Page 2981 - Week 09 - Wednesday, 20 September 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
requirements needed to adequately resource a major incident like 2003. This information has been used to develop a capability model for the RFS with a training plan and a model for implementing the Australasian interagency incident management system to deploy and manage these resources. This is the basis for the RFS renewed recruitment program and preparations for the coming bushfire season.
These outcomes, reviews and products are a small part of the huge effort undertaken by this government to implement the SBMP to date. They highlight the importance of gathering all the available information before we embark upon a detailed revision of the current plan and represent a prudent and sensible approach to risk management planning.
Minister Hargreaves’s amendment to Mr Pratt’s motion contains a host of initiatives created by this government. I counted 49 new initiatives since 2003, so I think it is incredible that Mr Pratt should suggest that nothing has been done on the SBMP. There are 49 new initiatives in a scientifically sound system of risk management. Where have you been, Mr Pratt, since 2003? Certainly not in Canberra, it seems.
MR SMYTH (Brindabella) (4.57): It is quite clear that Mr Gentleman has been given his marching orders. He has been handed his speech and, like a good trooper, he stood up and read the speech without any understanding of what it means. To stand up here and say, “I can count to 49, because there are 49 dots that John Hargreaves has put on a bit of paper. Aren’t we good fellows,” entirely misses the point of the motion.
We did not ask you what initiatives had occurred since January 2003 that demonstrate that we are much better prepared. The whole point of the motion is the progress of the strategic bushfire management plan.
Mr Gentleman: You are missing the amendment there.
MR SMYTH: No, I am not missing the amendment at all. I will go straight to the amendment. We see this all the time from the government. When you cannot answer with substance and with conviction the motion that is put in this place, you wipe out the whole motion.
If we wanted a motion calling on the government to list 49 things they have done since coming to office or since the January 2003 bushfires, that is what we would have put on the notice paper. But we did not have a motion saying, “Please outline the 49 initiatives that you have taken since January 2003 that clearly demonstrate that the ACT is so much better prepared.” We did not ask that.
Both government speakers have ignored and have deliberately chosen not to answer our question about the lack of tangible and definite goals, targets and directions in the current version of the SBMP and the specific bushfire operational plans for risk areas throughout the ACT. Not a comment! They have not used those words; they have not addressed those targets; they have not spoken to the motion; they have not told us when they will expedite the completion of version 2.
Mr Hargreaves’s answer is: “There will not be a version 2 because we have got a plan that runs from 2005 to 2010. We are working on the draft plan. We are doing other things under development.” You can pick answer A, answer B or answer C from
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .