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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 06 Hansard (Tuesday, 22 June 2004) . . Page.. 2349 ..

The structure is kept simple. Much of the detail of the work flows from the higher level principles and responsibilities. This also is intended to underlie a sense of responsibility and ownership rather than a culture of following tick-lists of required jobs. This approach follows through to more detailed requirements such as the shift towards assessing and requiring particular standards of cover at different locations in the rural area and urban edge. This focuses on the result rather than how to get there, which allows the many factors to be taken into account.

Another of the glaring problems, the failure of successive governments to implement recommendations about community preparation and responsibility, is addressed in part by the expansion of the bushfire fuel management plan to a strategic bushfire management plan. This includes the full range of factors and is another example of the approach of focusing on the desired result, setting the principles and information sources in place to ensure the method of achieving the result takes into account all important factors and up-to-date views and evidence.

Clearly this is a large bill and I’m not going to go over again all the changes made. I will, however, note a couple of points. The problem of transition of responsibilities between rural and urban has been dealt with by use of a new bushfire abatement zone and setting the urban brigade the responsibility of making sure that planning is done for that zone in collaboration with the rural fire service. However, the rural fire service is responsible for responding to fires in that zone. Ninety-five per cent of fires begin in that zone, so it is an important responsibility and means that the rural fire services have experience built in that area for the less frequent occasions when fire fighting requires work in the more remote rural areas.

Communication of the developing potential for the fire emergency was one of the big failures in January last year. I think we’ve all heard from people who did not know that the fire was even threatening the suburbs until they saw flames. Massive efforts were made at the last minute but this of course is not enough. The bill establishes a state of alert, responsibility for community education and the process for progressing from a state of alert to a state of emergency.

Strong powers are conferred on the territory controller and the chief officers of emergency services to deal with declared emergencies. These are limited by a caveat at clause 148 that division 7.3.1, concerning declared emergencies, does not authorise the taking of measures directed at ending an industrial dispute or dealing with a riot or other civil disturbance. This protects us from possible abuse of these powers in the future. Emergencies represent situations when lives may be at risk.

The scrutiny of bills report pointed out the questions that should be considered when looking at extraordinary powers to control liberty and I think it’s clear that this is a situation that falls within the definition of human rights. The powers are circumscribed by the existence of the emergency. The power to remove someone from one place to another is given by clause 166. This may include detention—however, detention only for the purpose of the removal, not a general detention. The controller is permitted to use any necessary and reasonable force in doing so. However, it is permitted only for the purpose of removing a person who is obstructing or threatening to obstruct response or recovery operations in a declared state of emergency.

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