House of Assembly Fifty-Third Parliament, Second Session (53-2) 53 2 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Bills Native Vegetation (Road Verges) Amendment Bill Native Vegetation (Road Verges) Amendment Bill Native Vegetation (Road Verges) Amendment Bill Second Reading Second Reading Adjourned debate on second reading. (Continued from 10 September 2015.) Dr McFETRIDGE House of Assembly Morphett Dr McFETRIDGE (Morphett) (10:40): Mr Speaker, I understand that, as the person who moved this bill, if I speak now I close the debate. The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: If the member for Morphett speaks he closes the debate. Dr McFETRIDGE House of Assembly Dr McFETRIDGE: Thank you, Mr Speaker. This bill is a very straightforward piece of legislation that has been put forward to this place. It is common-sense legislation. It is a reasonable piece of legislation. I use that word 'reasonable' deliberately, because the whole impetus behind this bill is to allow the people of South Australia who I trust to act in a reasonable manner to undertake reasonable activities to reduce the risks of bushfires impinging and threatening their lives and properties. As we approach the fire-danger season in South Australia in the not too many weeks away, certainly everybody will hopefully be getting their bushfire survival plans in place, but more importantly also to prepare their properties to reduce the threat and impacts of any bushfires that should start. We do not want to have to go through another Sampson Flat; we certainly do not want to have to go through an Ash Wednesday. Unfortunately, this year has been a year—in some ways fortunately for the farmers but unfortunately for firefighters—where there has been very good rains and there is a lot of growth. I said to the Chief Officer of the CFS the other day, 'You can just about hear the grass growing; the farmers will love it.' He just said to me, 'More fuel.' There is a real need to allow landowners to go out and clear to their expectations of what is reasonable to reduce the impact of fire on their property should a bushfire start. They have got some fuel reduction in place, they have got some firebreaks in place. They are going to be able to have some ability to concentrate on other tasks at hand, not just preventing a fire jumping the road. The Coroner's reports in the past on numbers of fires around the place have emphasised the fact that the big danger along roadsides is the huge build-up of fuel. This bill does not allow people to get a chainsaw out and clear every tree, or get the bulldozer out and reduce the verges back to bare earth. That is not what it is about. It is about allowing them to not have to go through myriad red tape and through councils. I know that the bureaucrats do not want to lose control. It is about keeping their jobs in many ways. I think it is no more than that, because I cannot see any reasonable argument coming from these people, but I can see the will and the need and the want of landowners to undertake reasonable clearing of the verges, reasonable fuel reduction, without having to go through all the unreasonable red tape that they have to go through now. CFS members have spoken to me about this at length. I know that members on the other side have said that the CFS does not agree with it. Well, that is not my impression speaking to many CFS members, at all ranks, from the baggy pants right through to brigade captains and higher ranks. When you explain to them about what the bill is all about, they understand and they say that this is a common-sense thing. I had a lady phone me the other day who said that her mobiles were out in the Sampson Flat bushfire. She could not use the landline either, because, while the underground telephone lines going through her property had very little fuel on them, they were fine, along the road verges where there were heavy fuel loads—and even though the telephone lines were quite deep (she said about two feet under the ground)—and because of the impact of heat those telephone lines, those landlines, had been destroyed. There was no means of contact for those people. That is just one small example of not only the impact of heavy fuel loads along road verges but, more importantly, the impact on human life. We have seen tragedy after tragedy, and I know that if there is another tragedy involving people trapped on roads because of heavy fuel loads on roads, I will be at the Coroner's inquiry to listen to the evidence that is given and to say, to the shame of this place, that reasonable steps were not allowed because of people's egotistical drive. I think it is a shame that egos get in the way of intellect in this place, and I really do not understand why we have to have this adversarial system all the time. To make sure that we get not just what people need but what they want and to trust people in South Australia is something we do not do enough in this place. This is a reasonable piece of legislation and I expect the people in this place to take the action they need in a reasonable manner to allow people to do what they want. The house divided on the second reading: Ayes	19 Noes	20 Majority	1 AYES Bell, T.S. Brock, G.G. Chapman, V.A. Duluk, S. Gardner, J.A.W. Goldsworthy, R.M. Griffiths, S.P. Knoll, S.K. McFetridge, D. (teller) Pederick, A.S. Pisoni, D.G. Redmond, I.M. Sanderson, R. Speirs, D. Tarzia, V.A. Treloar, P.A. van Holst Pellekaan, D.C. Whetstone, T.J. Wingard, C. NOES Bedford, F.E. Bettison, Z.L. Bignell, L.W.K. Caica, P. Close, S.E. Digance, A.F.C. Gee, J.P. Hildyard, K. Kenyon, T.R. (teller) Key, S.W. Koutsantonis, A. Mullighan, S.C. Odenwalder, L.K. Picton, C.J. Rankine, J.M. Rau, J.R. Snelling, J.J. Vlahos, L.A. Weatherill, J.W. Wortley, D. PAIRS Marshall, S.S. Cook, N. Pengilly, M.R. Piccolo, A. Williams, M.R. Hughes, E.J. Second reading thus negatived.