Page 501 - Week 03 - Wednesday, 14 March 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
me, could put to me, as minister, their views and advice on bushfire preparedness. The bushfire council have welcomed that request and provided me with their first report just prior to the commencement of the fire season last year. Further, as members would know, the government has requested the bushfire council to oversee implementation of recommendations in relation to the coroner’s report.
Mr Speaker, the bushfire council is also independent. Its members are statutory appointments. They are appointed by the minister and they have certain statutory roles which are respected and enshrined in legislation. So any suggestion that there is a lack of independent and expert advice coming to the government from those familiar with the operational needs and requirements of our emergency services is simply not backed up by the facts.
I am aware that, following the announcement of the new ESA structure last week, volunteer groups have been voicing their opinions on it. They have raised concerns at their perception of a loss of autonomy of the RFS and a lack of support within the broader bureaucracy for volunteers. They have also expressed their disquiet about the layers of reporting lines between the volunteers and the minister. I can assure them that there will be no loss of autonomy of any of the services. Each will be overseen by a separate operational command. Further, under the new structure there will be no change in the support for volunteers. Indeed, the intention through the restructure is to enable more resources to be devoted to support for volunteers, training and equipment, because management of the services will be more cohesive under the guidance of a deputy commissioner with broader objectives and responsibilities.
I understand that the VBA has yet to provide its consolidated comments to the commissioner on the restructure. I think that it is appropriate for me to await those comments before discussing its position further. The government supports the future direction of the ESA that has been put together and outlined by our commissioner. Let’s remember that this restructure is on the advice of the commissioner, the independent chief of the emergency services. It is his structure, he has put it together, he has proposed it and I am endorsing it.
Mr Smyth: You did not drive it?
MR CORBELL: No, I did not drive it; the commissioner did. Again, the opposition’s argument falls down. The opposition fails to recognise and fails to support the independent head, the operational head, of the ESA who is making decisions about the best possible management of the organisation. We welcome the new direction because we are committed to placing the weight of emergency service resources on the front line, on the delivery end. We are dedicated to ensuring that we have the best possible emergency services, and the government will not be supporting Mr Pratt’s motion today.
I foreshadow, Mr Speaker, that I will be moving an amendment to Mr Pratt’s motion. The amendment deals with the fact that the government has already implemented, in part or in whole, 51 of the 73 recommendations from Coroner Doogan’s report; that the ESA does have operational autonomy, as this is enshrined in law; and that the proposed new structure for the ESA which is contained in the ESA three-year business plan does ensure closer operational command and control links between the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .