Legislative Council Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2) 52 2 Parliament of South Australia Legislative Council published Motions Community Safety and Emergency Services COMMUNITY SAFETY AND EMERGENCY SERVICES Adjourned debate on motion of Hon. R.L. Brokenshire: 1.	That a Select Committee of the Legislative Council be established to inquire into and report on community safety and emergency services in South Australia, including: (a)	The status of funding, resources and policy initiatives for community safety and emergency services in South Australia, viz: (i)	the South Australia Police; (ii)	the SA Ambulance Service; (iii)	the Country Fire Service; (iv)	the State Emergency Service; (v)	the Volunteer Marine Rescue; (vi)	the Metropolitan Fire Service; (vii)	the South Australian Fire and Emergency Services Commission; and (viii)	the rescue components of— (a)	Surf Life Saving South Australia (SLSSA); (b)	South Australia Police Rescue; and (c)	the State Rescue Helicopter Service. (b)	The process leading up to the creation of the new Community Safety Directorate and analysis of the structure and operations of the directorate; (c)	The historical and current adequacy of the Emergency Services Levy to meet emergency services funding and resource requirements; (d)	The accuracy and adequacy of crime statistics and other key performance indicators as a measure of community safety perceptions and realities; and (e)	Any other related matter. 2.	That standing order No. 389 be so far suspended as to enable the chairperson of the committee to have a deliberative vote only. 3.	That this council permits the select committee to authorise the disclosure or publication, as it sees fit, of any evidence or documents presented to the committee prior to such evidence being presented to the council. 4.	That standing order No. 396 be suspended to enable strangers to be admitted when the select committee is examining witnesses unless the committee otherwise resolves, but they shall be excluded when the committee is deliberating. (Continued from 5 September 2012.) The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY Legislative Council Leader of the Opposition The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY (Leader of the Opposition) (17:41): On behalf of the opposition, I indicate that we will be supporting the Hon. Robert Brokenshire's select committee— An honourable member Legislative Council An honourable member: Surprise, surprise! The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY Legislative Council The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY: Surprise, surprise—well, I know that members opposite enjoy select committees and the new Hon. Mr Maher is here. He needs to get involved in as many select committees and I think it is only fair he should take his share, so I would hope that government members do make sure he embraces them. As members would be aware, it was under the Liberal government that the emergency services levy was created. It is over a decade or more—it is probably closer to 15 years—since it was first established. If you look at the Hon. Rob Brokenshire's motion, the select committee is to inquire into and report on community safety and emergency services in South Australia including the status of funding, resources and policy initiatives for police, ambulance service, Country Fire Service, State Emergency Service, Volunteer Marine Rescue, Metropolitan Fire Service, South Australia and Fire and Emergency Services Commission and the rescue components of Surf Life Saving South Australia, South Australia Police Rescue, the State Rescue Helicopter; the process leading up to the creation of the community safety directorate and analysis of the structure of that directorate; historical and current adequacy of the emergency services levy; the accuracy and adequacy of crime statistics; and any other related matter. Members can see that it will be quite a quite a wideranging select committee but the opposition feels that it is important to perhaps have a look at the funding mechanism, the emergency services levy, as to exactly whether it is adequate, how it compares to other states and the level of service across all of those areas. The Hon. Carmel Zollo Legislative Council The Hon. Carmel Zollo: Are you suggesting we increase it? The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY Legislative Council The Hon. D.W. RIDGWAY: There was an interjection by the Hon. Carmel Zollo there. I was actually reading an important text message—and the Hon. Russell Wortley is not here—that I will read out in a minute because it does involve some emergency services workers I want to congratulate. I did attend three community safety forums that the Leader of the Opposition held after the last election—one up north, one out west and one down south. I think the community is just a little concerned about community safety and I would hope that the select committee does look at some of those aspects of everyday, down every street type safety and ways that we might be able to give some comfort to locals, whether it is hoon driving or just antisocial behaviour that makes people not feel safe out in the street. I think there are components not only of the funding and the operation of what is visible—the police, the ambulance service and all the fire services—but also the community safety aspects of providing those emergency services. I referred to my phone. Some weeks ago at our house in Mitcham my mother-in-law collapsed, and for the first time ever in my life I had to dial 000. I would like to pay tribute to the paramedic who turned up in a very, very quick amount of time. It was very impressive how quickly they arrived. I obviously explained where we were and by the time I went downstairs and opened the front door, it seemed like probably only a minute before I could hear the siren coming, and she was there in a very short time. Then, of course, it was not long before the ambulance turned up. I sent my wife a text to ask her the names particularly of the two staff in the ambulance. I think they were Ashleigh and Tanya from the Parkside ambulance station. I hope I have those names correct, but we were delighted as a family with the very quick response that we received to an emergency call. As I said, it was the first time in my life that I had dialled 000 and I thought that the service and the system worked extremely well. I would like to pay tribute to those people for the rapid response they gave us, and I would also like to report that my mother-in-law has made a good recovery and is in very good health. With those few words, I indicate that the opposition will be supporting the Hon. Robert Brokenshire's motion. The Hon. G.A. KANDELAARS Legislative Council The Hon. G.A. KANDELAARS (17:46): It will be no surprise to those in the chamber that the government opposes the motion. There is nothing to be gained by establishing another level of review of emergency services funding. This is one of the most scrutinised areas of government, and another committee will simply take staff away from their vital roles for political purposes when they would otherwise be focused on keeping our community safe. The state government allocates $227 million to support our emergency services, compared to just $104 million when the Hon. Robert Brokenshire was the emergency services minister in the Liberal government when they were last in power in 2001-02. That is over a hundred per cent increase in funding in this area. In that time it has allowed the government to help upgrade 61 CFS stations, 11 MFS stations, 20 SES units and eight surf lifesaving facilities. Funding for the areas listed by the honourable member is provided through the emergency services fund, of which the emergency services levy will contribute $126.4 million this financial year. The set rate and allocation of funding is already scrutinised thoroughly and endorsed by the existing parliamentary standing committee, the Economic and Finance Committee. The budget for the emergency services sector and other programs funded through the emergency services levy are also examined by the parliamentary select committee, the Budget and Finance Committee, where expenditure is scrutinised. Budget papers are scrutinised and income and expenditure reviewed during the annual estimates process. These same budgets are further scrutinised annually by the Auditor-General. The state government has established, through the passage and subsequent review of the Fire and Emergency Services Act, the South Australian Fire and Emergency Services Commission (SAFECOM). This body has accountability and responsibility for overseeing the allocation of resources within the sector, with oversight provided by an independent board. I also note that the honourable member has amended his original terms of reference to now include the scrutiny of the Community Safety Directorate. This has been established to further assist our ability to plan, respond and recover from a wide range of safety issues, such as fires, natural disasters, crime, offender management and road safety, while building community resilience. In introducing this reform, the government has been very keen to use the directorate as an instrument to look at the sector closely and to iron out inefficiencies and leverage opportunities for collaboration across the sector so that resources can be better focused. This change does not improve the initial motion. Essentially, it is now proposed that there be a scrutiny of the scrutineers which amounts to a waste of resources and a waste of time for our emergency services personnel. Another committee will not add any value to what is already a well audited sector. This extra level of bureaucracy will divert resources away from core business that is keeping our communities safe. To answer frivolous political questions may massage a few political egos but it fails in making not a single South Australian safer. This committee will unnecessarily create another level of bureaucracy in a sector that has already had sufficient levels of review. Before members vote on the need to divert life-saving resources away from the emergency services sector to establish a talkfest they should give some thought to the achievements made in recent years in making South Australia a safer place and then ask themselves if they want to hinder progress. The Hon. A. BRESSINGTON Legislative Council The Hon. A. BRESSINGTON (17:51): I rise to indicate my support for Family First's motion to establish a select committee to look at the state's emergency services with a particular focus on their funding and the adequacy of the Emergency Services Levy but also on each service's resource and policy initiatives. I am pleased that all the state's emergency services have been specifically referred to and, as such, the committee will not just focus on the major services like the police, SA Ambulance, the MFS and CFS. Smaller but no less vital services such as Surf Life Saving South Australia, the state rescue helicopter service and Volunteer Marine Rescue must be part of such a review. In the lead-up to what will inevitably be another law and order election, I also believe it is appropriate for this parliament to turn its attention to crime reporting and statistics which will inevitably be relied on by the government in its re-election campaign. This was foreshadowed yesterday by the Premier's announcement that victim-reported crime has purportedly fallen for the fifth year in a row, which is certainly not reflected in what I hear from my constituents. As we know from the Australian Bureau of Statistics General Social Survey, South Australian victims of violent crime are far less likely to report the offence than their interstate counterparts which, of course, seriously skews the data. This could obviously come back to the policy initiatives of the South Australia Police and whether sufficient efforts are made to encourage our constituents to report offences. I recall that about six years ago I did a doorknock of about 170 houses out north because of property damage and graffiti and all the rest of it. Of those 170-odd houses that I doorknocked, one of the questions was, 'Would you be inclined to report the crime to the police?' The overall response was, 'No,' by some 80 per cent and when asked why, again, the resounding response was, 'Well, we report it, they come out and then tell us to claim it on our insurance.' The committee may also be able to shed some light on why people are so reluctant to report offences to the police in the first place. I also look forward to the committee's insight into the new community safety directorate and, in particular, exactly what function this office will serve and what it is hoped it will achieve. With that said, I indicate my support for the motion and look forward to the committee's report. The Hon. T.A. FRANKS Legislative Council The Hon. T.A. FRANKS (17:54): I rise to indicate that the Greens will also be supporting this motion moved by the Hon. Robert Brokenshire who first raised these issues with me, I think possibly a year ago, if not more. We were supportive then and we remain supportive with broader terms of reference. Certainly, if the government believe they have a great story to tell then they will enjoy hearing what the workers and volunteers in this sector have to say. I suspect, having been lobbied strongly to support this motion and to support the set-up of this select committee, perhaps there are some voices out there that disagree with what the government has put before the council today. I also note that while, yes, there is scrutiny in budget estimates of this area and every other portfolio area, the Legislative Council is never involved in the estimates process, which does in fact amount to a mere few minutes for each portfolio area. I do not think that is an appropriate level of scrutiny and I certainly welcome the setting up of this select committee. On behalf of the Greens, we are prepared to ensure that it is populated, if that is the case, and we look forward to focused attention on law and order that gets away from the polemics and the politics of talking about law and order and actually ensuring that people are properly resourced and that we have the best outcomes for real community safety in South Australia. The Hon. B.V. FINNIGAN Legislative Council The Hon. B.V. FINNIGAN (17:55): In the past, when I have made contributions on whether or not select committees should be set up, I have tended to be quite critical of the establishment of various select committees, not simply because I was then a member of the government but because most select committees seem to be set up with a political purpose in mind. Everyone here is a politician, so that is not surprising, but I think the role of a select committee, or any committee, needs to be to look at something objectively on the evidence, rather than, as often seems to be the case, where the outcome is thought of before the committee has even been established. The Hon. Ms Franks, and other members, raised the issue of scrutiny of finances and budgets. That is, obviously, a considerable part of what this select committee intends to do. In that regard, there is a weakness in the system we have in South Australia in estimates committees being committees only of the lower house and there being no proper role in budget scrutiny for the Legislative Council. Most jurisdictions in Australia, like the Senate, as we know, but also most state upper houses, have quite an extensive estimates committee process, either tied to the budget or operating on a regular timetable. When the Hon. Mr Lucas moved to establish the Budget and Finance Committee I was certainly critical, and still am in the sense that it really acts like a standing committee not a select committee of this council. I understand why that decision was made because, obviously, the opposition was able to get support in this council for having the Budget and Finance Committee, which they were not able to do, I assume, in the lower house. It is over 20 years since the parliamentary committee system was thoroughly reviewed and the current act enacted. I think a review of the whole system and a step back to see: does it serve the needs of the parliament, is really what is required. Obviously, that is beyond the scope of this particular motion but it seems to me, if you look at the policy areas that are covered by standing committees, there are a lot of areas that seem to be neglected or left out. If you look at the structure of many other parliaments' committees they tend to be more thorough. I think some of the standing committees we have now were set up to meet the particular needs or demands of particular members, particularly when you have a minority government. In relation to this committee, I note there are very extensive terms of reference and to cover the scope of what is in this motion would require a royal commission, just about, because there is an awful lot in there. It seems to me there is a bit of a grab bag of issues. We have funding and resources issues, the Community Safety Directorate, whether the emergency services levy is adequate and then the adequacy and accuracy of crime statistics thrown in. So, it seems to me that it is a very broad committee that, realistically, could not, I do not think, come up with a report that would serve the interests of this policy area, ultimately because I think it is too unfocused. I know that when those proposing select committees make their second reading speech, often what they talk about is not necessarily borne out by the actual wording of the motion. Sometimes, when the honourable member proposing the select committee speaks to the motion, it is obviously clear that they have a particular focus in mind, which is not necessarily what comes across in the wording of the motion itself. I know that the Hon. Mr Brokenshire is concerned about particular issues, and some of those are identified. However, the tremendous scope of this committee to look at the funding, resources and policies of all our emergency services, as well as the emergency services levy and those other matters, is really more than a select committee of the house can be expected to bear. I am afraid I will be disappointing the Hon. Mr Brokenshire, but I will not be supporting this motion, although it is clear that it will go through anyway. I think that the work of a select committee needs to be more focused than the particular motion that is proposed here. The Hon. J.A. DARLEY Legislative Council The Hon. J.A. DARLEY (18:01): I indicate that I will be supporting the Hon. Robert Brokenshire's motion. The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE Legislative Council The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE (18:01): I will be brief; I did have quite a long speech on this motion but, from the contribution of all honourable members, it appears that this committee will be approved by the Legislative Council, therefore I will save my energies and efforts for working with my colleagues. I want to briefly sum up, if I may. First and foremost, I thank all my colleagues for their contribution. This is a broad committee, but it is an important committee. Volunteers are at stake here, for one. Lives are at stake, and funding is a real issue. Of course, the Premier (Hon. Jay Weatherill), when he became Premier, along with the minister, the Hon. Jennifer Rankine, changed the whole format of the structure of the police and emergency services to a focus to one he described in his discussions as the community safety area. Of course, we already have a select committee into Correctional Services. This will enable us as a committee to be able to have a detailed look at all other aspects of this area, including, as the Hon. Ann Bressington said, the Community Safety Directorate, which I think is an important area. I added an addendum to this motion because that came from left field; it came after we had given notice about this committee. I have had some discussion with a range of people in emergency and policing services, who expressed some concerns about this issue. I think it is appropriate that the parliament, through the Legislative Council, democratically investigate that issue. Lots of volunteers have talked about concerns they have with training, plant and equipment. We have seen the government make a decision in recent years to extend the life of fire trucks against the recommendations of the Coroner after Ash Wednesday. This committee will be up and running as we sadly focus on the 30^th anniversary of Ash Wednesday in February next year. We will also be facing high fuel loads. I think this committee is very relevant. I am disappointed that the government has again taken a negative 'it knows best' approach. There may well be, I trust, some very good outcomes and recommendations in the final report of this committee, which will actually assist the government to provide better community safety in all areas. Clearly, we know that a lot of volunteers are expressing concern to many of us in this house. I know it is going to be a big job for the committee; I know that it is going to take some time. It is also appropriate because, by early 2014, at or around the time of the next election, the whole act is due for review, analysis and debate in the parliament. So, I think that it is appropriate that crossbenchers and the major parties, through their representatives, have an opportunity to transparently look at this issue and to give those people in the know the opportunity, under parliamentary privilege, to let us know how they think the service area of SAPOL and emergency services is tracking at this point in time, as nothing is more important than the protection of life and property. I commend the motion to the house. Motion carried. The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE Legislative Council The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE (18:05): I move: That the select committee consist of the Hon. Kyam Maher, the Hon. John Dawkins, the Hon. Tammy Franks, the Hon. Jing Lee and the mover. Motion carried. The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE Legislative Council The Hon. R.L. BROKENSHIRE: I move: That the select committee have power to send for persons, papers and records, to adjourn from place to place and to report on 28 November 2012. Motion carried.