Well it smells like another cover up to me.

First it was all over, before one of the MSM decided to break ranks & print some facts.

Then we extend the inquiry, & get a heap of "he said, no he didn't" type testimony.

Engineers & operators are questioned, & re questioned, with nothing solid appearing. It's all a farce really.

If the truth is a desired result, it is oh so easy. Ask the bl00dy river.

It really is hard to hide how much water is running down a river, ask some of the poor buggers in the mid west floods now about that. So why is no one looking at this.

There is probably CTV footage of how much was being released, unless it's been "lost". Even if not, there are hundreds of folk living just downstream of the dam who would know. Many of these know very well at what stage of release their access is cut, or what goes under.

So if this is not a cover up, & doesn't want to be seen as such, call a few witnesses who will know, & have nothing invested in the outcome. It's all so easy, I can not be the only one who's aware of this. I'm amazed I'm the first to mention it, unless of course the whole thing is a cover up.

the terms of the inquiry..are all important
but also inportant is to know...federally there are hundreds of enquiries going on right now...

see we stop the press speculations[100's of em]
with an inquiry..that never gets heard from ever again

this one at least is seeing the lawyers/press/media
doing what they are supposed to do

what about the rest of em
comon shadow?

a long list please

and belly..the histry of inquiries...libs put up
then went away..as most mostly do

but not this time?
only time will reveal..

nexty comes insurance agencies suing
that water authority...and its beurococracy

plus govt...but the people [the state]..
cant be responsable..*this time...it was purely beurocrickrats
just like the health beurorocrats..etc

the people refuse to pay

Perhaps Arjay could enlighten further.

Arjay ... enlighten ... lol

The wounds are still raw out this way and no amount of blame will heal that. No one talks about the real tragedy of the floods and that's the suicides, the way people took advantage of each other, and the absolutely rorting the insurance industry pulled on people.

Much of the flood couldn't have been avoided but the water from Wivenhoe SHOULD have been released slower and earlier. This is obvious. They failed with letting it get so high and to a point where they had no choice - or the dam itself would've opened itself up - but to let so much go. The dam didn't cause it, it only contributed.

Hasbeen I'm holding my judgement on that but am finding it interesting the questions which only seem to have been asked now (after info was revealed elsewhere). I don't know the terms of reference but it does seem that part of the process early on should have been to triple check claims about water released.

Anybody know how the gates at Wivenhoe are controlled? I assume that it would be via electronic controls and that there would be electronic records of the state of the gates at any given time along with water level records (hopefully electronic as well). It should be easy to plot water release volumes at every point in time around the event.

R0bert

They didn't do anything until 180%. At 200% the gates open themselves. They should've been releasing at 100%. That would be common sense.

I live about 5k's down stream from Wivenhoe.