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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 2 Hansard (5 March) . . Page.. 576 ..

MR PRATT (continuing):

and offering community briefings. The briefing program would involve street groupings in the most vulnerable streets, as identified by the Emergency Services Bureau, or perhaps groupings of a number of co-located streets, gathering as communities to meet with fire unit teams to discuss contingencies for their areas.

Residents would need to agree to join in the briefings. If they did not agree then at least the authorities would be comforted by the fact that they had offered the best services possible. This is an important element of this proposal. This would not be mandatory for residents but it would be mandatory for the Emergency Services Bureau to ensure that all individual residents and their formal, or informal, community groupings were contacted and formally offered the program.

If this means that the Emergency Services Bureau signs off on the residents of Bloggs Street, for example-if I can pull a mythical street out of the air-as a bunch of uncooperative chaps who do not want to get involved, well then so be it. At least they will have tried and at least they will know that they have done their best. If an individual in a street where residents do not want to get involved seeks the services of the Emergency Services Bureau then that individual should be offered appropriate services.

Mr Deputy Speaker, there are four components to this proposed program. The first is an advice to the community of the likely bushfire threats confronting their community area; a description of the possible directions that fire paths approaching that community might take with respect to the differing weather pattern scenarios; and advice to the community of what the community might do with respect to mitigating local bushland fuel loads, ensuring that streets are open for emergency vehicles, et cetera.

Secondly, fire units would undertake to carry out safety audit inspections of individual houses and offer advice to house owners on what preparations to undertake-for example, cleaning of roofs and yards, moving a wood pile; perhaps a street could apply to have a fire-prone dangerous tree cut back; the fitting of metal fly screens to windows, et cetera.

The third component in this plan is that fire units, preferably with community police in attendance, would brief community groups on worst case evacuation procedures. With police advice, they would identify the "routes out"plan for evacuation-that is, the best vehicle and pedestrian escape routes, and these would differ for each separate fire weather scenario. Evacuation control measures would be planned, keeping in mind that in thick smoke and the mayhem of a firestorm, calm and well rehearsed evacuation plans will save lives. Perhaps neighbourhood evacuation marshals and guides could be appointed.

Fourthly, the fire units would consider the provision of basic street fire kits to willing communities. Again, communities would need to voluntarily accept such kits and would need to be prepared to store them in a secure but very accessible place-for example, in somebody's property. This plan would need to involve the training of those communities in the use of such street fire kits. The kits might involve the use of fire hoses and stand pipes. I would stress that the provision of street fire kits would not abrogate the responsibility of fire units to attend fires in those streets and would essentially be only a supplementary measure.

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