PARLIAMENTARY COMMITTEES (NATURAL DISASTERS COMMITTEE) (NO. 3) AMENDMENT BILL

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 17 October 2013.)

Mr GARDNER (Morialta) (12:55): I am very pleased to have another chance to speak on this bill. I will speak in favour of it, as I did about four months ago, when it originated in this house, before the government, I think foolishly—

The SPEAKER: Is the member for Morialta telling me he has spoken already on this bill?

Mr GARDNER: No, sir; this is a bill that has been given to this house by the Legislative Council, as approved by the house, as it originated there, and it is remarkably similar, sir, to the one that appeared, originating in this house.

The SPEAKER: If it quacks like a duck—

Mr GARDNER: The reason it is very good that we have the chance to do this today is because the government now finally has a fifth chance in five years to come to reason, to agree with their own members who have supported the introduction of natural disasters committee when it has been considered. The member the Ashford, a member of caucus, bound by the Labor vote, as she is, knows in her heart of hearts, and in fact on the Hansard on a number of occasions has said, what a useful device this would be.

The government argues that issues to do with natural disasters can be dealt with by existing committee structures—the ERD, the NRM, and others. The chairman of one of those very committees, the member the Ashford, courageously, in a way, said words to the effect that a bill such as this was necessary. As courageous as her words may have been within caucus, at the end of the day, when you are standing up for the people of South Australia you should vote the way you believe. While she believes, as she has said, that a natural disasters committee would be of benefit to the people of South Australia, she voted with the Labor Party, as they do at every bill, as a bloc, and therefore it is very unfortunate that this bill has not come through.

The member the Ashford again has an opportunity, due to the fact that this bill is now in the Notice Paper, to convince her colleagues of her passion. Caucus will be meeting, I believe, on Tuesday week, the last sitting week of the parliament. Caucus can be convinced, as they could have been on the last bill, to come around and see the value in a natural disasters committee. They could see the improvements that it could make to areas such as mine in Morialta, where so many constituents are threatened with bushfire every year during the fire danger season. They could see the sort of work that a natural disasters committee could do to inform the parliament, to inform the government, in an instructive way, in a well researched way, of the benefits and improvements that can be made in a non-political way.

That is the benefit of the committee system, that you can take the politics out of it, have a discussion, look at the research, have a non-partisan discussion in a way that finds the best results for the parliament, and then come up with conclusions that can be adopted by the government, knowing that they have the full backing, potentially, of the house. The committee system is valuable, and this would be an addition to the committee system that would be of significant value.

Constituents in Morialta would benefit, the house would benefit, and I know that the member the Ashford would benefit, because she truly wants to support the establishment of this committee. We know this because she has said so. I urge those Labor members who look forward to that caucus meeting, before potentially the last sitting week, to take her words in the Hansard to heart, to think about the consideration that she has given it, and to change the Labor Party's position, on what is, I think, the fifth occasion that this bill has had the opportunity to be passed, to reverse their position and support this bill.

I commend the member for Davenport who has been assiduous in supporting the establishment of this committee. He has not taken no for an answer, and when the government has kept saying no he has kept looking for ways to benefit his community in Davenport, which is similarly plagued by concerns of the fire danger season. He continues to stand up to his community, as any good member of parliament should. I urge those opposite to reconsider their position and to support the bill.

Debate adjourned on motion of Mrs Geraghty.

[Sitting suspended from 13:00 to 14:00]