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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 06 Hansard (Tuesday, 22 June 2004) . . Page.. 2354 ..

control, as suggested by McLeod, we end up with a number of senior officers. We have the chief officers and their functions quite clearly outlined. Then, under chapter 4, we actually have a number of services, the emergency services, all individually outlined. This is an absolute contradiction, and quite correctly so, of the McLeod recommendation that this government, in its haste to be seen to be doing something after the emergencies of last year, accepted holus-bolus without any thought or any consultation.

Well done to the commissioner for actually getting out there and conducting some serious analysis of what was required and which would keep all of the players in the tent. I think the model that the government was so happy to accept and say that they would implement was going to lead to serious divisions. I expect it would have led to a serious loss of volunteer power and expertise as well.

The good thing about what has finally come forward, even though it has taken some time, is that it does follow very much strongly on the model that Mr Pratt put forward last September and, indeed, is based on the model that I had the pleasure to sketch up on a board at a volunteer brigades association meeting at about the same time.

Right from the start, when the McLeod report came out, people were concerned that it did not take into account the needs and the unique nature of the city/state that is Canberra. So what we’ve got, I think, is a much better response and something that will give us greater clarity of how it will work.

I hear the scoffing from those opposite. Perhaps, Mr Corbell, you should look at page 208. All it’s got is: “Chief Executive Officer”, “Operational Management”, separate “Ambulance Operations”, then “Community Education and Prevention”. If you can find that in this bill, Mr Corbell, then you’re fooling yourselves.

So the process that we follow, albeit somewhat slowly—and again it’s not a criticism of the commissioner—has been a good process. Well done, particularly to you, commissioner, in terms of the follow-up of suggestions; the consultation with the troops on the ground, whether they be ES, bushfire, ambulance, or police; the updating of the community; and, I think, the constant interaction with the politicians where you’ve been able to come back and actually talk to the politicians and tell us where the bill is going and how you were going to address the concerns raised.

The program that saw people as senior as the head of the fire brigade coming out to the community councils, indeed facing the rigours of the Tuggeranong Community Council just last month, I think, shows a commitment to getting it right. In that regard, congratulations again; it’s done the rounds.

Part of the scepticism that I think existed in some of the brigades, particularly the ES and the bushfire brigades, has been addressed and I think the troops on the ground are particularly pleased that Commissioner Dunn was doing the rounds, was talking the talk, and actually walking the walk. He’s delivered what he promised.

What we now have to do, as members of the legislature, is actually pass it so that it can be gotten out there and made to work. There isn’t a great deal of time between now and 1 July, and that’s a shame because I think some more time to get the set-up ready would have been useful for the commissioner. Well, that’s said and done.

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