The "Beer Post" Controversy: Unpacking the Lies: “The Tank Was Safe” and Other Claims
Disclosure
The purpose of this article is solely to highlight the issues brought to light regarding the Cooma water tank collapse and the surrounding events. It is not intended to take sides or unfairly target any individual or organization. The relevant article and associated documents are made available on this site, and we encourage everyone to review them thoroughly and form their own opinions.
Our role here is to present the facts as we understand them, and to offer interpretations based on the available information. We recognize that perspectives may differ, and we respect the right of all parties to voice their views.
Do not shoot the messenger! Our aim is to facilitate informed community discussion and greater transparency, not to foster animosity or personal misgivings toward any of the parties mentioned. Thank you for your understanding and engagement.
Introduction:
Dear listeners, welcome to another episode of the Monaro Zone. Today, we continue to delve into a story that resonates deeply in our community: the Cooma water tank collapse. This tragic event not only left a physical scar on our landscape but also exposed cracks in the governance and accountability of our council that are yet to be remediated.
Before we begin, we want to take a moment to thank the brave and amazing people of the Monaro. Since the disclosure of the declassified water tank reports, there has been a flood of additional material relevant to this discussion. Analysis of these new reports is likely to be brief, as our priority is to make these documents as accessible as possible for the community at large. We encourage you to continue analyzing these documents—for the community, by the community—and to record your thoughts in the comments section.
This is a story that must be told, not just for those who lived through it, but for future generations. It is critical that lessons are learnt and that such a preventable tragedy does not happen again. Together, we will help bring light on what happened, what didn’t happen, and what must happen moving forward.
Concerns Notice to Council, Taken Under Defamation Act
At the heart of today’s discussion is a defamation notice submitted to the Snowy Monaro Regional Council (SMRC). This notice, dated December 7, 2022, was filed by Peter Anderson, the convenor of the Snowy Monaro Community Advocates group. The document highlights allegations of defamation in response to public comments made by then-Mayor Narelle Davis during an ABC radio interview on November 7, 2022.
Peter Anderson’s defamation notice points specifically to Davis’s claims regarding a social media post—referred to as "the Beer Post"—which Anderson insists was neither defamatory nor inaccurate. The notice outlines Anderson’s perspective that the post merely aggregated factual information, including excerpts from engineering reports and statements by former Mayor Peter Beer. However, during the radio interview, Davis labeled the post as defamatory and described the author as a "nasty person" responsible for spreading "untrue information" that amounted to "bullying and harassment."
The subsequent defamation notice sent by Mr Anderson to the SMRC serves as both a legal warning and a broader critique of how the council addresses public accountability. With the matter again on the table, Anderson is calling (across multiple platforms) for public apologies, emphasizing the reputational damage caused by Davis’s statements. The defamation notice (attached) sent by Mr Anderson to council encapsulates a larger issue: the council’s approach to dissent, debate and criticism in the community.
The Transcript of Simon and Narelle
The second element we examine is the transcript of the ABC interview with Simon Lauder and then-Mayor Narelle Davis. During this interview, Davis called for greater respect and kindness in public discourse, highlighting the challenges faced by council staff and contractors. However, it is her remarks about the "Beer Post" that became the crux of Anderson’s defamation notice to the council.
Davis described the post as "awful stuff by a keyboard warrior" and stated that such content was "damaging, disrespectful, and rubbish." These comments, broadcast on a trusted platform like the ABC, were perceived by Anderson as defamatory, indirectly identifying him as the author of the post without directly naming him.
An Analysis Of the ex-Mayor’s Complaints
Kindness Does Not Equate to Truth:
Davis repeatedly described the criticism as “nasty,” “awful,” and “disrespectful.” However, the emotional tone of a statement does not determine its accuracy. Her complaints appear to conflate the tone of the posts with their validity, a flawed argument that dismisses the substance of the criticisms.The Council’s Own Failures:
The facts underlying the "Beer Post"—namely, the structural vulnerabilities of the water tank—were based on council-commissioned engineering reports. Davis failed to address why these documented concerns were not acted upon. By ignoring these details, she undermined her own credibility, making her claims appear more like an attempt to suppress dissent and debate rather than a genuine call for respect.Community Scrutiny is Legitimate:
When Simon Lauder asked if Davis welcomed public scrutiny of council performance, she stated, “The community has a right to scrutinize council… but do it in a respectful way.” Yet, Davis’s actions—such as labeling factual posts as “rubbish”—suggest an unwillingness to accept any scrutiny and evidence that challenges the council’s narrative.
Factual Inconsistencies of the SMRC
Beyond the interview, the council’s handling of the water tank collapse reveals troubling inconsistencies:
The Tank Was Safe:
In the immediate aftermath of the collapse in 2020, council representatives, including the then-Mayor Peter Beer, claimed that “It’s always been a very safe tank… It is very unexpected that it gave way.” and “The reservoir had recently undergone structural check and was deemed safe for use…” However, documents later revealed that engineers had provided professional advice about critical flaws in the decommissioned tank’s structural integrity long before the incident and that these had been considered by council on 19 December 2019 in its decision to spend ~$1 million to repair the tank. This directly contradicts the council’s public statements, casting doubt on its commitment to transparency and accountability.Investigations Were Promised but Never Delivered:
Mayor Beer and other officials assured the community that “…investigations will start into the cause of the burst...” To this day, no such investigation has been undertaken. This broken promise highlights a pattern of deflection and inaction that has eroded public trust.
Annexure B
The final element is Annexure B, an excerpt from the "Beer Post" itself. According to the defamation notice, this post was composed of factual statements sourced from publicly available materials, including engineering reports obtained through GIPA (Government Information Public Access Act). Anderson maintains that the post aimed to inform the public about the water tank collapse and its implications rather than to defame any individual.
A casual analysis of Annexure B supports Peter Anderson’s position that the "Beer Post" was factual and non-defamatory. Conversely, Narelle Davis’s claims of defamation, when she was Mayor in 2022, appear to lack substantiation, particularly in the absence of specific evidence of falsehoods or malicious intent.
Annexure B highlights the importance of transparency and the community’s right to hold public officials accountable. The council’s failure to address critical concerns about the water tank collapse—despite repeated warnings and promises—underscores the need for continued scrutiny and public discourse.
Regardless of the post’s content, its inclusion in this broader narrative highlights the tension between the council’s desire to protect its reputation and the community’s right to scrutinize its actions. However, rather than protecting the council’s reputation, the council’s actions since the tank failure have only cast a long shadow over the reputation of the council. A shadow that needs to be redressed to begin to restore the council’s reputation. This story is also a stark reminder of the fine line between free speech and defamation in today’s digital age.
Closing Remarks
As we conclude this episode of the Monaro Zone Podcast, it’s important to recognize that the tactics used in the aftermath of the Cooma water tank collapse are still at play today. When posts such as this one are shared online, they are frequently met with an army of trolls—staunch supporters of the "Gang of 6" who attempt to discredit the authenticity and merit of these disclosures. Their goal is clear: to cast doubt, suppress the truth, and discourage further scrutiny of the Snowy Monaro Regional Council.
But we must not be deterred. Truth and accountability are the cornerstones of a thriving community. When faced with misinformation and obfuscation, our best response is unwavering commitment to transparency.
Here’s our call to action:
We, as a community, must always stand for the truth and push back against those who would try to silence it. Thank you for your continued support in shedding light on these important issues. Please continue to share these documents far and wide—every share strengthens the cause of transparency and accountability and brings us closer to justice.
To those with more information: we encourage you to come forward. The antidote to misinformation is truth. Your disclosures are vital to ensuring that the mistakes of the past are not repeated. As the saying goes, “The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing.” Together, we can make a difference.
Until next time, stay safe, stay informed, and stay strong for the Monaro. Thank you for listening to the Monaro Zone.
“And you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.”
