Page 503 - Week 03 - Wednesday, 14 March 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
We also had huge admiration for the recovery centres, which set a new national standard which is now being emulated in Victoria and New South Wales. Generally speaking, the government was being thanked for that work. I think that the Chief Minister said himself that when he walked around people were thanking him. That was probably too much one way, but I do think that there is a conversation now which has swung too far the other way. Indeed, how the mighty are fallen, or how determined is the opposition to bring them down.
In addressing this motion, I do not have access to the currents of rumour which possibly Mr Pratt has. I am restricted to information which is in the public domain and, I am afraid, I have to confine myself to that knowledge base. The prime relevant documents that I have to do that are the McLeod report and all the other reports that I have read and the ESA business plan, which I know has not been referred to here by Mr Pratt. Also, of course, I have the benefit of the speeches made just now by Mr Pratt and Mr Corbell.
I absolutely agree that McLeod suggested, and the government was quick to set it up, that there be an independent ESA, but it seems to me from reading McLeod’s report that the prime concerns he had were with the cultural problems of the old establishment. My reading of the reports from 1988 show that this is an old problem and one that is not going to be solved by any restructure. It requires an awful lot more than that if you are going to build a sense of people being involved in the one service. My own feeling is that, in the course of the fires in January 2003, the bureaucratic processes and policies may have stifled the fast reactions which we, in hindsight, now see may have made the difference.
To me, that is crucial. I believe that we should have a very quick response to fires and I believe that, as far as possible, resources need to be sunk into them in the first instance to put them out. Four Corners showed that it is not just an ACT issue; that it is an Australian issue. For the Blue Mountains fires, the McIntyres Hut fire and possibly the Victorian fires there have been issues to do with the lack of a quick response and putting the resources there. I hope that this is one thing that has been learned.
Although this is the third restructure, it is the first time since I have been in this place that the ESA has been back within a department. Although it may not be optimal, it might still be fully functional. Although it is true that there have been a number of resignations within emergency services, I do not know why these have occurred and I cannot comment as to whether they are a reflection of the restructure. So, rather than complaining about the restructure, I think it would be best if we do work, as Mr Pratt said on Friday, with the current arrangements.
In this respect, all I have to go on is this ESA business plan, and I have to say that I think that it has been well thought out. It shows that there are opportunities for discussions with stakeholders. Perhaps in this case I am going to be more positive than Mr Corbell. I have not heard too much reference to this business plan, but it is what we have. It is all we have in the public domain, apart from innuendo, rumour and perhaps conversations that have been had off the record by members of the opposition. But this plan says that there will be community comment and there will be a review
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .