the program and addresses the multiple failure mode risks within the required timeframe to protect the downstream community. No alternative works have been suggested by any industry expert that can address the multiple risks within the same timeframe.

Building Queensland (BQ) conducted an accelerated assessment on options for the future of the dam. The BQ report was released on 25 March 2020, before the Member for Nanango made the misleading statement on 22 April 2020. The report found further investigations are needed into the three options listed once the spillway is reduced by five metres.

• maintain the same height • raise the spillway back, to a level to be advised • lower the spillway further, with extra alternative water supply options as required.

The further works to be done include:

e geotechnical investigations of the dam’s foundations anchoring trials (to determine if anchors such as those suggested by Dr. Rizzo could perform at the dam site) additional testing of the roller compacted concrete detailed assessments of water demand in the region

As discussed above, both Dr’s Rizzo and BQ’s reports speak to anchoring potentially serving a purpose in future spillway remediations. The BQ report further notes that anchoring trials are needed before understanding whether anchoring could be used. The Member for Nanango suggesting that anchoring could fix the dam while testing is still required is misleading.

The Qffice of the Inspector-General of Emergency Management publicly released the Paradise Dam Preparedness Review (the Review) on 19 December 2019 to provide assurance about community readiness for any flood future event and help strengthen local and district disaster management arrangements. The Review also provided details regarding different failure modes and the apportioning of risks. .

https://www.disaster.qld.qov.au/dmp/Documents/2019-Paradise-Dam-Review.pdf 9

The following table appears on page 27 of the Review.

The below table shows all the likely failure mechanisms of the dam.

Failure Description % Contribution Sliding of Primary Spillway monoliths through RCC (shear) 51% Undermining of Primary Spillway monoliths due to overflow scour, 35% below apron Sliding of Secondary Spillway monoliths through / below the 5% foundation Undermining of Primary Spillway mcmdkhs due to scour at the toe, 4% through the apron Undermining of Secondary Spillway monoliths due to loss of apron 3% Sliding / overturning of Secondary Spillway monoliths through RCC 2% (shear) AH other failure modes <1%

Risk contribution by failure mode

While the BQ report noted that testing is still needed to determine if anchoring could be used, as the table shows any successful anchoring of the RCC monoliths in the main spillway only address around 51% of the total failure risk. This does not address the remaining (approximately 49%) risk of failure or account for the cost associated with remediating those issues. As listed in the table, additional risks include undermining of the primary spillway, sliding of the secondary spillway and scour of the toe through the apron. To address all these risks will require more than just anchoring and incur greater costs and the Member for Nanango has ignored these costs in her statement.

The GHD report, the BQ report and the Review that were discussed above were all made public before the Member for Nanango misled the house. Prior to their public release the Member for Nanango adamantly called on information relating to Paradise Dam to be released. I refer to the Member’s comments in the Hansard of 16 Qctober 2019 on page 3289.

• People living in drought-declared Bundaberg and Burnett have rightfully demanded an explanation. They want to know what on earth is going on with Paradise Dam. The Palaszczuk Labor government has simply refused to tell them. It has refused to tell those communities why their water is being wasted. Labor will not say what is wrong with the dam, and that was the dam it built. It will not say how it will fix it or when.

https://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/documents/hansard/2019/2019 10 16 WEEKLY.pdf.

Given the Member’s adamant request, it is assumed she had the opportunity to examine documents after their public release.

As has been shown through the details provided above, the Member for Nanango’s statement misquoted Dr Paul Rizzo’s engineering report, deliberately ignores the additional risks that could cause a dam failure and does not account for costs associated with addressing those risks.

2) The Member making the statement must have known, at the time the statement was made, that it was incorrect

There are multiple reasons why the Member for Nanango must have known, at the time the statement was made, that it was incorrect. The Member for Nanango, the House and the wider

public have been fully informed of issues, the risk to the downstream community and the need for essential works at Paradise Dam.

On 4 February 2020, in my address to Parliament on vital amendments to the Water Supply (Safety and Reliability) Act 2008, the following statements were made:

1. While Paradise Dam is safe under normal circumstances, urgent work is required to protect the people of Bundaberg and the surrounding region from a dam failure in an extreme one-in-200-year weather event. 2. As Sunwater announced in September last year, the Paradise Dam spillway needs to be lowered as soon as possible to meet safety standards. 3. This is an urgent, time limited action. Importantly, reducing the height of the spillway is just part of our response to addressing issues at Paradise Dam. 4. The expert advice of the 13 experts who have assessed the issues in detail and reviewed the reports has led to a decision that work is required immediately. 5. The independently peer reviewed technical investigation by GHD calculated the safety risk that informed Sunwater’s decision to undertake essential works on Paradise Dam immediately. This work will mitigate the safety risk and the safety of Bundaberg is paramount. Sunwater’s numerous investigations include 13 national and international experts, including six independent experts on Sunwater’s technical review panel, three independent Gutteridge Haskins & Davey experts, two independent international experts who reviewed the reports, the dam safety regulator and the chief engineer. All of these experts agree with Sunwater that urgent action is required because of the potential risk to downstream communities.

These statements are a record at page 40 and 41 of the official Record of Proceedings which can be accessed at:

https://wvvw.parliament.qld.gov.au/documents/hansard/2020/2020 02 04 WEEKLY.pdf

On 6 February 2020, in my address to Parliament regarding vital amendments to the Water Supply (Safety and Reliability) Act 2008, the following statements to inform the House were made:

1. The need to reduce the risk to the community of Bundaberg and surrounding areas before the 2020-21 wet season is clear. We cannot afford delays. 2. We cannot guarantee the safety of that dam without these necessary works. 3. Irrigators and businesses can have confidence in Building Queensland’s accelerated assessment on options for the future of the dam. The assessment is exploring alternate water supply options to ensure future water security for the region. That includes the final revised spillway height and the final full supply level for the dam. 4. The Queensland government is committed to ensuring water security in the Bundaberg region. Irrigators and businesses can have confidence in Building Queensland’s accelerated assessment on options for the future of the dam. 5. As mentioned, this government engaged the Inspector-General of Emergency Management to ensure that the community is ready in the event of extreme flooding. That preparedness review was handed down on 19 December 2019. The Palaszczuk government has accepted all of the report’s recommendations and they are now being implemented. Ultimately, the review by the Inspector-General of Emergency Management increases the safety of Bundaberg residents while we undergo the improvement works.

These statements are a record at page 269 of the official Record of Proceedings which can be accessed at: If

https://www.parliament.qld.qov.au/documents/hansard/2020/2020 02 06 WEEKLY.pdf

On 15 October 2019, in a Ministerial Statement regarding Paradise Dam, the following statements were made:

1. Sunwater is currently reducing the storage level of Paradise Dam to 42 per cent ahead of the 2019-20 wet season. 2. This will allow works to improve the dam’s stability during extreme rain events.

These statements are a record at page 3105 of the official Record of Proceedings which can be accessed at:

https://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/documents/hansard/2019/2019_10_15_WEEKLY.pdf

In relation to costs, on 25 March 2020, in a media statement I made the following statement:

1. The $100 million contract will create 80 jobs and is scheduled to be completed by the third quarter of 2021.

In the same media statement I addressed the Building Queensland Paradise Dam Options Assessment:

1. The Building Queensland Paradise Dam Options Assessment report released today says further investigations is needed into three options once the spillway is reduced by five metres: • maintain the same height • raise the spillway back, to a level to be advised • lower the spillway further, with extra alternative water supply options as required. 2. Further work to be done this year includes: • geotechnical investigations of the dam’s foundations anchoring trials additional testing of the roller compacted concrete detailed assessments of water demand in the region.

The Building Queensland report was made public on 25 March 2020 at http://statements.qld.gov.au/Statement/2020/3/25/more-paradise-water-available-as-dam- investigations-continue.

As discussed previously, the GHD report was made public on 29 November 2020 and can be found on Sunwater's website - https://www.sunwater.com.au/proiects/paradise-dam-essential- works/technical-reports/. Additionally in a public statement on 29 November 2019 at http://statements.qld.gov.au/Statement/2019/11/29/paradise-dam-inquiry-called-as-reports- released I announced the release of the technical documents which included a link to access those reports at -. https://www.sunwater.com.au/proiects/paradise-dam-essential-works/

By intentionally misquoting Dr Rizzo, ignoring the additional risks identified in the Paradise Dam Preparedness Review, and based on the aforementioned information, the Member for Nanango would have known that her statement around fixing the dam for $25 million was incorrect.

3) In making the statement, the Member intended to mislead the House

Mr Speaker, having established that the statement made by the Member for Nanango were misleading, and that they knew them to be misleading, it must now be established that the Member for Nanango intended to mislead the House. A

The remarks were deliberate and have been both repeated in media coverage as well as on the Member’s social media and website. Please find links below where the Member has repeated the statement, which proves her intentions to make the statements were deliberate.

https://www.facebook.eom/DebFrecklinatonMP/photos/a.266039133496490/2450160821750 966/?tvpe=3&theater

https://www.deb2020.com.au/stop-tearinq-down-paradise-dam-and-fix-it/

The public statements reveal the Member did not make the statement by mistake or off the cuff during parliamentary debate.

Considering the arguments and the fact that the Member for Nanango has not taken any of the available opportunities to correct the record, I respectfully submit that this matter warrants the further attention of the House by referral to the Ethics Committee.

Please do not hesitate to contact me if you or the Member for Nanango require any further information to assist in your deliberation on this matter.

Yours sincerely,

Dr Anthony Lynham MP Minister for Natural Resources, Mines and Energy Our Ref; 200520-OUT-LOTO

20 May 2020

Mrs Deb Frecklington MP Leader of the Opposition Member for Nanango

By E-mail: [email protected]

Dear Mrs Frecklington

I have received correspondence from the Minister for Natural Resources, Mines and Energy on 15 May 2020, in which it is alleged that you have deliberately misled the House. In connection with this matter, I enclose a copy of the letter.

Deliberately misleading the House is listed as an example of behaviour that the House may treat as a contempt (see Standing Order 266 (2)).

Standing Order 269 (5) provides that in considering whether such a matter should be referred to the Ethics Committee, the Speaker may request further information from the person the subject of the allegation. Accordingly, I am writing to you pursuant to that Standing Order.

Standing Order 269 (4) provides that in considering whether the matter should be referred to the Ethics Committee, the Speaker shall take account of the degree of the importance of the matter which has been raised and whether an adequate apology or explanation has been made in respect of the matter.

I wish to stress that I have not yet formed a view as to whether this particular allegation should be referred to the Ethics Committee. However, as a matter of course, I remind all members who are the subject of such allegations of the long established convention that should a Member become aware they have inadvertently mislead the House, they should, at the earliest opportunity, correct the record and apologise for their inadvertence.

Parliament House George St Brisbane Queensland 4000 Australia

Phone+ 61 7 3553 6700 Fax + 61 7 3553 6709 Email [email protected] Web www.parliament.qld.gov.au Should you wish to provide me with further information to assist me in making a determination as to whether the matter should be referred to the Ethics Committee under Standing Order 269 please provide your response by COB 3 June 2020.

In the meantime, should your office have any queries relating to this matter, they may be directed to my Executive Officer, Geoi^e Hasanakos, by email to [email protected] or on 07 3553 6700.

Yours sincerely

HON CURTIS PITT MP Speaker of the Legislative Assembly »' 5^ Deb Frecklington mi> t. A Leader of the Opposition and Shadow Minister for Trade

26 May 2020

Hon. Curtis Pitt MP Speaker of the Legislative Assembly By email; [email protected]

Dear Mr Speaker

Thank you for your letter dated 20 May 2020.

I appreciate the opportunity to provide a response to Minister Lynham’s correspondence to you.

I did not mislead the Assembly, and I deny that I have committed a Contempt of the Assembly. I ask you to consider this letter as an adequate explanation of the matter and to dismiss Minister Lynham’s complaint.

With respect to Minister Lynham, the question of the cost and solution to be employed to repair Paradise Dam is a matter of debate. I believe it is an abuse of the privileges processes to assert that I have misled the Parliament when it is clear on the face of Minister Lynham’s own material that I have no case to answer.

In my MPI speech on 22 April 2020,1 said: “It makes no sense to spend $100 million on lowering the Paradise Dam wall when independent experts say it can be fixed for Just $25 million.” I said this based on the following facts;

1. Paradise Dam is in a distressed state and requires further work. 2, Dr Paul Rizzo of Rizzo International is an independent expert who has provided a report on the facts in point 1. 3, To paraphrase the Rizzo report, it states that a different solution than what is currently being considered by the Palaszczuk Government is available, for a cheaper cost of USD$15.75 million or AUD$25 million.

I note that Minister Lynham also agrees with the facts in point 1 above.

In respect of point 2,1 note Minister Lynham refers to Dr Rizzo as: “The Member for Nanango has relied upon the below extract by an independent expert, Dr Paul Rizzo of Rizzo International Inc., who in his report compares the issues with Paradise Dam to Bagnell Dam in the United States...” (Emphasis added.)

Minister Lynham does not dispute that Dr Rizzo is an independent expert and in his letter, Minister Lynham also describes Dr Rizzo as an independent expert. I note Dr Rizzo provided expert evidence to the Paradise Dam Commission of Inquiry.

Telephone 07 3838 6767 Email [email protected] Mineral House, Level 7, 41 George Street, Brisbane Qld 4000 • PO Box 15057, City East Qld 4002 $

tr Deb Frecklington mp Leader of the Opposition and Shadow Minister for Trade

In respect of point 3,1 refer the Speaker to the Rizzo report, basic conclusions on page 38 of the report; https;//paradisedaminquirv.qld.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Assessment- of-Dam-Safetv-lssues-Report-FuHv-Executed.pdf and a copy of which is attached. The relevant conclusion is as follows;

1. Paradise Dam is in a distressed state but is highly unlikely to experience a catastrophic failure resulting in the loss of life. The distressed state can be remediated at a reasonable cost as accomplished at other dams around the world, without negative consequences or extreme actions. Remediation is recommended to at least meet current ANCOLD Guidelines concerning FoS against sliding stability analysis and to prevent severe erosion and scour of the type that occurred in 2013. (Emphasis added.)

The Rizzo Report also establishes the LIS$15,750,000 or AUD$25 million figure by reference to costs of repairing a similar dam located in Missouri, USA, as Minister Lynham has already provided;

If one uses the cost at Bagnell as a benchmark, the 63 anchors recommended by GHD for Paradise would have an indicative cost of the anchors at Paradise at $15,750,000 USD.

These are the facts that I relied on to make the statement in my 22 April MPI speech. These facts are also verified by Minister Lynham as being accurate.

It’s available to Minister Lynham to debate the merits of what Dr Rizzo proposes as an alternative solution, but it is not reasonable to say that I have misled the House, when my statement was accurate and verified.

I ask you to dismiss Minister Lynham’s complaint.

Thank you again for the opportunity to provide a reply to Minister Lynham’s correspondence. If I can be of any further assistance please do not hesitate to contact me.

Yours sincerely

f

DEB FRECKLINGTON MP Leader of the Qfiposition Shadow Minister for Trade Member for Nanango

Tclqjlionc 07 3838 6767 Email [email protected] Mineral House, Level 7,41 George Street, Brisbane Qld 4000 • PO Box 15057, City East Qld 4002