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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 13 Hansard (26 November) . . Page.. 4695 ..

MR SMYTH (continuing):

those people, "Be very clear about this: I am the Leader of the Opposition and I am also a volunteer. I don't want to be accused later of politicising this issue, but I'll do what you want."As we discussed each of the models, I reiterated that I was a volunteer, but I was also the Leader of the Opposition.

The models put up included the current model, the ESB structure, and the McLeod option. I put up Mr Pratt's option and there were several others. We worked our way through them and, in the end, the models were all rejected and removed from the whiteboard, except the basic Pratt model, which the brigades then modified. They wanted a few bits and pieces added and a bit of clarity, but it was basically a modified Pratt model that the Volunteer Brigades Association voted on and said, "That's what we would like."This legislation today would enact that.

The question for the government is: if they are going to implement McLeod, how do they address the needs of the volunteers? Some of them-not all, but a large number-still feel left out of the process. It is curious to reflect on the fact that several months ago this Assembly passed a motion calling on the government to do a number of things, one of which was to acknowledge, as was done after the Christmas 2001 fires, the fabulous efforts of the volunteers with some sort of welcome to the city parade. For the 2001 fires, volunteers received a small badge-a lapel pin-and a patch that they could put on their clothing. That is the lapel pin. I carry mine quite proudly. But I note that nothing has been done to implement that motion of the Assembly. We will come back to that in coming days.

The thrust of the matter is that at some stage you will have to listen to the volunteers. I guess that is why we are hearing particularly from the government, as Mr Hargreaves said, that this bill is a good start. If it is a good start, it is a start that rejects McLeod. It says that the McLeod model does not work. Minister Corbell also mentioned that Mr Pratt was to be congratulated on the work he had done.

The objections seem to be-the consequential amendments are not available, but I understand that Mr Pratt has those already prepared and is ready to roll with them-that he has not worked out some organisational arrangements. Of course those things need to be worked out, but the advice from the parliamentary counsel was that this bill was the basis for doing so. Once you have got the basis done, you can put the other bits and pieces in place around it. But the government is still going to implement McLeod.

Your brigades are telling you that McLeod is wrong. The emergency services brigades are saying that they reject McLeod. The emergency services brigades as opposed to the Emergency Services Bureau-the guys in orange as opposed to the guys in yellow-actually want their status raised. They would be quite happy to have their own board directing their operations, because they were so submerged in the Emergency Services Bureau model that they are feeling a loss of identity. They are very scared that having a super organisation will only exacerbate that problem, instead of freeing them up, allowing them to do their job and recognising what they do.

There is a fundamental decision to be made here today as to which way to go. It is quite true that it has never been put to every single volunteer, but their representatives did agree to a modified Pratt model. Do we follow the modified Pratt model or do we keep

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