Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 1 Hansard (30 January) . . Page.. 35 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

With four people dying, a coroner's inquest will be necessary. A coroner may or may not also be requested to hold an inquiry into the cause and origin of a fire. I listened carefully to Mr Stanhope. As I understood it, such an inquiry would look at the cause of the fire and the broader issues. It would be bound by the rules of evidence and be conducted in an open and public manner in the courts.

With rebuilding in part dependent on such an inquiry for guidance, a long, drawn-out inquiry could create difficulties. A review of the Emergency Services Bureau and its management of the event could well get to the heart of some matters more promptly, although issues to do with bushfire analysis, land management and planning, and house design and siting would not necessarily be included.

It is our responsibility in the Assembly to support an inquiry that is rigorous, unbiased and broad. There will undoubtedly be lessons to be learned from this experience. For the sake of everyone who has been hurt by this event, and for the Canberra that we love and hope to promote in the future, we must focus on identifying the issues, being prepared to acknowledge any mistakes that may have been made and learn from them.

Some of the issues that need to be addressed are obvious. There were a number of reports on bushfire danger in the ACT from 1994 to 1995, including the McBeth report, not many of whose recommendations appear to have been implemented in full. Canberra people would like to understand what has happened to these reports and what issues remain unaddressed.

An issue particularly promoted by some advocates is that much more rigorous pre-emptive burning in national parks would have significantly reduced the impact of the fires this year. Clearly that is a factor that must be considered. However, from my reading, I know that there are peer-reviewed and published reports supporting various and contradictory positions on the efficacy of hazard reduction burning in different fire conditions. It is by no means a simple question or an exact science. The Greens are not opposed to hazard reduction burning as some commentators have suggested.

We also need to understand what is happening to the weather and climate. Last year had the highest average temperature between March and November on record. According to a recent report by the World Wide Fund for Nature and leading meteorologists, human-induced global warming is an important factor in the severity of the 2002 drought. High temperatures and dry conditions create greater fire danger. As policy makers we cannot afford to ignore these global climate issues in this debate.

Location of pines is again on the agenda for discussion and is part of the broader question of fire risk and fire danger at the urban interface. The vulnerability of urban interface areas has been extensively dealt with in several reports, the most recent being The Report of the Task Force on Bushfire Fuel Management Practices in the ACT in 1995, which I understand led to adoption of the fuel management plans for the ACT.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .