CCC: Silverstone's Evidence to Senate Inquiry

Silverstone’s “Children Overboard” Evidence

In an earlier post “Lies, Mistakes and Character Assassination” (19 Nov 2007), the Desert Rat highlighted the erroneous evidence on the sensitive issue of telecommunications interception matters, that CEO Mike Silverstone gave to the Legislative Council Corruption and Crime Commission (CCC) Committee. That incorrect evidence was followed 10 day later by a letter correcting three significant errors – on matters Silverstone claimed he had read in preparation for the hearing, just before he gave his answers. Silverstone is the CEO of the CCC.

Shortly before he got the plumb job at the CCC, Brigadier Mike Silverstone, as he was then known, was at the centre of the “Children Overboard” scandal, where his evidence is in dispute. The “Children Overboard” cock-up certainly cost the Labor Government victory in 2001 and Kim Beasley the job of Prime Minister of Australia.

On the 6 October 2001, the HMAS Adelaide intercepted a people smuggler’s vessel near Christmas Island, carrying 223 passengers and crew.

The Adelaide sent a navy boarding party to take control of the vessel and set it on a course towards Indonesian waters. The situation onboard the vessel became increasingly tense, and a number of the asylum seekers started sabotaging the vessel.

At daybreak the next day, 14 male passengers jumped or were thrown overboard from the vessel. These man overboards occurred while the navy boarding party was attempting to restore order on the vessel.

At some stage, a man was seen to be holding a girl over the side of vessel, possibly threatening to throw the child into the sea or onto one of the Adelaide's seaboats that was alongside, but eventually brought the child inboard. All 14 males were recovered and returned to the vessel. No child or (children) were retrieved from the water.

The Adelaide recorded the entire episode on its 'video' tracking system.

During the tense tactical situation involving the man overboards, the commanding officer of the Adelaide, Commander Norman Banks, was phoned by his superior Brigadier Mike Silverstone, who was based in Darwin. While talking to his superior, Commander Banks was simultaneously receiving multiple reports from his crew on the Adelaide and the boarding party as the man overboards were occurring.

This conversation was the origin of the erroneous children overboard report. Brigadier Silverstone believed Commander Banks said to him that “a child was thrown over the side”. Commander Banks, on the other hand, maintained that he did not say this, telling the Senate Committee that “no children were thrown overboard from the vessel, no children were put in the water, no children were recovered from the water”.

Brigadier Silverstone described the charged and confused situation that Commander Banks was reporting on as a “kaleidoscope of events”. Most reasonable people would think Silverstone would have asked for written confirmation of such sensational event of a child or children being thrown overboard! An hour, even a day’s delay would not have been a problem.

Within minutes of his conversation with Commander Banks, Brigadier Silverstone telephoned a number of senior officers to update them on the situation with the intercepted vessel. Under a special arrangement to fast-track information to Canberra, he first called Air Vice Marshal Alan Titheridge, Head Strategic Command in Canberra, and told him that some of the passengers had jumped into the sea and children had been thrown overboard. The Senate Committee noted that this special arrangement was not repeated for any other vessel interception incident.

Indeed, Brigadier Silverstone informed the Senate Committee that the requirement to brief Air Vice Marshall Titheridge early on 7 November was the only reason for him ringing Commander Banks at daybreak in the middle of an operation, something that was contrary to his normal practice!

On 10 December 2001, Commander Banks told Brigadier Silverstone and Rear Admiral Smith that no children had been thrown in the water.

On 26 March 2002 on the 7.30 Report, Commander Banks said the whole matter came down to his conversation with Brigadier Silverstone. Commander Banks later said in evidence to the Senate Committee: “If anybody wanted to clarify the veracity of the information perhaps I should have been questioned to provide corroboration of what did or did not happen”.

“What annoyed me was that throughout this whole period, was that nobody else called back to ask for the information.” – not even Brigadier Silverstone!

Banks said, “I spoke to Admiral Smith and Brigadier Silverstone in the period 9, 10, 11 October, the next conversation I had with anybody about this issue was on 8 November with the chief of the Navy.”

When asked by Senator George Brandis about the events on 7 October: “Do you accept that Silverstone's recollection of it is correct?

Commander Banks said “No.”

In some private notes later released, Commander Banks records a conversation he had with the Chief of Navy, Admiral Shackleton, where the Admiral told him not to worry about this controversy.

"He stated clearly we had done a great job, nothing to be ashamed of and this was all about politics and the election."

Who do we believe?

No child was thrown overboard. Commander Banks does not accept Brigadier Silverstone version of the conversation. The alleged child became children. The election polls went the other way.

Who got it badly wrong this time?

Was it all about politics and elections?