Page 739 - Week 02 - Thursday, 23 February 2012
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
For example, the Victorian fire commissioner, who was established following recommendations from the Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission, shares similar powers and functions with the ACT’s emergency services commissioner, with the notable exception that under section 10(1)(e) of the Victorian Fire Services Commissioner Act 2010 the Victorian fire commissioner has “overall control of the response to major fires”.
Specific powers are also conferred upon equivalent positions in other jurisdictions. For example, under section 44 of the New South Wales Rural Fires Act 1997 the New South Wales Rural Fire Service commissioner may also take charge of bushfire-fighting operations where specific conditions apply.
On 1 December 2011 Mr Neil Comrie released the final report of the Review of the 2010–11 flood warnings and response in Victoria, noting:
The absence of any overarching policy framework or centralised operational control (except for fire hazards) results in a siloed, uncoordinated structure that invariably breaks down in the face of a large scale or protracted emergency. This fact was evidenced on Black Saturday and again during the 2010–11 floods.
Mr Comrie recommended that the state appoint a state emergency controller who is ultimately accountable for all emergencies.
Clearly, a common theme is established through these reports and the subsequent enacting legislation, specifically that the need for unambiguous and robust arrangements for high-level control during significant emergencies and for the provision of coordination between emergency services before, during and after significant emergencies is a fundamental and critical component of effective emergency response.
Many of the existing statutory arrangements in the ACT under the Emergencies Act 2004 are in accord with the recommendations made. For example, the ACT may appoint an emergency controller to have overall control in an emergency.
The territory has clearly established responsibilities for the chief officers of the emergency services in relation to the range of different hazards that exist in the territory.
Commissioner’s guidelines can be prepared under the act to provide for the planning and conduct of joint operations of the emergency services.
While the existing functions of our emergency services commissioner provide for the overall strategic direction, management and preparedness of the emergency services, no express provisions are, however, established for the commissioner to give direction to chief officers during an emergency event.
Without this clear provision in the act it is acknowledged there is a gap in the provisions for high-level control and coordination of the emergency services during
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video