Sea King Inquiry The Australian 20 June 2006

JUNE 20:
John Stapleton
THE multi-million dollar inquiry into the Sea King disaster which left nine dead on the island of Nias in Indonesia during aid operations in the wake of the Asian tsunami last year has stalled amidst concerns over potential bias.

The inquiry, which raised doubts over the proper maintenance of helicopters within parts of navy, has run for ten months, interviewed 150 witnesses and taken 9,000 pages of evidence.

Suggestions of potential bias have been made against the Board of Inquiry's president Commodore Les Pataky due to positions he has previously held.

Last week counsel for Air Commodore Noel Schmidt, the man who was responsible for the decision not to implement recommendations improving the Sea King's seats, a move which could have saved several lives, raised the potential conflict of interest.

Commander Gerry Purcell, representing Schmidt, argued that there may be a conflict of interest because Commodore Pataky and another member of the board, aviation expert Captain Brett Dowsing, had held senior jobs during the implementation process following on from a Board of Inquiry into the Barmaga helicopter crash on Cape York in 1995 which left one person injured.

Pataky was Chief of Staff at Maritime Command at the time when the recommendations were being implemented or ignored. Dowsing was Fleet Aviation officer during the late 1990s and oversaw aviation operations.

Yesterday counsel assisting the inquiry agreed, recommending to the board of inquiry that the two men stand down.
About 30 relatives of the nine who died showed up at the Sea King Board of Inquiry yesterday. They spent a long and frustrating day listening to legal argument in between a lengthy adjournment.

Commander Jack Rush, counsel representing the families, told the board of inquiry that regrettably they agreed the President and Dowsing had to stand down.

However Commander Sandy Street, representing the former maritime commander Rear Admiral Rowan Moffatt, lamented the potential loss of the knowledge, observations and learning acquired by the two board members over many months.

The inquiry will reconvene this morning to take submissions on whether the Board should continue in its present form, be reconstituted or perservere with only three members.