Page 606 - Week 03 - Thursday, 15 March 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I did not get a count, but I assume that there were something like 120 or 150 volunteers out there this morning. We are probably talking about a third to a half of the operational members—the active members—of both the SES and the RFS who were out there this morning. They actually were not noisy. They were very dignified and they were very calm. They did not pull a stunt like wearing a uniform to pretend to be one of the boys. They actually wanted the minister to talk to them, but he said, “I am here as a volunteer.”
The problem is that it is not a few noisy people out there. The minister and the commissioner are the lone voices in the wilderness saying that these reforms are good. He is the one who is not listening to people. It is interesting. The excuse is, “We’re not going to control units; we’re not going to be operational”. He says, “They are the commissioner’s reforms and I back the commissioner.”
But who is letting the commissioner insert the ESA back into JACS? The commissioner cannot do that. The commissioner cannot say, “I am jumping back into the fold; I want to be there.” One person gives the permission for that, and that is the minister. The minister is responsible for these reforms. One person only has endorsed these reforms, and that is the minister. One person only has done this.
When his attack failed, the minister raised the issue that volunteers are concerned about which unit gets responded first. Because of which unit responded first, we are going to drag the ESA back into JACS? First it was budget; then people were concerned about Comcen and how it responds. Well, fix Comcen. Again, this is cutting off the leg—amputating a leg—to fix an ingrown toenail. The minister does not have the ability, the wherewithal or the courage to control his organisations as he should.
That is the failing here. The minister does not have the ability, the wherewithal or the courage to take command, to take control of his ministerial portfolio. That is the problem here. He can say, “I’ve been sold a pup by the commissioner.” He can say, “I’ve been sold a pup.” That is his problem, because he accepted what the commissioner said. He stood next to the commissioner when they launched this and he said, “I am behind this. I am fully supportive of this.” They are the two lone voices in the entire population who are saying that this is a good thing.
This motion should get up, because of the minister’s failings. The minister’s failings since he has become the minister for emergency services include a reform process that will not improve the situation and that has been comprehensively rejected by all those who will be affected by it; his failure to consult; the continuing debacle on the headquarters for emergency services, where we now pay rent on three empty buildings out of four buildings; the loss of senior staff and the hundreds of years of experience that went begging there this morning; the fact that he allowed the fleet not to be ready for the fire season and seemed totally unaware of or unconcerned by it; the lack of equipment for volunteers and lack of equipment replacement; and the lack of training funds and opportunities—chaps for chainsaws and chainsaw training, with New South Wales paying for our training.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .