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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 06 Hansard (Tuesday, 22 June 2004) . . Page.. 2381 ..

MR WOOD: I move amendments 1 and 2 to Mr Pratt’s amendment No 18 together [see schedule 7 at page 2455].

I understand from what Mr Pratt has been saying that these two issues are most fundamental to what he has been arguing about in speaking to this bill. I can say to him that we support his amendment, with changes. We do not support it in its current form because the amendment would introduce a new concept of disaster plans to be prepared by each administrative unit and each emergency service.

There was even a provision requiring the CPO, the Chief Police Officer, to prepare disaster plans, and that covers specific types of emergencies that are currently dealt with as sub-plans of the emergency plan. Mr Pratt’s amendment is not necessary as the emergency plan encompasses processes for dealing with disasters and is developed by the emergency management committee, which includes representatives of all relevant agencies and a community representative. The amendment, as it stands, would only serve to complicate the bill.

As I have proposed, the government believes it is more appropriate to insert a provision requiring the emergency plan to contain certain critical information. That is why the amendment I propose borrows from Mr Pratt’s amendment by specifying that the emergency plan must include plans for emergencies that are reasonably likely to occur in the ACT. Further, the amendment includes a number of Mr Pratt’s examples of particular emergencies.

The second government amendment amends Mr Pratt’s proposed new clause 147B, which deals with a community communication and information plan. Simply put, my amendment removes the words after “training” in paragraph (ii) of proposed new clause 147B (2) (b). Those words would require a media representative to demonstrate willingness to fully participate in training in order to be selected for something that is not really identified in Mr Pratt’s provision. It is also unclear how willingness to fully participate might be established. I think there are many circumstances when you simply could not say, “Did you show a willingness to do our training?” I think that is not a practical way to proceed.

We do not propose to change anything else in Mr Pratt’s amendment regarding a community and information plan. That stands up very well indeed. I would encourage Mr Pratt to look sympathetically at the government’s amendments in these areas.

MS DUNDAS (9.33): Mr Speaker, I will be supporting the government’s amendments to Mr Pratt’s amendment and I will be supporting Mr Pratt’s amendment, as amended, to the original bill. As the minister has outlined, Mr Pratt uses the words “disaster plans” in his proposed new clause 147A. These words are not used anywhere else in this bill and it is appropriate to use the term “emergency plan” in the new structure.

Mr Pratt’s suggestion, however, that the emergency plan contain specific sections that refer to specific emergencies is not unwelcome and may be a useful tool in investigating the ACT emergency response in a variety of situations. I support the minister’s amendments to this proposal as they retain the existing elements of the act but also include Mr Pratt’s ideas.

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