HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3)
2009-12-02 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Parliamentary Committees

ECONOMIC AND FINANCE COMMITTEE: EMERGENCY SERVICES LEVY

Adjourned debate on motion of Hon. P.L. White:

That the 69th report of the Economic and Finance Committee, entitled Emergency Services Levy 2009-10, be noted.

(Continued from 28 October 2009. Page 4498.)

Mr GOLDSWORTHY (Kavel) (17:10): As I am a member of the esteemed Economic and Finance Committee—

The Hon. M.J. Atkinson: And a former banker.

Mr GOLDSWORTHY: —and a former banker; indeed, Attorney-General—as is the norm, the emergency services levy review comes before the committee on an annual basis. It is a requirement under the act that the Economic and Finance Committee has oversight of the emergency services levy. The member for Taylor is the Presiding Member and, obviously, she has spoken to the report. As usual, a plethora of departmental officers—the Chief Officer of the CFS, the MFS, the commissioner of SAFECOM and a whole range of other bureaucratic personnel—come along. The members of the committee are out-numbered about five to one with the number of bureaucrats, and so on, who come along potentially to answer any question that may be put to them by members of the committee.

From memory, the setting of the levy was not an extraordinary issue; it was not out of the realms of normality in terms of setting the levy. Really, the levy itself has been a real boon to emergency services here in South Australia. I ask the house to indulge me a little to enable me to expand on my comments in relation to the emergency services levy itself. It was a policy initiative of the previous Liberal government. Its introduction did generate considerable debate in the community and in this place and the other place. However, it really has shown that it was the right policy because the emergency services, particularly the CFS, were struggling and under considerable pressure to adequately resource themselves.

The Hon. M.J. Atkinson interjecting:

Mr GOLDSWORTHY: I know that, as a result of the poor management of the Bannon government—and you have got me onto another train of thought, Attorney; I was not going down this track, but you have encouraged me now—the CFS was, I think, something like $10 million—

The Hon. G.M. Gunn: $13 million.

Mr GOLDSWORTHY: The member for Stuart has a good corporate memory. The CFS was $13 million in debt, and it was struggling to service that debt; hence, it was starved of money, and that is not an exaggeration. One of my brigades in my electorate at the time—

Mr Pengilly: I was the chairman.

Mr GOLDSWORTHY: Indeed, you were, member for Finniss—could not afford the diesel fuel—

The Hon. M.J. Atkinson interjecting:

Mr GOLDSWORTHY: I am glad that you recognise my correct status, Mick—to run both its trucks; that is how starved of resources and funds the CFS was time. It was difficult policy to manage at the time; however, as is the hallmark of many Liberal governments (and we saw this through the Howard government years), difficult policy debate does not necessarily mean that it is not good policy to be implemented.

We have seen expansion of the resources, the services and the equipment made available to the CFS, in terms of the firefighting aircraft that have come on stream and the air-crane helicopter that comes over from Europe and North America every summer to be based here permanently over our bushfire season, as a result of the implementation of the emergency services levy.

I am obviously pleased to support the report, and I look forward to the state of South Australia being kept as safe and as secure as it possibly can be by the outstanding contribution made by the emergency services.

The Hon. G.M. GUNN (Stuart) (17:17): I speak to this report because I was one of those who had some involvement in imposing the emergency services levy. At the time, it was not a particularly popular decision, but it has been proved beyond doubt to be the correct decision. As you drive around the state, you can see not only vast improvements in the facilities the Country Fire Service and the SES have to carry out their important role but also the provision of trucks.

It was quite unreasonable and untenable that certain large organisations were insuring offshore in order to avoid paying the stamp duty levy for fire protection, while the small householder down the street was paying it, but these people expected to get the service. So, after a great deal of consultation and consideration, the decision was made to impose the levy.

I remember people being less than charitable towards me about this and, although I am not one to blow open a fight, I had to say to them that, if their family was stuck in a car in the middle of the night, they would want somebody with the jaws of life to get them out. We could not expect to continue to encourage volunteers to do their work if they did not have reasonable equipment.

It is a fairly small amount, and I was of the view that we would be better served by having this. Unfortunately, nothing comes free and, if you want a service, you have to pay for it. We now need to take the next step and put some sensible provisions in the law to allow people to take action to mitigate the effects of bushfire, such as decent firebreaks and so on, and earlier today I was told by the Mayor of Port Lincoln that a large fire is burning in the Cowell district this afternoon.

I am happy to support this proposal, and I think that, in the future, there is a need for it to continue. I believe that we need to continue to upgrade and have the latest technology available to protect the community against bushfire.

Mr PENGILLY (Finniss) (17:20): I note the member for Stuart's most worthwhile comments, as well as those made by the member for Kavel and the member for Hammond. When the levy was introduced, it was highly controversial, and I should know because I had my head chopped off over it. The fact of the matter was that the Country Fire Service board at the time was totally unable to operate properly because of the massive $13 million debt which was hanging over our head and which we had to service.

It made the role of the Country Fire Service board at that time almost impossible; it was a bit like try to run a kindergarten without adequate funding. The levy was introduced and put into place in due course and, as the member for Stuart said, the jaws of life and so on have been funded from it.

However, we still do not have enough funding to do everything that should be done in emergency services, and I will talk briefly about the Country Fire Service and the brigade of which I have been a member for many years. It has a truck that is well over 20 years old and, although it is in pretty reasonable condition, its quality pales against what is available now. It is always half a gear short, and the technology of latter-day trucks is vastly superior.

I sometimes query (and I have had this discussion with Mr Euan Ferguson) the number of vehicles that CFS volunteers are running around in as group vehicles. It almost seems to be overkill—

Mr Goldsworthy: Group officers.

Mr PENGILLY: Yes; group officers and below. A number of them have these vehicles. I think we need to keep a bit of an eye on just what they use them for. They should be restricted, in my view, to serving the Country Fire Service and should not be used as private vehicles. If you drive around South Australia you see them out and about here, there and everywhere. I can recall during the winter seeing one out on the road south of Port Augusta when it was about minus 3º and raining, and you wonder what on earth it was doing at about 2 o'clock in the afternoon. However, I am sure that—

The Hon. M.J. Atkinson: It's unlikely to be raining at minus 3º.

Mr PENGILLY: No; you are quite right. Perhaps it was just over zero.

Mr Goldsworthy interjecting:

Mr PENGILLY: That is right. So, it has been beneficial. I think we should continue to monitor where the levy is going and how it is being used, but I commend the report.

Mr PEDERICK (Hammond) (17:23): I also want to acknowledge the report of the Economic and Finance Committee with respect to the emergency services levy. I wish to add my comments about the upgrades that have been possible with respect to emergency services, especially coming from a farming area, as I do, which is an area covered by the CFS. Recently, my own brigade of Coomandook has upgraded its old truck to a new truck. In a sense, it was a sad day, because the old fire truck was only about 20 years old. It still had a 3,000 litre tank and was in very good order. I cannot remember how many kilometres it had done, but it would have made a very good unit for anyone who purchased it. I do not know whether it is being used somewhere else in the CFS ranks. The beauty of it was that you could jump on the back from the rear of the vehicle but, obviously, because of occupational health and safety concerns—

Mr Pengilly: We used to do that on farm utes.

Mr PEDERICK: —yes—the trucks are entered from the side. Certainly, the new trucks are an upgrade. The whole crew can fit in the dual cab style cabin, and there is even a few minutes' supply of oxygen. I just hope I am not in the truck when it hits the fan: you are really in strife if you have to use that. One extremely important priority for the survival of firefighters when conditions are extreme is protecting the firefighters in the cab, and there are sprinklers mounted around the cab and also fire resistant curtains that can be brought down when there is a burn-over. I note that it is compulsory for every CFS volunteer to participate in a burn-over drill, no matter what piece of equipment they have, so that everyone knows how to survive in a very bad bushfire.

Certainly, these upgrades are far better than the old fire truck. Essentially, all we had was a fire blanket in the cab. If someone was caught in the cab in a bad fire they would have to get underneath it with whomever else was in the cab and try to survive. Certainly, the upgrades have been well received and we have seen improvements. I also note that a water tanker for the group has recently been stationed at my local brigade at Coomandook, so that gives us added fire protection in the Upper South-East and the Mallee.

You have to be involved in a big fire operation like the one on Kangaroo Island (in the electorate of the member for Finniss) a couple of years ago to realise how much emergency services do for this state and this country. There were many fire units from all over South Australia on the island and also trucks from Victoria and New South Wales. This has also happened with other big firefighting incidents elsewhere in South Australia, where trucks from the Eastern States have come over to assist our firefighters. I note that our firefighters have been only too keen when given the call to go to the east to assist in major incidents.

I certainly endorse this motion acknowledging the emergency services levy. It has upgraded things such as communications in fire trucks. I do not think there could be a worse position in a fire truck than to be the radio operator and have three radios barking at you in extreme situations.

Mr Pengilly: Turn two off!

Mr PEDERICK: Yes. It can be quite distracting. Obviously, communication is the key. There are many people trying to talk to each other, and there can be a lot of activity taking place—aerial bombers saving critical places such as infrastructure, homes, shedding, and so on. It is all happening. As I said, it can be confusing, but it is absolutely vital that people keep in touch. Certainly, with the equipment and the upgrades that go on and on, it does a lot for the firefighters of this state.

I note that a few years ago several trucks were built in Queensland by Mills-Tui. They were not too flash at all, and some of those trucks when delivered had 150 faults; they just were not up to speed. Meningie had one which failed on its first trip and Ceduna received one which was not any good. Let us just hope that more due diligence is completed when contracts are given out for new fire trucks. Certainly, I commend the report.

The Hon. P.L. WHITE (Taylor) (17:29): I thank members for their contribution. It is an obligation of our committee to inquire into the emergency services levy as set each year, and it is one that we perform with some diligence.

In closing the debate, I would like to respond to comments made on 28 October by the member for Waite. In supporting the report and commenting on its positive value, he made some criticism about the motions before our committee. For the record, I would like to make it clear that two other references are before the Economic and Finance Committee. We are in the process of concluding one inquiry and will report shortly—hopefully tomorrow—and in relation to the other inquiry we are at the stage of an interim report, but it is a much larger inquiry that will not be completed in this time frame.

The first inquiry to which I referred is an inquiry into warranties affecting farm machinery. That inquiry is welcomed by the farming sector and the South Australian Farmers Federation. I hope that the proposals we put forward will aid that sector in an area of consumer law.

The second inquiry that the committee is currently undertaking is an inquiry into renewable energy, specifically the barriers to investment and the regulatory impediments to positioning South Australia as a leader in clean energy. They are two very important inquiries. One is nearing completion and the other is a much larger inquiry which is ongoing.

Motion carried.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT