Coronavirus: Ruby Princess inquiry labelled a ‘cover-up’

The Berejiklian government has been accused of making a ‘sham’ of its special commission of inquiry into the Ruby Princess debacle.

The Ruby Princess cruise ship leaves Wollongong, NSW, in April. Picture: Getty Images

The Berejiklian government has been accused of making a “sham” of its special commission of inquiry into the Ruby Princess debacle by deliberately narrowing investigations to the day passengers disembarked in Sydney and preventing an examination of how 1100 crew onboard were treated afterwards.

Lawyers for the International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF) have written to NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian urging an expansion of the inquiry’s terms of reference, arguing it should be free to examine health and safety standards for crew who were exposed to coronavirus but forced to remain on the ship after passengers disembarked on March 19.

The ITF’s co-ordinator in Australia, Dean Summers, claimed the handling of the Ruby Princess crisis was “botched all the way along” but the NSW government wanted to limit a necessary inquiry to the date passengers disembarked and look no further.

Mr Summers said a narrow terms of reference and a rushed report-back date in August amounted to the NSW government “covering up” what happened to the crew between March 19 and April 23, which he called the “second phase of the crisis”.

“The inquiry has become a government sham – the crew are victims of a political smother,” he said.

Out of 2647 Ruby Princess passengers allowed back into the community when the ship docked in Sydney on March 19, more than 340 later tested positive for COVID-19 and 22 died. More than 200 of the 1100 crew later tested positive during a screening program conducted when the ship was moved to Port Kembla.

The ITF’s lawyers say the inquiry is inadequate because there is to be no examination of the vessel’s abrupt shift from Sydney to Port Kembla with crew onboard. They complain the inquiry headed by Bret Walker SC cannot, under its present terms of reference, examine the availability of testing and medical treatment for crew, the circumstances in which crew were later repatriated to home countries when the ship left Australia in April or any precautionary measures that could have been taken for the crew.

Another ITF concern is how the inquiry cannot consider the treatment of onshore workers who might have been exposed to COVID-19 after passengers disembarked.

The ITF’s lawyers sent a request on June 22 to the commission of inquiry’s senior solicitor assisting, Jennifer Hoy, asking for an examination of “the treatment of infected crew after passengers disembarked and the circumstances of their repatriation, or ongoing medical treatment on the vessel”.

Ms Hoy replied that the matters raised were outside the terms of reference and therefore “beyond the scope of this inquiry”.

But she added that Mr Walker had advised her to say all the factual matters raised by the ITF’s letter were “of concern to him”.

A spokesman for the NSW Premier said Ms Berejiklian’s office was “not aware of any correspondence” from the ITF or others seeking an expansion of the inquiry’s terms of reference.

NSW Labor opposition deputy Yasmine Catley said it was surprising the inquiry could not explore events after passengers disembarked covering several weeks.

“That this is not allowed to be part of the inquiry shows disdain for the crew,” she said.