Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 14 Hansard (12 December) . . Page.. 4782 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

In fact, I dare say that most of the time it is not the case. The emergency service is very useful on occasions such as floods; with the severe storms we had last month, for example, getting out there on occasions when a large infusion of manpower is necessary in order to assist the community to cope with a particular problem. Bushfires, of course, occur in hotter weather. They very rarely coincide with floods or storms. There is a necessity, therefore, to consider how some of the resources that are available to the emergency service and to the bush fire brigades, in fact, could be shared better than they are now. That is what all the changes are all about - getting cooperation between those two arms of the service and sharing resources.

Mr Speaker, quite apart from the benefits which I have argued today ought to demonstrate the need for and the desirability of taking on these changes, I would firmly reject the proposition put by Mr Osborne that people have not had what he calls a fair and adequate say. They have had that opportunity. There are obviously - I have to put it bluntly - different camps, different factions, if you like, in this argument. It is unfortunate that that should be the case. I would prefer it were not; but I think it is important to be able to identify that we have taken the issue so far and it is now appropriate to be able to move ahead with these changes, to see how they work and to ensure that the benefits, if they are benefits, are examined and explored. The Assembly has my commitment that, if this process does not produce benefits that will assist people who provide those services and receive those services, then they will be reconsidered. But, Mr Speaker, we have had enough discussion and debate about these matters. They do not warrant further discussion and debate, particularly by an Assembly committee.

I appreciate Mr Osborne's loyalty to his constituents, but I would say that the issue has been well canvassed. The changes that we have announced are not unusual; they are not novel, as Mr Osborne has suggested; they are, in fact, a structure used by a number of other emergency service operations elsewhere in this country. The model is very similar, in fact, to other State services. I appreciate Mr Osborne's concern about these matters, but I would say that it is important for us to press ahead with these changes and ensure that the benefits which will flow to the community are realised and that we at least explore how this can benefit the ACT community. If they do not appear to provide those benefits, then obviously we will have to reconsider our position. I do not believe that a further examination, after the process of change has been put in place, would be appropriate. In fact, given the season we are now facing - it could well be a very bad bushfire season this year - I think it is most important that we not change tack at this point in time.

MS HORODNY (10.53): Mr Speaker, like other members of this Assembly, I have had briefings from Mr Humphries's department and a visit from people from the ACT Emergency Services Bureau. I have heard claim and counterclaim on this issue. I am not sure why Mr Humphries has a problem with it going to a committee. If, as he says, there are no problems with the restructuring, then let us have an open, full and fair hearing on it; let us inquire into it in a more open way; and let us get to the truth of the matter.

Mr Humphries: It says that no structural changes will be implemented. This is already happening, Lucy.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .