Page 916 - Week 03 - Thursday, 10 March 2016
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
We have the UFU calling for a state authority and the changing of the commissioner’s position to a CEO—an administrator, not an operator. We have immense anger inside the SES organisations over the way an officer was just conveniently slotted into the position without any search for the most qualified officer to go into that position. We have recently had a new officer appointed to the head of the RFS, an acting officer. This time there was a process, but people say to me that they do not believe it was a genuine process but that another officer from the fire service was moved across to the RFS. Then we have the minister standing up here today and saying, “Look at this. All is well.”
Probably the only thing I agree with the minister about in this report is that we get a good service. We get a good service because the officers care. The paramedics do a great job, but they are doing a job in circumstances they should not have to put up with. Most staff in other organisations would not put up with it because of the way they work. They work in dispersed locations and ultimately they are out there normally just in teams of two and four. So there are dilemmas here.
The minister spoke about the broad objective being to support and foster a culture of professionalism throughout the ACT Ambulance Service workforce. To say that is an insult to the paramedics. The paramedics are professional. They are highly professional. Despite failures through communications, defibrillators or taking decades to get new uniforms, the officers have done the job. It is a failure of leadership. It is about time we had a culture of leadership from the management of ACTAS and from the government on how this should happen. The minister says:
As you know, Madam Speaker, cultural and organisational change is challenging and takes time.
A page and a half later he says:
… I am very happy to report that all eight of the original blueprint for change recommendations are substantially being addressed or indeed have been completed.
Have we completed it or haven’t we completed it? And if we have completed it, why is the change still coming and taking time? It is because there is no change. The more we change, the more we stay the same.
I have had reports of the workshops. The minister says, “Yes, over 100 staff members voluntarily attended.” I wonder if the minister knows what percentage that is of all the staff. It would be interesting to see if he does. The problem is that most of the people who went that I spoke to felt that they were spoken at, not spoken with; that they were not heard. It was, “Bring your cup. We’ll have a chat.” They were spoken at about what was going to happen.
Then we had four project groups formed to develop these ideas with over 40 staff members who volunteered. But they have met only three times. Three times in a year the working groups have met. Is that an adequate time? I suspect not. We have managed to address or have completed the eight recommendations. We are just
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video