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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 2 Hansard (5 March) . . Page.. 578 ..

MR PRATT: I do apologise to Ms Gallagher. I did not mean to upset you. In a question on 20 February about what formal fire education programs exist in the school system, Ms Gallagher advised that there are fire brigade conducted programs available for kindergarten to Year 1, and there are arson programs available for Years 3 to 16. However, the K to 1 program is more about building fire safety, about how children cope in either school fires or fires at home; it does not seem to have much of a bushfire element to it. Additionally, it should be noted that these programs do not appear to be compulsory.

It is clear that a sprinkling of schools across the ACT do, however, undertake very good robust bushfire preventative programs. They do that annually. They ensure that all of their children go through the same type of activity each year with the program being ratcheted up, depending on the age of the class. So they build on the previous education.

Mr Deputy Speaker, I am convinced that a general bushfire education program would be effective in concurrently reaching into the hearts and minds of youth at risk, as well as in ensuring that all school children are better prepared for the sorts of challenges they might need to face during a bushfire season. (Extension of time granted.)

Mr Deputy Speaker, the sort of education and rehabilitation that might be undertaken after the event to deal with youth arson is another subject and one that I intend to come back to this place with perhaps a few months down the track. I would like to deal with this very important issue as a separate issue.

What I am proposing will certainly cost the government, because undertaking mandatory activities in suburbs which are identified by the Emergency Services Bureau as being at risk will entail perhaps even paying volunteers to provide this service. This may need to be done to make sure that they get to those suburbs and cover the areas that need to be covered.

In conclusion, can I say that prevention is better than cure-of course, that is a fairly well used proverb but in this case it is absolutely true. Firefighters would prefer to engage in preventative planning with residents in vulnerable suburbs, not because this guarantees eradicating the risk but because the risk will be reduced. If our firefighters can work up front to help with preventative measures, we just might minimise or at least lessen the amount of time they will need to spend on the fire ground.

We are the bush capital, and Canberra by and large is a pretty dry place during the fire season. Those are the conditions in which we live. In city planning terms, we will always want to continue to have a city that has a strong bush content and a fairly robust bush interface. I am sure our residents will continue to want to live in that type of environment. It is therefore important that the government adopts an emergency management plan which includes the sorts of measures that I have proposed: the developing of professional information, education and audit programs in vulnerable suburbs; and the development of mandatory bush fire education in government schools, and offered to all non-government schools, for all years of schooling.

The government has a duty of care. The community has a responsibility to look at how it can best minimise risk and it must be as well prepared as it possibly can be to face the

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