Page 1988 - Week 06 - Thursday, 9 June 2016
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
High-risk activities include activities such as welding, grinding, soldering and gas cutting. Given the very high risk to life and property of fires and the high level of knowledge in the community about the risks of fires during total fire bans, I agree it is appropriate to create this new offence.
The bill also increases the penalty for lighting a fire during a total fire ban from 50 penalty units and imprisonment of two years, 200 penalty units or both. The review of the act found that the maximum penalties for the majority of offences were balanced and proportional, with the exception of this particular penalty. It has, therefore, been increased to reflect its seriousness to ensure it is an effective deterrent.
Certainly the key issue—and Mr Smyth has just spent some time discussing this—that has been raised with my office over the past couple of days is that of the declarations and definitions of the “built-up area”, the “bushfire abatement zone” and the “rural area”. Certainly my office has had conversations with the United Firefighters Union. We have been in touch with the RFS and I have obviously spoken to my fellow MLAs, and I think this is a challenging issue.
In my mind the most important point is getting clarity and getting clear maps about who is responsible where. That, I think, is something on which there is universal agreement. Where there does seem to be some disagreement is perhaps either in the interpretation of the legislation or what the final outcome of that determinative process will be.
The review found that the procedures for determining which service has control of a fire in the bushfire abatement zone are cumbersome and potentially problematic. The bill clarifies these powers by giving the RFS responsibility for response and response planning in this area. The concept of a bushfire abatement zone is also removed from the act for the purposes of operational planning and response.
Responsibility for fire planning response will now be split between the rural area, which is the responsibility of the RFS, and the built-up area, which is the responsibility of ACT Fire & Rescue. The rural area will incorporate the bushfire abatement zone for operational purposes, but what we will end up with is essentially two areas. I think that clarity, as I understand it, will be very beneficial when it comes to understanding the responsibilities of both services into the future.
The clarification of these areas is defined within a notifiable instrument declared by the commissioner. Given the changes in this legislation, it is of utmost importance that the notified maps are amended to reflect the new definitions and are developed in close consultation with both ACT Fire & Rescue and the Rural Fire Service. Both parties from my discussions are very keen to have these new maps, and the minister and the commissioner have given their commitment to ensuring that emergency services operational review group meetings will be convened as soon as possible to finalise the new maps. They certainly need to be done in time for the next bushfire season, which, of course, will commence, all else being equal, on 1 October.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video