South Australian Fire and Emergency Services Commission, $500,000

South Australian Metropolitan Fire Service, $3,513,000

South Australian State Emergency Service, $1,050,000

Administered Items for the Department of Treasury and Finance, $3,557,414,000

Membership:

Ms Hutchesson substituted for Mrs Pearce.

Minister:

Hon. J.K. Szakacs, Minister for Police, Emergency Services and Correctional Services.

Departmental Advisers:

Ms J. Waddington-Powell, Chief Executive, South Australian Fire and Emergency Services Commission.

Ms J. Best, Chief Financial Officer, South Australian Fire and Emergency Services Commission.

Mr B. Loughlin, Chief Officer, South Australian Country Fire Service.

Ms V. Halikias, Business Manager, South Australian Country Fire Service.

Mr M. Morgan, Chief Officer, South Australian Metropolitan Fire Service.

Mr J. Swann, Deputy Chief Officer, South Australian Metropolitan Fire Service.

Mr M. Fernando, Business Manager, South Australian Metropolitan Fire Service.

Mr C. Beattie, Chief Officer, South Australian State Emergency Service.

Mr G. Tudini, Business Manager, South Australian State Emergency Service.

The CHAIR: The portfolios today are SAFECOM, Country Fire Service, SA Metropolitan Fire Service and State Emergency Service. The minister appearing is the Minister for Police, Emergency Services and Correctional Services. I declare the proposed payments open for examination. I call on the minister, if he wishes, to make an opening statement.

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS: I start by acknowledging the tremendous work, the outstanding work, of the volunteers and staff of our emergency services sector every single day in their roles as they serve the community and dedicate themselves to the protection of life, property and the safety of all South Australians. Each year, the response efforts by our sector, the CFS, the MFS, the SES, supported by SAFECOM, put themselves out of enormous time, energy and resources in preparing, responding and recovering from activities and emergencies.

I also acknowledge, as has been highlighted tremendously through the floods of 2022-23, the efforts of other agencies as they work with our sector, including the Department for Environment and Water, ForestrySA, SAPOL, local government and, of course, farm firefighting units as well, especially volunteers from all of those communities who pull together in times of crisis.

I am proud to highlight that the government has provided a very significant investment through the 2023-24 budget that includes $36.5 million in new measures for the sector. At the heart of that is $26.7 million over four years to secure up to an additional nine aircraft to significantly enhance the state's aerial firefighting capability to combat the risk of bushfire.

These funds will support the addition of up to nine aircraft and three ongoing full-time employees to significantly enhance the CFS's aerial firefighting capability. It will be the largest number of aircraft ever to support South Australia during bushfires and will play a key role in supporting the incredible work the CFS on-the-ground firefighters undertake. I also note that, as part of the state's digital investment fund initiative, $2.3 million over four years is being dedicated to the emergency services incident management system.

In 2023-24, $6.7 million is also being provided to implement strategies that address future resilience, preparedness and risk mitigation from significant and catastrophic disasters through the commonwealth's Emergency Response Fund. In addition, $1.9 million is being allocated over four years to increase mental health and wellbeing support to more than 15,000 volunteer emergency services first responders, staff and their families in the sector, and a further $1.2 million investing in 2023-24 to establish the strategic flood barrier cache of DefenCell or like product.

I would also like to highlight that the 2023-24 budget also included $12.3 million for the cost of extraordinary events that occurred across the 2022-23 period, of which $9.8 million has been allocated to the State Emergency Service, Metropolitan Fire Service, Country Fire Service and SAFECOM for the extraordinary response costs relating to the River Murray flood event, and a further $5.6 million in 2022-23 to support the CFS for extraordinary response costs for significant fires, including Mount Wedge, Lincoln Gap, Montacute, Port Lincoln and Baldina, as well as the extension of firefighting aircraft availability in line with bushfire risk.

Over 2022-23, the SAFECOM logistics functional support group managed the SA rapid antigen testing close contact program from January 2022 until its ultimate transfer to SA Pathology on 20 December 2023. Through that period, 1.92 million tests were distributed to South Australians, with 15 fixed collection points and 39 hybrid sites, some co-located with testing sites across metropolitan and regional parts of the state. At its peak, the program employed 548 staff. The program also tailored support for outbreaks in university accommodation, assisted with testing of regional-based education staff and provided other support to NDIS participants of the national disability and inclusion scheme.

As part of the final closure arrangements, $5.2 million has been recovered from SA Health during 2022-23 and the final accounting of all service providers is all but complete. SAFECOM has identified a range of administrative and operational lessons from the experience, which will improve the conduct of other operations in the future.

Last year, South Australia experienced its worst flood in over 50 years. The River Murray flood was a protracted and complex flood that impacted 11 major towns across seven local government areas. On 21 November 2022, the police commissioner declared a major emergency, which remained in place for three months—the second longest duration for a declaration under the Emergency Management Act, with the COVID-19 pandemic being the longest.

Ultimately, the peak flow of around 190 gigalitres per day reached the South Australian border on 23 December 2022. The SES and the broader emergency services sector worked tirelessly with communities and local councils to prepare for this flooding. Permanent levy structures were assessed and repaired, with thousands of tonnes of clay being sourced and used to shore up the levy networks. Temporary flood barriers were deployed, with over five kilometres of DefenCell barriers being installed to protect essential infrastructure and high-value community assets.

Community meetings were held across Riverland and Lower Murray areas. Sandbag distribution centres were established, with emergency services staff and volunteers helping households prepare for flooding, distributing nearly half a million sandbags. A doorknock of over 4,000 premises was conducted and an outreach program had crews visit over 800 houseboats on the river.

While the budget impacts for the SES are highlighted in the Agency Statements, this only partially reflects the resources and the extraordinary efforts of volunteers and staff from across all agencies. SES, CFS, Volunteer Marine Rescue and Surf Life Saving volunteers contributed to thousands of hours of support by over 220 staff, interstate crews, Army personnel, local council officers and contractors. Leading the state's response to the flooding event, the SES was steadfast in coordinating the preparations and response. I put on the record my thanks for the extraordinary job done by all of those involved.

This government has also made a significant investment into our firefighting capability. The sector also received $588,000 per annum from 2023-24 to reflect additional costs incurred by the MFS and the CFS when providing assistance to the Ambulance Service, to their paramedic colleagues and to callouts. This is in addition to the $2.35 million provided in the 2022-23 Mid-Year Budget Review over three years from 2023-24 for the installation and ongoing maintenance of automatic external defibrillators in all CFS vehicles. This funding will assist the CFS in meeting new legislation in recognition of the important role the CFS plays in protecting the community.

Finally, but not least, I want to recognise the MFS today. The MFS in South Australia remains one of the oldest continuous government fire services across the globe. On 5 November 1862, the MFS became one of the first legislated urban fire services in the world. This year marks the celebration of 160 years of the MFS.

I thank all the volunteers and staff who contribute every single day to the sector, and particularly note those members in committee today who themselves volunteer and contribute.

The CHAIR: Member for Hammond, do you have a brief statement?

Mr PEDERICK: Just a brief statement. First of all, I would like to acknowledge the minister for being around during the peak flood event—that was noticed—and also all of the emergency services personnel, whether paid or the thousands of volunteers who contributed during that event. This made it something that people could actually live through, so I commend their work. I also note the ability for me to have direct contact with senior people, so that between us we got some stuff done. I will just put that on the table.

We will go to SAFECOM first and Budget Paper 1: Overview, page 19, the digital investment fund. Can you explain how the emergency services incident management system will operate and how it will enhance compatibility with other operational agencies?

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS: I can advise that question relates more specifically to the CFS. If the member would like to shuffle up the CFS for some advice, I am happy to do so, or alternatively we can come back to that question when we get to the CFS.

Mr PEDERICK: We can go back to the Country Fire Service, if you like. I will have a go at this one: Budget Paper 1: Overview, page 33, emergency services. How is the $1.9 million over four years to increase mental health and wellbeing support for volunteers, staff and families going to be spent?

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS: The emergency services sector encompasses broadly the SA Fire and Emergency Services Commission, the MFS, the CFS, the SES and the Volunteer Marine Rescue, of which the total workforce is 16,751 approximately, comprising 15,000 volunteers. As the member would know as a long-time contributor to the safety of his community, the volunteer emergency services workforce members can face a complex range of mental health factors that can reduce productivity, increase conflict and destroy interpersonal relationships.

This can contribute to the development of long-term mental health issues, including but not limited to suicidal ideation, anxiety disorders including post-traumatic stress, major depressive disorders, substance use disorders and, at worst, psychosis. Since 2018-19, I can advise that there has been a 70 per cent increase in volunteers and staff accessing the EAP and a further increase this quarter.

In the past 12 months, the Stress Prevention and Management (SPAM) 24/7 helpline has recorded a 129 per cent increase in its demand for services by both volunteers and their immediate family members across the sector. I can advise, as I have already, that in the 2023-24 budget, as the member has inquired, SAFECOM has been funded $461,000 for the provision of additional mental health and wellbeing support function.

Breaking that down, that is an FTE of 3.5 staff. The funding will facilitate the continuation of current programs and the provision of a substantial strategic approach to respond to the growing number of potentially traumatic and stressful incidents that our volunteers and their workforce attend to, such as an increase right across the state in first response road crash. I provide the following examples of particular functions that will be enhanced or improved:

research implementation and evaluation of the suicide prevention plan in accordance with the regulations of the SA suicide prevention bill;

the implementation of data collection and reporting systems to meet the requirements of the South Australian Suicide Prevention Act;

increased delivery of mental health first-aid workshops for volunteers and staff and the implementation of an evaluation process;

the development of family—partners, children and youth—mental health programs;

the coordination, review and delivery of the 90-minute stress trauma and suicide prevention program to be delivered to 425 CFS brigades and 73 SES units and a further 14 flotillas within a three to four-year period;

the implementation of the SA Mentally Healthy Workplaces framework action plans, to reflect the mitigation of psychosocial hazards in the workplace as described in our WHS regulations; and

recording and managing exposures to potentially traumatic events whilst volunteering.

Mr PEDERICK: I refer to Budget Paper 3, page 23, operating expenses. In regard to the operating expenses for SAFECOM, can you explain why there is such a decrease in what has been budgeted for the 2023-24 financial year compared to what is estimated for the 2024-25, 2025-26 and 2026-27 financial years?

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS: I can advise the member that the 2023 budget and 2022 estimated results have a variance of $16.7 million, a decrease in income. This is primarily due to income recognised for disaster risk reduction in 2022-23 of $3.1 million; commonwealth government funding from the Emergency Response Fund for the Coastal and Estuarine Risk Mitigation Program recognised in the 2022-23 year, being $6.7 million; and income recognised from SA Health for supporting the logistics of the rapid antigen test sites in 2022-23, that being $5.2 million.

That is offset against a $3.9 million increase in expenses, primarily due to additional payments from the commonwealth Emergency Response Fund for the Coastal and Estuarine Risk Mitigation Program and the National Flood Mitigation Infrastructure Program in 2022-23, that being $8.8 million, and expenditure from SA Health for logistics in the RAT test sites of $5.2 million.

Mr PEDERICK: Is the estimated additional $15 million in operating expenses for the SES for the 2022-23 year attributable to the River Murray floods? It is still there under operating expenses.

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS: I can advise the member that, yes, that is correct.

Mr PEDERICK: In regard to Budget Paper 4, Volume 2, page 70, workforce summary, I might frame this around all the agencies so we can perhaps get the answer in a timely manner. In regard to SAFECOM, the MFS, the CFS and the SES, is there a clear plan and time line in place for staff who are working from home to return to the office, is the right balance of staff working from home and are there more people coming back to the office, if there has been a contingent of people working from home?

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS: I am very pleased to advise the member that, being emergency response agencies, the not just vast or overwhelming majority of the workforce but the workforce almost to the exclusion of others across the sector is contained within emergency response. It is an opportunity and also important to note and reflect that this sector, our emergency services, like a number of other sectors, was never able to take those precautions that some others did, including this place. There were extraordinary measures put in place by our agencies in emergency response, risk mitigation and preparedness around the COVID pandemic.

Particularly, I do want to note the MFS, having 24/7 stations, the willingness of both the agency and the workforce to undertake work practices that were difficult to comprehend, difficult to understand, and also the willingness of the workforce to get behind it. There is a very small number of non-emergency response staff across our sector. For staff where there is a flexible working arrangement related to COVID-19 or others, it might be best to take those on notice for the member, seeing as they are across multiple agencies. We might chew up the best part of half an hour if I get the advice now.

Mr PEDERICK: That is a good idea. Go to Budget Paper 4, Volume 2, page 71, key agency outputs. Dot point 2 states that providing corporate governance direction and business support to the emergency services sector, including occupational health, safety and welfare and injury management services, is a key agency output. It is my understanding that some of the work health and safety staff within SAFECOM are assigned to service the individual agencies. Given that each of the agencies has their own work health and safety staff, do you not see this as a duplication?

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS: Absolutely to the contrary. When it comes to work health and safety, it is my view as minister that the resources being deployed are worthy, and they are worthy of our volunteers, worthy of our sector. I would entirely, with respect, reject the assertion that it would be duplication. There is a small number of embedded agency staff responsible for work health and safety, but under the Fire and Emergency Services Act SAFECOM is a designated lead agency to provide those corporate services out.

When you have one of the most diverse work groups anywhere in this country, in my view—13,500 CFS volunteers and about 1,500 SES volunteers VMR and then of course the workforce thereafter—the complexities around work health and safety, ensuring best practice to keep our volunteers safe, is worthy of every effort we can make, so I am entirely comfortable, even if it were correct to say that there were minor duplications, that the duplications are well warranted.

Mr PEDERICK: Dot point 2 states that SAFECOM provides corporate governance direction and business support to the emergency services sector, including finance, assets and procurement. Noting that the Auditor-General found the need for improvements in emergency services sector asset management practices, can you advise what work has been done on this in the 2022-23 financial year?

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS: I can advise, as the member foreshadowed, that in 2021-22 the Auditor-General's report to parliament outlined his findings in relation to suggested improvements to the current sector asset management framework and systems. As a result, the emergency services sector chief officers and SAFECOM chief executive have agreed to progress the development of a project to implement a whole-of-sector asset management system.

I can advise that the initial scoping of this system is underway, and it is anticipated that this system will be delivered within the 2023-24 financial year. The scope, and particularly the evaluation of business requirements and the associated procurement processes, I can advise are yet to be established; however, will be opened soon. The CFS has not yet implemented a system referred to as Hardcat, which will be considered a potential solution across all agencies in this evaluation. I can advise the member that SAFECOM will coordinate this project on behalf of the sector.

A coordinated whole-of-sector asset management system will consolidate all asset information into one single location and provide capability for the system to be utilised in the development of asset management plans and, importantly, replacement schedules. I can further advise that the project will be funded from existing resources within the sector.

Mr PEDERICK: Budget Paper 4, Volume 2, page 71, investing expenditure summary, line 16: why is there no figure under the 2022-23 estimated result for the Alert SA replacement project?

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS: I can confirm that the Alert SA project has ongoing funding of $1.3 million indexed per annum. Since Alert SA was launched in December 2019, there have been over 332,000 downloads of the application. The current build of Alert SA, which was released in 2019, provided improved notifications for grass and other rural fires. Minor amendments and upgrades continue to be made to the current version of Alert SA as required.

However, a range of options are now being explored to enhance Alert SA, including uplifting the current application to a more modern and multihazards application, replacing it with a pre-developed solution, or building a completely new version. An option has not yet been confirmed, as this market research continues.

SAFECOM is currently undertaking this market research, community consultation and stakeholder engagement to help develop a road map for the future of Alert SA development. This engagement has included focus groups with metropolitan, regional and culturally and linguistically diverse communities, targeted surveys from approximately 1,100 members across a broad area of South Australia, and a stakeholder engagement forum. I can also advise the member that there is currently a YourSAy survey that is live and closing on 30 July. I encourage the member and, in fact, all members to promote that YourSAy website so that we can maximise community input into this future design.

Mr ELLIS: I have two questions so I hope the committee will indulge me, and both can be found in Budget Paper 4, Volume 2. The first one is at page 92, specifically the capital works and investment program with the State Emergency Service, and volunteer marine rescue, perhaps more particularly. I wonder if you might have an update for the people of Point Turton as to whether a new vessel will be found in that funding for them.

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS: I thank the member for his question and his strong advocacy on behalf of his Point Turton community. It was a great opportunity for him to attend at our country cabinet in the Copper Coast recently. At present we do not have a future provision for a replacement vessel at Point Turton. Having said that, the process by which replacement vessels are undertaken is very much ground-up, and we particularly take advice from the flotillas themselves and the individual groups within those flotillas and, of course, ably coordinated by the SES.

We are very hopeful and open-minded about an ongoing future replacement. There are a number of vessels right across our state that will need to have a programmed replacement or have been the beneficiaries of programmed replacement over the past number of years, particularly amazing vessels coming out of Nautic Star, a great local company. I am absolutely committed to keeping the member informed but also working with him to ensure that his Point Turton community is heard.

Mr ELLIS: I have one more question, on page 34 now, which is a CFS component, a similar budget line with the capital works program. I wonder if the minister has any update on how works are tracking at Maitland where I think there is an SES and CFS combined facility being planned, and also whether there are any upgrades planned at Yorketown.

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS: I can advise that the Maitland work is underway and that DIT are currently engaged in that work. If there is a time frame for the progress of that, particularly around milestones, I would be happy to take that on notice for the member. I am further advised that Yorketown has been subject to some minor remedial works and improvements through the Renew project and that there are no further works as advised at this stage.

Mr PEDERICK: I will stick with the SES, while we are there for the moment. I refer to Budget Paper 4, Volume 2, page 93, Program 1: State Emergency Service, description/objective, paragraph 2. What support does the government provide for volunteer marine rescue organisations through the SES? What I am talking about here are non-SES volunteer marine rescue organisations. Do they get any support?

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS: I thank the member for his question. I can advise that, in the 2022-23 financial year, 1.36 was provided and in 2023-24 funding will be $1.394 million. This annual funding to the six volunteer marine rescue groups in South Australia is towards their operational service, a vessel, a tow vehicle replacement program and, further, a contingency fund.

These funds are across the VMR groups, being the Australian Volunteer Coast Guard, the Cowell Sea Rescue Squadron, the Royal Volunteer Coastal Patrol, the South Australian Sea Rescue Squadron, the Victor Harbor-Goolwa Sea Rescue Squadron and the Whyalla Sea Rescue Squadron. I can advise that, in 2023-24, a replacement vessel is funded for the SA Sea Rescue Squadron, Copper Coast.

Mr PEDERICK: Where is that?

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS: The SA Sea Rescue Squadron, Copper Coast.

Mr PEDERICK: In regard to sea rescue vessels, is there any budgetary position for a rescue vessel at Port MacDonnell in the South-East?

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS: There are no future provisions across the forward estimates specifically for Port MacDonnell, but, in a similar consideration to the member for Narungga's questions regarding his local flotilla, there is ongoing advice being received across future years and under active consideration.

Mr PEDERICK: We will go to page 93, targets 2023-24, dot point 1. Can you describe the envisaged make-up of a state flood mitigation cache and where the assets will be stored?

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS: I am happy to advise the member that in the budget $1.25 million in capital and a further $20,000 in ongoing funding will be utilised to sustain a temporary flood barrier capability—and by temporary I mean the flood barrier being temporary, not a temporary contribution—for the state, including caches of barriers, plant and equipment and doctrine and training. This will be important in delivering training and also future large-scale responses to flooding events.

The SES's deployment of DefenCell during the River Murray flooding event was the first time that these particular DefenCell barriers have been utilised in Australia for active flood fighting. Overall, the barriers have proven to be highly effective and cost and labour efficient, with nearly 5.5 kilometres of product deployed over the event. There have been significant learnings, equipment investments and enhanced operational protocols implemented, which will result in improved barrier performance in the future.

As for the location of that strategic acquisition, I can advise the member that it is likely to be housed at the Netley warehouse but deployed across strategic locations in the state as operationally required by the SES.

Mr PEDERICK: I refer to Budget Paper 4, Volume 2, page 94, explanation of significant movements, line 21. Can you break down the additional costs associated with responding to the River Murray flood event?

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS: The specific budget allocation under consideration of the estimates committee today is of course for the SES, and this forms part of the largest ever expenditure on any event in South Australia's history, being $190 million in state and commonwealth funding. That sustained nearly 120 people every day in the coordination and response to this flood, with over 1,000 people in total contributing.

The specialist resources deployed in pursuit of the SES response included swiftwater rescue teams, aerial observation and resources, marine skippers and crews, ADF 40M personnel trucks and Unimog high clearance vehicles from our friends and colleagues at the New South Wales SES.

The SES has incurred a total expenditure on the River Murray flooding event to date of $13.4 million. This can be broken down to include salaries and wages for operational staff and deployments; contractor fees; operational consumables, such as the sandbags and DefenCell product that I referred to earlier; as well as very significant freight costs for these products.

The further breakdown for the additional expenditure in this year's budget can also be categorised across salaries and wages of $1.18 million. I can also advise that the operational consumables, particularly the DefenCell product and the sandbag costs, were at a cost of $3.772 million—product alone.

Mr PEDERICK: Budget Paper 4, Volume 2, page 36, the farm firefighting grant: how many farming businesses applied for the grant and how many were successful in 2022?

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS: I can advise that the farm firefighting units grant, the Regional Capability Community Fund more specifically, as committed to by the then Labor opposition and implemented as a high priority election commitment, has in its first year awarded 276 separate grants in round 1. These grants have gone to various individuals, including, of course, our farming community who attend local bushfires or local fires with their own equipment to protect their property and also the wellbeing of others.

We recognise fulsomely the contribution that farm firefighting units make and that they are an essential part of our community response to bushfires. More specifically for the member's interests—and I am not sure if he was a successful applicant himself—

Mr PEDERICK: No. Paid for it himself.

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS: We will need to look at that for future years.

Mr PEDERICK: It is okay.

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS: Round 2 is now open and anybody who was not successful in round 1 will be prioritised for round 2 grants. Round 1 facilitated 257 successful applicants and the purchase of 741 separate pieces of equipment. That included 78 farm firefighting units, nine water pumps, three water tanks, four hoses or branches, 134 UHF CB radios, 428 items of personal protective clothing (this includes gloves, jackets, pants, boots, overalls and goggles), 34 amber rotating beacons, 40 first-aid kits (specifically with burn kits included) and 11 fire blankets.

I can advise that there has been a further extension of the program—$500,000 in this year, in year two of four—being an extension to community groups that may apply for personal protective clothing (PPC). That was very clear to me, having visited the Bute CFS and having met with the Bute Lions Club. The Bute Lions Club were keen to apply for personal protective clothing on behalf of their members, many of whom are farm firefighting unit first responders, but they were unable to, being a community group, under the first round guidelines. As resourceful, progressive, regional communities tend to do they found a way around things and each of them were able to apply individually, so we were very happy to have delivered a significant number—I think it was 13 in total—PPC items up to Bute.

The second extension has been to move on from the primary production threshold for applicants to now include landowners, for two reasons: one is the recognition that many landowners, particularly in the Adelaide Hills region, may not undertake primary production. However, in pursuit of their own and the community's wellbeing and safety, they do participate in farm firefighting unit first response, or may be eager to. The second is to support conservation, or landowners who undertake conservation. Again, they are not involved in primary production; however, with the conservation undertakings that they endeavour it is entirely appropriate for the funding to consider those individuals as well.

Mr PEDERICK: Is there certain equipment that the CFS rules out when considering applications? For example, trailer-based farm fire units.

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS: Yes, there are a few additional requirements that may go to answering the member's question regarding exclusions. One requirement of the funding is that these are new pieces of equipment—new FFUs, new hoses, new branches, new personal protective equipment, new radios—and we do so because we endeavour to ensure that all of the equipment that the government is supporting through funding is at the highest quality and the highest standard.

We are also very keen to ensure that where we can, and this was demonstrated in fact through the purchasing of equipment post the KI fires, we support local businesses and support economic stimulus and economic support for local businesses that are retailing or wholesaling the equipment that may be covered under the FFU grants.

Further, under the member's question regarding trailers, the CFS advice is that from a risk mitigation perspective and health and safety standard the grant round should be limited in relation to trailer-based FFUs. So if the grant application is for a trailer then it is not preferred.

Mr PEDERICK: That is interesting because you can cart a lot more water, but anyway be that as it may. Budget Paper 4, Volume 2, page 36, line 31: can farmers operate harvesters on a catastrophic fire day?

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS: There is not a black and white answer to that, so I will ask the Chief Officer of the CFS, who accompanies me and is an adviser, to provide some additional detail. In brief remarks on that, I will take the opportunity, if I may, to thank the CFS as well as Grain Producers SA for their extraordinary commitment to safety in harvest.

I have spoken personally on a couple of occasions during harvest of last season with the member for Hammond on some dicey days. I appreciate his approach and I appreciate the approach of GPSA. What we all want to do is ensure that harvest is economically valuable for the state—it is an extraordinary primary production for our state—but also that, during harvest, the welfare and safety of regional communities is protected.

Mr LOUGHLIN: Obviously, catastrophic fire danger days are the most significant fire danger risk to the community. They happen a handful of times a year. If I can quantify that, if you look to a year like 2019-2020, we saw six catastrophic fire danger days, so these are not everyday events but are when conditions are such that bare earth will burn if there is a fire.

So, yes, technically people can harvest up until they reach the grain harvest code cut-off, but considering that you would reach that very quickly, very early in those days, typically, and considering that if you did start a fire, even if in the conditions you are allowed, it could pose a risk and a challenge to firefighters, it is always a recommendation to people that they assess that risk and they do so very carefully. So technically you can, but I am not aware of too many people who are that daredevil or risk-taking to engage in that activity on those days.

Mr PEDERICK: Thank you for that answer. I did have some communication direct to the minister on a day when there was a bit of a wet period during harvest and people were keen to get it off, which I fully understand, and there was a bit of frustration because people were sounding out people—calling them in, essentially—for harvesting and some of these people were well organised with 4,000 litres of water just on their chaser bins, for instance, and then, obviously, military-style fire vehicles and that sort of thing. But I do appreciate the answer. In regard to that, does the CFS recognise the mesonet weather station network and Kestrel weather meters as tools for farmers to manage fire safely?

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS: I may ask the chief officer again to contribute on this one.

Mr LOUGHLIN: The short answer is yes.

Mr PEDERICK: In regard to the mesonet weather station network, which is not right across the state, will the emergency services levy or some other funds be used to pay for the expansion and operation of the mesonet weather station network across the state to assist farmers with harvest and other farming operations?

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS: I am advised that there is no apportionment in the forward estimates for this, particularly with the various considerations, the least of which is that mesonet is a private company, but there are licensing fees of which the agencies are contracted to that contribute to that.

Mr PEDERICK: I refer to Budget Paper 4, Volume 2, page 35, description/objective. The question is: how much has the two-year investigation into Terry and Cheryl May cost?

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS: If there is information I can provide on notice, I would be happy to do that.

The Hon. D.R. CREGAN: If I can take the committee to Budget Paper 5, page 31, aerial firefighting fleet enhancement. Minister, where will any new assets be based?

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS: I thank the member for his question and his fierce advocacy in this space. Leading in to the budget, I had multiple conversations with the member, particularly around his strong proposition for supporting our aerial firefighting fleet and his advocacy as a Hills MP for the acknowledgement of the extreme capability of aerial firefighting, so I am very pleased that we have been able to deliver a very significant enhancement of that capability. The capability will be significant. At this juncture I need to advise that, because procurement has not been finalised and we are very much in the throes of final back and forth on those negotiations with the support of NAFC, I cannot advise where or the composition.

However, the member is very familiar with the Brukunga site and the very significant number of fleet and assets that are deployed up there. The bare minimum will be deployed, of the current composition, but I do not think it would be unreasonable to assume a future where there would be additional fleet out of that site, protecting the Adelaide Hills region.

The Hon. D.R. CREGAN: I understand that the acquisition is underway, but what type of aircraft is it anticipated that services will contract to?

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS: I may ask the chief officer, who, within the constraints of that procurement, may be able to provide some broad advice regarding the framework in which the procurement is being undertaken, as well as the type of aircraft or the capability of those aircraft.

Mr LOUGHLIN: Thank you, minister, and I thank the member for the question. Obviously, we are very proud of our aerial firefighting capacity and capability. I believe it is among the country's best systems. In fact, it is probably among the world's best systems, with our combination of primary response zones, secondary response zones and the automatic dispatch of aircraft.

In terms of the contract, as the minister has alluded, I cannot go into specifics. What I can say is that if you look at the make-up of the previous fleet, it included 14 fixed-wing bombers, the two Black Hawk helicopters, and a range of command, control and intelligence support platforms. Any increase is going to be along those same sorts of lines and that similar capability. I single out those Black Hawk helicopters as being a particularly effective tool for us in South Australia. They were used to great effect at the Montacute fire and in the Port Lincoln fire during the past season.

The Hon. D.R. CREGAN: It may be that the minister may take the next two questions on notice. Is the minister able to outline to the committee the number of SES call-outs for the Mount Barker SES depot over the past two financial years? Are there any additional resources which have been committed for the Mount Barker SES depot?

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS: I may need to take some of that on notice. I can perhaps provide as best I can per the information I have in front of me regarding the Mount Barker SES unit. For the five-year period ending July 2023 the unit has been tasked to 1,760 incidents, averaging about 352 incidents per year. As of today, or perhaps last week when my advice was forthcoming, the unit has 31 volunteers.

As a snapshot to the work that the SES unit in Mount Barker undertakes, of which the member no doubt would be well aware, it is broad and it is diverse, and that is reflective of all of our SES units across the state. They are called out to everything from trees down and severe weather damage, all the way through to animal and land and general searches.

The facility itself that the SES calls home in Mount Barker was purchased in 2012. It was a former industrial warehouse. The SES proceeded with construction works which were completed shortly thereafter in 2013. I am advised that minor works to be completed in 2023, and I am happy to correct the time frame for the member if I can, consist of the removal of an old oil heater. Other works that have been completed in recent financial years are repairs to gates, repairs to cracked concrete kerbs, new concrete paving and a new door to the shed.

As for future investment or capital plans to be undertaken in Mount Barker; like all of our regional centres it is a dynamic assessment by our agencies, one of which I am sure that the SES is undertaking with the full knowledge and appreciation of the growing geographic centre that Mount Barker is and the dynamic risk that is posed in Mount Barker from a multihazards approach or consideration.

The CHAIR: I would move at speed, member for Hammond.

Mr PEDERICK: Thank you sir. I do not want to leave the MFS out so I might get a couple in quickly. I refer to Budget Paper 4, Volume 2, page 51, key agency outputs, dot point 2. What work is being done in relation to electric vehicle fires?

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS: I am happy to ask the chief officer for some advice directly to the committee on that one.

Mr MORGAN: With any emerging technologies, with electric vehicles being one, we are constantly monitoring the type of vehicle and the ramifications or implications of fires and so we continually review and update training packages for firefighters and awareness around how they manage those fires.

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS: I might add to that as well, because the chief officer is too humble to recognise this himself, but in the days gone we have had 500 of our best practitioners of road crash rescue across the country and Australasia in Adelaide. Particularly regarding the member's question regarding electric vehicles, the Australian-Australasian road crash championships have been a demonstration of the ongoing capability of agencies when it comes to electric vehicle response as well as the preservation and protection of life. I am very pleased to advise the committee that the joint MFS-SAAS team were victorious for the second year running in the championships here in Adelaide.

Mr PEDERICK: Very good.

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS: I should note many of those MFS staff are also co-badged as CFS volunteers to cover off on everything.

Mr PEDERICK: You get everyone rounded up. That is good and they are all very worthy people. We will go to Budget Paper 4, Volume 2, page 54, Sub-program 1.1: Frontline Services, at dot point 3, under highlights 2022-23. Can you outline the MFS resources that were deployed to support the River Murray flood event?

Mr MORGAN: It was a combined effort amongst all the emergency services certainly, but supporting the SES as the lead agency. We had members in the incident management team in the Riverland. We had members of the MFS workforce doorknocking, as the minister mentioned earlier, to communicate and engage with members of the community along the river where there were risks. Overall, the support was across the board where resources were required.

Mr PEDERICK: I refer to page 54, targets 2023-24, under dot point 1. Can you explain what the MFS is doing to continue modernisation of operational doctrine, policy, procedure and training?

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS: I am happy to ask the chief officer to provide some advice to the member on this one.

Mr MORGAN: We are constantly reviewing our doctrine and training procedures but we are currently reviewing and developing our new strategic plan for the next five years. There is a body of work that has gone into developing that strategic plan. We have engaged with an external provider to provide oversight and we have had external stakeholder engagement not only amongst the emergency services sector but external agencies, as well as internal stakeholder engagement, which will then develop and drive our strategic plan, as I said, over the next five years.

As a result of that, there will certainly be emerging risks and issues that we will be looking at. We will be looking to increase the number of recruits over the next five years, with an anticipated departure of approximately 300 staff. So from a training perspective, it is not only new and emerging risks it is also recruiting and developing our staff through operational training.

Mr PEDERICK: Under dot point 4, can you explain what the MFS is doing to enhance training provision to personnel in regional operations?

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS: Sorry, what page was that?

Mr PEDERICK: Budget Paper 4, Volume 2, page 54, targets 2023-24, dot point 4.

The CHAIR: That is the last question.

The Hon. J.K. SZAKACS: I will ask the chief officer.

Mr MORGAN: Thank you, minister, and I thank the member. With our regional operational staff, we are currently reviewing the regional operations in total. Part of that is around the training of our retained firefighters. Retained firefighters are paid a retainer. They are paid to attend training and respond to fire calls. Currently, we have a training allocation of three hours for each retained person per week, as per the station. We are looking to see how we can maximise that opportunity with training and any other training opportunities that can come forward to improve the preparedness of our regional firefighters.

The CHAIR: The allotted time having expired, I declare the examination of the portfolios of SAFECOM, the Country Fire Service, the SA Metropolitan Fire Service and the State Emergency Service completed. The examination of the proposed payments for the South Australian Fire and Emergency Services Commission, the South Australian Country Fire Service, the South Australian Metropolitan Fire Service and the South Australian State Emergency Service are now complete. The examination of the proposed payments for the Administered Items for the Department of Treasury and Finance will be referred to Estimates Committee A.

I thank all the staff and all the volunteers of our emergency services for all the great work they do in keeping the state safe, and I thank them for the work that they do in the lead-up to estimates.