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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 2 Hansard (5 March) . . Page.. 522 ..

MR PRATT (continuing):

seeks to apply all the vital lessons. Hence the need for a judicial inquiry. Perhaps Mrs Cross could seek to recover her sense of duty.

There are already many lessons which are fairly obvious. In my capacity as shadow minister for emergency services, I would like to see action taken soon. I would hope, therefore, that proper inquiries have interim reporting capabilities so that as the major lessons become clear they can be brought to this place and to the community and quickly applied. I think the story about the inquiry taking two years is a red herring. Any decent inquiry ought to be able to report on an interim basis. I am sure that the people who are already earmarked are professional and would seek to do that.

Some of the lessons could already be applied-the compatibility of emergency management equipment and procedures amongst agencies; preparation of vulnerable suburbs from an emergency management point of view; mandatory education in schools on bushland and fire management; and bushland and forest hazard reduction. We do not need to wait for an inquiry to apply those types of lessons.

There are some major questions that need to be answered. The coronial inquest and the McLeod inquiry as it now stands, without a full judicial capability, are simply not going to be geared to reach out and identify issues such as strategic management and long-term planning in preventative measures, including hazard reduction. What about the application of the McBeth report? Will the inquiries we have now be able to go back a good length of time and examine such issues?

What about emergency management planning for townships, villages, rural areas and vulnerable suburbs? What about identification of the threat in the days prior to 18 January? What about fire intelligence and the provision of information to the community in the period 15 to 18 January? What about the organisation and the training of rural and urban brigades? Is the coronial inquiry going to look at those matters?

What about the compatibility of procedures, systems and equipment amongst our emergency services agencies and across jurisdictions, between ACT and New South Wales fire services? What about the compatibility of operational systems on the fire ground between police and bushfire crews in identification of threat and timely warning to communities?

The aim of an inquiry is to bring confidence back to the community about how well the community can be and should be equipped to face the next threat. The threat is there. We are the bush capital. We are in an area which can be drought prone. With the threat level identified, we must put in place emergency management plans to cope with it .

The Chief Minister's claim that witnesses will come forward with defamatory claims under protection is highly overdone. The small risk of this happening is far outweighed by the benefits of receiving a wide range of evidence. Let us not forget that the witnesses who come forward will also be concerned about their own reputations. We can trust Mr McLeod to be discerning in how he receives information and how he qualifies it. If somebody is coming the raw prawn with Mr McLeod, he will not be backward in coming forward and pointing this out. I think we can trust the system.

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