FIRE SERVICES

The Hon. S.G. WADE (14:35): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for Emergency Services a question about fire services.

Leave granted.

The Hon. S.G. WADE: When the opposition raised concerns in January that the government had plans to close fire services in the country, the government spokesman asserted that any emergency services planning work being done was routine. However, a number of fire service personnel have advised the opposition that a formal and substantial review is underway. The opposition is advised that a report on changes to the fire services of 12 South Australian communities was presented to the SAFECOM board late last year. Within the fire services the report has been dubbed 'The Top 12 Report'.

As a result, the opposition is advised that around 10 working parties have been established, involving SAFECOM and local and regional representatives of the affected emergency services. These working parties have not been given a copy of 'The Top 12 Report' in spite of requests that that be done, nor any other risk assessment, yet they are expected to look at the adequacy of services in the area. I ask the minister:

1. Will she advise the council of any review being done of CFS, MFS or SES services areas?

2. What communities will be affected?

3. What process will be followed in the review?

4. When will the communities to be affected be consulted in this process?

The Hon. CARMEL ZOLLO (Minister for Emergency Services, Minister for Correctional Services, Minister for Road Safety, Minister Assisting the Minister for Multicultural Affairs) (14:37): I thank the honourable member for his question. I think he mentioned the top 12. I can assure him that, as part of our presentation to the SAFECOM board, the volunteers' association and the unions, scenarios were painted to show how research methodology would work in the emergency services sector. I think it would be fair to say that it is important that any government undertake research to ensure that community risk is well managed.

It does not mean, of course, that we have hard data available here which has generated outcomes at this time. I think it is important and it is, obviously, an ongoing issue. It was used to illustrate scenarios and show how this methodology would be developed and used and, more importantly, what sort of information—such as response times and urban growth—would be factored in. So, to answer that: certainly no decision has been made and there is no data that I can provide. But, yes, as SAFECOM is responsible for the provision of a strategic plan for our state, it is necessary for it to have a research methodology to manage risk in our state. As I said, it will be used to analyse future service delivery needs across the state.

It is the responsible thing to do, to look at the population growth, the response times, industrial/commercial/residential growth and decline, and also to look at the ABS statistics that are available to all of us, data from Planning South Australia and any available data from councils that we may have. It is our job to look at where the services are and whether those services match the risks in our state. It is really about planning responsibly for future services.

So, there is no hard data at present and we are, as the honourable member said, still in the process of collating data and developing this research methodology. Certainly, government has not made any decisions or considered any options. What we are doing—

Members interjecting:

The Hon. CARMEL ZOLLO: I will come back to that. As I said, what we are doing is developing this research methodology which identifies the risks and advises government about the potential service delivery models that meet those risks. There have been no decisions made, and when the opposition spokesperson for emergency services goes on radio and scares people it is very irresponsible. Certainly, when government is at the stage where there is any hard data we will immediately consult with all stakeholders, including the United Firefighters Union, and, of course, the Country Fire Service Volunteers Association.

Indeed, the MFS is involved in the development of this research, so it is completely incorrect—as I think the honourable member went on radio to say—that the government has not consulted with the MFS or the union that represents its members.

Presentations have been made to the CFS Volunteers Association, the SES Volunteers Association and the United Firefighters Union about the theory of risk modelling—and I am certain they agree—and how SAFECOM is going to approach this task. Again, it is mischievous to say that decisions have been taken about closing stations. Indeed, it is entirely incorrect even to say that closing any stations is being considered. It is, as usual, scaremongering from the other side. What is on the table is really a very responsible research methodology, which any government should be proceeding with.