Coronavirus Australia: Mikakos blames Daniel Andrews’ subversion of Cabinet process for bungled quarantine

In an explosive final submission, the former health minister urges the quarantine inquiry to treat the Premier’s evidence with caution.

Former Victorian Health Minister Jenny Mikakos, Picture: NCA NewsWire/Ian Currie

Former Victorian Health Minister Jenny Mikakos has blamed Daniel Andrews’ subversion of Cabinet processes for the hotel quarantine program’s failings.

In an explosive final submission to the inquiry published on Friday, Ms Mikakos said the haste with which the program was set up saw “usual Cabinet processes subverted” with the Premier, through the Department of Premier and Cabinet, giving responsibility for the scheme’s design and implementation to Job Minister Martin Pakula’s department.

She said ordinary decision-making mechanisms, lines of accountability and reporting had been supplanted by the Premier’s introduction of the Crisis Council of Cabinet, which replaced ordinary Cabinet Committees and processes, and reorganised key aspects of the Victorian public service.

Ms Mikakos said the fact that no Cabinet or Cabinet Committee process was engaged for the setting up of the Hotel Quarantine Program is “the root cause of some of the issues which have been ventilated before the board in the course of this Inquiry.

“In particular, the failure to follow ordinary Cabinet-led decision-making processes is the cause of the differing views which have been given by witnesses as to who had overall responsibility and accountability for the Hotel Quarantine Program,” she said.

She said the lack of process might also be a “cause of the obscurity” as to who decided to engage private security guards.

Victorian Premier Dan Andrews listens to his then Health Minister Jenny Mikakos answering questions during press conference into the latest infection numbers in September. Picture: NCA NewsWire / Ian Currie

“Had the Hotel Quarantine Program been the product of a Cabinet or Cabinet Committee decision, these issues would not have arisen. More importantly, such a process would have enabled differing views and potential risks and weaknesses with the program to be identified and addressed prior to its establishment,” she said.

She said he features of the program identified as critical to its failure – hotels, inadequate cleaning, and the use of private security guards – remained the responsibility of Mr Pakula’s department until July when the program was moved to the Department of Justice and Community Safety

Treat with caution: Mikakos warns on Andrews

Ms Mikakos says it is “implausible” the decision to use private security was a “creeping assumption”, and has urged the hotel quarantine inquiry to “treat with caution” the evidence of Mr Andrews.

In her submission, she said accepting the use of private security had “insufficient regard to the realities of governmental operation and decision-making.”

“In this regard, it is respectfully submitted that the Board ought to treat with caution the Premier’s evidence where he sought to explain the reference to the use of private security in the Hotel Quarantine Program made by him during his media conference that commenced at 3pm on 27 March 2020,” she said.

Jenny Mikakos leaves her house in Thornbury the day after resigning. Picture: David Crosling

“It is submitted that had the decision not already been made by that time, the

Premier would not have announced the use of private security in the program.”

Ms Mikakos submitted that the evidence instead actually pointed to a decision being made at some point before a 3pm press conference given by Mr Andrews.

She said it was clear using Australian Defence Force troops was clearly the wish of National Cabinet, and the decision to use private security instead was “inextricably linked”.

“The decision not to use the ADF should be considered by the Board as being inextricably linked to the decision to use private security,” she said.

“This decision had substantial cost and resource implications for the State and it is inherently unlikely, if not implausible, that such a decision would be the result of a “creeping assumption” rather than a considered choice at an elevated level of government.”

‘Nonsense’ Mikakos alone accountable

Ms Mikakos said she accepted responsibility for the Department of Health and Human Services but said it was “nonsense” for her alone to be held accountable.

She further said the hotel quarantine inquiry needed to examine discrepancies in evidence given by the Premier and Ministers, saying it was “politically disadvantageous” for a cabinet member to cross examine another cabinet member.

“Accordingly, the Board should critically review the evidence of the Premier and the Ministers (none of whom has been cross-examined by those who might be in the best position to contradict them) where that evidence is at odds with other evidence (and in particular, where it departs from contemporaneous documents),” she said.

Ms Mikakos quit the day after Mr Andrews gave evidence she was responsible for the hotel quarantine program, the failings of which sparked Victoria’s second wave.