HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2)
2013-02-07 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

PARLIAMENTARY COMMITTEES (NATURAL DISASTERS COMMITTEE) (NO. 2) AMENDMENT BILL

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 20 September 2012.)

Mr TRELOAR (Flinders) (10:50): I rise today to speak in support of this bill put to the parliament by the member for Davenport, and I speak today in my role as shadow minister for emergency services, as the member for Flinders, and also as one who has experienced a significant natural disaster in this state.

I support this bill wholeheartedly and I commend the member for Davenport for his perseverance in this matter. He has recognised for some time the necessity for a change in the functions of the committee structure in this parliament, with a view to establishing a committee to take oversight of the way in which we as a state prepare, respond and cope with the effects of natural disasters, because they do occur, although from time to time we become quite comfortable in this state.

We are not often exposed to major earthquakes, floods or tsunamis, for example, but often we are faced with bushfires and, more often than not, that is the natural disaster that we are going to be exposed to. I know the member for Davenport has some vulnerable territory within his electorate, which he has repeatedly raised concerns about, and that probably is one of the reasons why he has come to this parliament with this proposal.

The committees of parliament do perform a vitally important role in the way in which this parliament runs, but, further to that, in the way this state is governed. Response to natural disaster is not necessarily a response of government: it is a response of parliament and, as such, I think we need to have the ability in a multiparty and bipartisan way to have input and consider matters which concern natural disasters.

Preparedness and response times are paramount in natural disasters. Often the landscape changes over years and people become complacent. I have noticed that, with regard to bushfires, they appear to be occurring with more regularity, and one thing I do note is that people and populations are not always as ready for the effects or the impact of bushfires as they might be.

The landscape is also changing; I think fuel loads are changing; I think the way the fuel combusts is changing; and I see that in the way the vegetation has changed over the last 30 years. The native veg and the re-established vegetation is adding to the fuel load. I think changing farming practices have also added to fuel loads and I think this comes together to add to an increased fire risk right across the state.

My suggestion is that we should seriously consider this proposal to establish another committee, and I do sincerely hope that the government decides to support this bill because I think it is of paramount importance to the wellbeing and safety of the people in this state. So congratulations to the member for Davenport and I do support the bill.

The Hon. S.W. KEY (Ashford) (10:54): I rise to speak on this bill because I have very strong views about it, but also to say that I am not in a position to support the bill. However, I would like to add to the debate this morning. I was very disturbed when we had the opportunity to make our inquiry into the Mitcham Hills area and to witness the video about the Canberra fires. That was a very chilling experience, and I think that yesterday the member for Frome outlined the feelings of all us, perhaps, on the Natural Resources Committee when we witnessed that fire.

Unfortunately, along with a number of members in this place, my family was also connected to the Ash Wednesday disaster. My mother was the chief social worker in the Hills and I think she worked very closely with the member for Davenport's father, in particular, in looking at a lot of the relief and the follow-up that was necessary as result of that terrible incident. My husband's house in Bridgwater also partly burnt down, so he was pretty much involved in the house having to be rebuilt. Fortunately, no-one in our family, although they are mainly Hills dwellers, died in that terrible tragedy, but a number of people we knew did lose their lives, so for our family and for my husband's family it was a very difficult time. I know that there are a number of members in this house who were also touched very directly by that situation.

Being the member for Ashford, I am very aware of other disasters, particularly in relation to stormwater, and the real concerns there are about that. Over the 15 years I have been in parliament I have been to a number of meetings, in particular with the former member and the current member for Unley. I know that the member for Davenport has also been to a lot of meetings, and as have the members for Waite, Colton and West Torrens. We are all in what would be seen as stormwater-targeted areas, and if there is a one-in-50 or one-in-100 year event we are going to have really big problems—particularly in West Torrens, Ashford, Colton and probably Unley as well.

The other experience I had that was very difficult—and this was as minister for higher education—was the Port Lincoln fires and going and revisiting the projects that had been set up by TAFE as well as by SA Works and seeing that there was absolutely nothing left. At one of the fantastic Aboriginal projects that had been set up, looking at horticulture, I was presented with what remained of the tractor. It was just a piece of metal; I still have it, and it is just a flat piece of metal. That was all that was left from the tractor, so you can just imagine what happened to the rest of the project.

I have had the honour of being on the Natural Resources Committee now for two sessions of parliament, and Graham Gunn, the then member for Stuart, was very assertive in the previous committee in talking about the need to prepare for fire, and he certainly had debate with a lot of us about native vegetation. I must say that by the end of being on that committee with Graham Gunn for four years I felt as if I had some education in the need to have that preparedness, particularly in regard to fires. Along with the member for Colton, he was one of the few people in the parliament at the time who had regularly fought fires. I know there are a number of members now in the house who have also, unfortunately, had that experience and who are members of country fire services—

Mr Pengilly interjecting:

The Hon. S.W. KEY: And are still doing it, as the member for Finniss has said. In fact, when I look over at all of the members on the other side—the member for Mount Gambier and the member for Hammond, to mention just a couple—all of them, unfortunately, have that extended experience.

Although I lived in Canberra only very briefly, I visited Canberra after the fires there and, as I said, more recently I saw the DVD, and just the devastation of what was basically an urban fire was quite chilling. It has taken a long time to people who were caught up in that situation to recover.

I think that the Natural Resources Committee and the Environment, Resources and Development Committee have more than enough work to do. I think there is an opportunity to look at natural disasters in this parliament, not to interfere with what is already in place by the different emergency services and the police, who I understand meet regularly and have a plan, but also to provide some focus and probably some pressure with regard to funds in this particular area. I think it is important that parliamentary committees do not interfere but, if we look at the track record of our other parliamentary committees, it is an opportunity to have a forum to discuss particular issues. It seems to me that it would be a good idea, as initiated by the member for Davenport, to have that fora in this place.

For a long time now the member for Florey has been talking about what disaster plans are available, what sort of concentration we have in different areas and, if there is a disaster, what does the public know to do. We are not just talking about bushfires—which is, of course, something that we are all concerned about—but other disasters that may happen. It might be a chemical spill, it might be an earthquake. South Australia, particularly Adelaide, is an earthquake-prone area, so what the hell do we do if we are in that situation? So, again, I think a committee that provides that forum could actually look at those situations and make sure that they are publicised so that people know what they are supposed to be doing.

I was in the bar a bit earlier talking with other members about the fact that the member for Bragg and I are on the Defence Reserves Support Council. We get regular reports at our meetings about the work the reserves do in natural disasters. It is quite chilling to think about the number of disasters, particularly in the last two years, that the reserves have been called out to assist with. The defence services actually do take over in a lot of these instances, but they are also supported not only by emergency services staff and volunteers, but also the reserves council.

Again, it seems to me that, if there was a focus in parliament on discussing what is happening and where things are going, we may get a better understanding of the fabulous work that is done in South Australia, not only in our own state but elsewhere. As I said, I am not in a position to support this proposal from the member for Davenport, but I think it is a really good idea.

Mr WILLIAMS (MacKillop) (11:03): I rise to indicate that I certainly do support this matter that has been brought to the attention of the house by the member for Davenport, who has long been an advocate, not surprisingly, given the seat he represents and his background of being a lifelong resident of the Adelaide Hills.

In nine days, it will be the 30th anniversary of the 1983 Ash Wednesday bushfires, as the previous speaker just mentioned. I have first-hand knowledge and experience of out-of-control bushfires and the devastation and trauma that can come from them. They are not the only natural disaster, and the member for Ashford also talked about flooding, and that is something that people should be aware of in metropolitan Adelaide.

An honourable member interjecting:

Mr WILLIAMS: My colleague has just mentioned earthquake. Let us not forget that South Australia is subject to earthquakes. Being a not irregular visitor to Christchurch and New Zealand, I am very well aware of the devastation that can occur to a modern city from an earthquake.

The member for Flinders suggested that things are different and that things are changing, and there is no doubt that things are changing. I will talk about my experiences and my understanding of my own electorate with regard to bushfires, which I think is the most dangerous of the potential natural disasters which may impact on my electorate. The member for Flinders talked about roadside fuel loads. When I was a boy growing up there were always a couple of locals who had a mob of livestock, generally sheep, that continually moved around the district, and the roadside vegetation was like the average backyard lawn.

Let me say that the roads I am talking about do not have a lot of native vegetation on them but it is basically annual grasses which grow up to a metre or more tall, and that is the way they stay. I am talking about country roads. A lot of them are three chain roads—they are not narrow roads—which, again, is a hangover from the old days when there was a lot of stock movement along the roads, and they are a haven for a rampant bushfire. They will carry a bushfire very quickly throughout the landscape because of the amount of fuel that has built up along those roads.

The other thing I think that has significantly changed in recent years, which we did not contend with 30, 40 or 50 years ago, is ignition sources. Those of us who are wary of bushfires know that you need a combination of factors to have a bushfire and one of them is an ignition source as a way of starting a fire. For some reason which, to a significant degree, escapes my comprehension, we have a number of people in our community who, for some weird reason, go about with a packet of matches in their pocket. For some crazy reason something they are driven to do is to start a bushfire.

The way that we have handled mental health issues in our community in recent years I think has added greatly to this particular risk. The way that we have moved people suffering from mental health diseases back into the community obviously has caused much anxiety for those of us who are threatened and very aware of and anxious about the potential for bushfire, particularly in our rural areas. That is something that has changed dramatically over the last 30 or 40 years.

I have had a very great interest in this matter. The previous member mentioned the Hon. Graham Gunn. Graham and I had many discussions and, between us, endeavoured to make a number of amendments to the relevant legislation, particularly that governing the Country Fire Service. We had some success—mixed success I guess—but through those processes I have read a lot of reports that have been commissioned following major disaster events in South Australia. There were reports after fires at Mount Remarkable National Park and, obviously, the Ash Wednesday fires, and the fires on Kangaroo Island. If members wish to seek them out there are innumerable reports that were written following these events and, obviously, numerous recommendations were made. The reality is that only a limited number of those recommendations have actually been followed through by the government of the day.

There are many things that we could and should be doing differently. I had a lengthy discussion with a reporter recently on these matters because, as I said, of the impending 30th anniversary of the Ash Wednesday bushfires. I went through a number of things that I thought, as a parliament, we should be attending to. Having a committee devoted to this work is something which would, once and for all, go a long way in addressing some of the matters which, I guess, have just been allowed to go along without the attention of the parliament.

One of the things, for example, that I disagreed with during the tenure of the current government was that we changed the way that we declare a state of emergency in South Australia. It is no longer the minister or the executive government that is responsible for declaring a state of emergency. That is now being pushed off to a bureaucrat. I totally disagree with that. I think the accountability for that function and the things that surround those things should be held by the executive government and a minister, because I think that will mean it is much more responsive.

They are the sort of things I think we should be addressing and I think that is why a committee of this nature again will ensure that the government of the day is more responsive to natural disasters, and I mean in a proactive way. It is all well and good to come along after a natural disaster and act in a way to help out the community that has been adversely affected and to do whatever you can. It is something completely different to be proactive and to minimise the risk to our community.

Again, the member for Ashford has talked about the potential for flooding. We all know that there is a huge potential for very serious flooding on the Adelaide plains, but nothing has been done about it year after year after year. I think if that does occur, certainly the current government is culpable because they have acknowledged the issue but they have been willing to sit back and have the attitude of, 'Maybe if it occurs, you know, there's a risk and if it does occur, we'll come along and help clean up the mess afterwards.'

I think the current government will be culpable because they have acknowledged the problem and have not proactively minimised the risk. It is certainly the same with other potential natural disasters and the one obviously that I am most interested in is bushfire. There are a lot of things we can do to minimise the risk of bushfire. I certainly have very serious concerns about the message—or part of the message, at least—that we are giving to our community about what to do in the case of a bushfire.

I think the message going out is somewhat mixed and, from personal experience, I think the worst thing is that we will have a real disaster on our hands, particularly in closely settled areas like the Adelaide Hills, if people are panicked to get in their car and get on the road in the face of a bushfire. I think that is the worst thing. I like the message: 'If you are going to leave, leave early.' I like that bit but we need to reinforce it. If you are going to do that, you have to get out well before there is any hint of smoke on the horizon because if you start to move about on the roads once the bushfire is underway, we are calling for a disaster to occur.

I am delighted that the member has again brought this matter before the house and I certainly hope that the government takes this matter very seriously and ends up coming to a position of support for this because I think it is very important to South Australia. I commend the bill to the house.

Mr PEGLER (Mount Gambier) (11:12): As the member for MacKillop said, it is close on 30 years since Ash Wednesday. Surely we have learned something from that. Thirty years, and we still do not have a committee in this parliament to deal with natural disasters. The committee system of parliament is one of the things that does work exceptionally well and I feel very strongly that we should have a committee that deals with natural disasters.

We have, as a parliament, no idea of what the disaster plans are for this state, particularly when it comes to fires, floods, earthquakes, chemical spills, etc. We, as a parliament, have no idea of what the plans are to avert those disasters before they happen. We have no idea of what to do when those disasters do happen and we have no idea of what to do after those disasters happen in mopping up, etc.

The people who elect this parliament are the people who look to their elected members whenever there is a disaster. They look to this parliament for guidance and direction and, through a committee, we could come up with decent plans so that the people of this state have some idea of what happens whenever there is a disaster.

I also feel that it is a pity that a political party can dictate to its members on an issue like this which way they should vote. As far as I am concerned this is an extremely important matter for the state and for the people of the state and it should be a conscience vote where people actually get the opportunity to vote on what they actually believe in rather than being dictated to. I certainly commend the member for Davenport for again bringing this bill to this house and strongly indicate my support for it.

Mr PEDERICK (Hammond) (11:15): I certainly support the member for Davenport and his work in introducing this bill. Iain Evans introduced a bill regarding the establishment of a bushfire committee and gave evidence, as the member for Davenport, to the parliament's Natural Resources Committee and, as indicated, it became obvious that there was wider support for a broader committee of natural disasters. I note that the Natural Resources Committee has now released its report, which states:

The committee strongly supports Iain Evans' call for a standing committee on bushfires, recommending that it may be opportunistically broadened to consider all natural disasters, including bushfires, floods, earthquakes, riverbank collapse, tsunamis, extreme weather events, hazardous material and pollution emergencies, pest plagues and agricultural diseases.

Obviously a broad range of events can be covered by this. I note the mention of riverbank collapse, of which there were many throughout my electorate during the drought preceding September 2010, where we saw pump sheds and cars disappear into the river at Sturt Reserve (I think three went in and only one came out).

Some massive impositions were forced onto marinas and property owners. Power supply infrastructure went into the river, and it has been terrible for many residents along the river. It also mentions agricultural disasters. Agriculture is a major contributor of income to this state, so that needs to be taken into account. There are earthquakes and it talks about tsunamis. Bushfires were the genesis of the proposal for this committee, and they are something this state suffers continuously. I note that we are coming up to the 30th anniversary of Ash Wednesday, and that was a terrible day for this state. On that day many lives were lost, along with stock, properties and many families' dreams, but it continues to happen.

With my farming property only seven years ago we had a lightning strike and a fire was fanned across the highway. We had aerial bombers coming down the highway bombing transport and other road users as they were trying to put out the fire. It came across into our tree line and into our property. With our private unit, other private units and the CFS we managed to get it under control. Being a member of the CFS I thank the other CFS people who came from as far away as Lucindale. I remember the next morning talking to the commander who was on site at the time, and he had come up from his own property at Lucindale to help someone else. I acknowledge their efforts.

This happens continuously and most recently I was over visiting the member for Finniss on Kangaroo Island and there were many lightning strikes and our property again was on fire. Thankfully it was only a small fire. Neighbours were quickly on the scene and took the bulk of the action, because the CFS was fighting a multitude of fires in the area at the time. There were at least 100 fires between the Mallee/Upper South-East and the Lower South-East that day, most from lightning strikes. Sadly, as the member for MacKillop indicated, there are idiots who seem to have an innate desire to go around and light fires. It just beggars belief why anyone would do that when you see the carnage or if you have witnessed stock losses, fencing losses and property losses that can happen through fire.

Recently, over 300 hectares of fire damage was caused in the Finniss area—farming land, vineyards, dripper lines, posts. There was massive damage to the area in my electorate, and if it was not for the efforts of the CFS and landowners these fires could be a lot worse. I note, with the member for Davenport initiating this back in 2011, as well as discussion around bushfires—and note his electorate—that when you travel around the Adelaide Hills there are so many spots where there is only one way in and one way out. Sadly, unless we get a lot smarter, as indicated on the front page of The Advertiser in the last couple of years, there could be 300 deaths from a major bushfire.

As the member for MacKillop indicated, we do give a mixed message to people: it is stay or go. People really need to be sure, if they are going to stay, that they can manage the situation, because you could have a fireball go right over the top and it might be ember attack that gets your property going. People really need to be sure that they are prepared to stay, and those decisions need to be made very early in the piece. If you leave it to the last minute, as we have seen in fires across the nation recently, sadly, people have lost their lives in trying to flee the flames.

In talking about Adelaide Hills fires, I note today that my family recently purchased an interest in an Adelaide Hills property. However, before doing that, I took particular notice that there were two ways out and there was a refuge if it really hit the fan, so to speak. I have always said to my family, no matter where it happened, 'Just leave; insurance will do the rest.' I can understand people wanting to save homes, but you can always rebuild.

I certainly congratulate the member for Davenport on putting this motion in place to get this committee elected across the parliament and to establish this natural disasters committee. I think we still have a lot to learn about fire and disaster management. As time goes on, I think we need to have things in place, especially this committee. It is a fantastic opportunity to have something like this in place so that inquiries can be made at the top level in this state as to what goes on in the management of these things. Too often we see so-called controlled burns that get out of control. A lot of these happen with the environment department.

Mr Pengilly: Most of them.

Mr PEDERICK: 'Most of them,' says the member for Finniss. There needs to be a lot more planning. I am appalled some days when you see so-called controlled burns take off in thousands of hectares of parks—like those over near the Gawler Ranges or, in recent years, in the Messent Conservation Park down at Keith and other areas. I visited Ngarkat Conservation Park in my electorate the other day, which has suffered major areas of burnout. I think that the environment department are going too hard with their so-called controlled burns and upsetting the natural habitat so much that we are not getting good growth back.

In my closing remarks I will comment on the recent Mid North fires, which the member for Stuart so rightly put on the record yesterday, where a fire seemed to rekindle after an event in November, I believe, and burnt out a huge tract of farmland as well as a huge part of the forest. I think committees like this one could fully investigate what happened there, why there are not enough resources for firefighting up there and why FireKing appliances are not permanently in place to make sure that these fires can be managed. I certainly endorse this move by the member for Davenport and hope that the parliament sees sense and endorses it as well.

The Hon. R.B. SUCH (Fisher) (11:25): I will be brief. I support this initiative by the member for Davenport. I do not believe that in South Australia we have learnt from past disasters. I think we have become complacent about some aspects of fire. We do not normally suffer greatly from floods, but it is still a possibility. We have not had a major earthquake for quite a while and hopefully we will not, but I am not too sure that we are ready.

Some key issues arise under this general heading, and I think a committee like this would add to the good work that is done by committees in this parliament. I have been saying for a long time that I think committee work is one of the best aspects of parliament. It is one of the most productive and useful, but committees need to be adequately resourced to do the job. Members need to focus on some inadequacies in planning law and the way plans are drawn up for subdivisions, and so on. As we have seen in the Queensland floods, we have some problems here, particularly in relation to bushfires, because of inadequate, poor and inappropriate planning, particularly in some parts of the Adelaide Hills.

There is another issue which is significant. I assume members have observed the Insurance Council's warning that they may not insure people who are in high risk areas. That has very serious ramifications for a lot of people living in bushfire risk areas, flood prone areas, and so on. If they cannot get insurance on their property, the value of the property will obviously diminish and people will be left high and dry. I think a committee like this could look at some of those issues, because otherwise people will be caught short, literally, in terms of not having insurance cover, and also the cost of insurance is becoming very high in some of these areas.

There are other points that some members have mentioned. I do not believe we have the burn regime right. That has to be extended significantly, done properly, but I think you need to assist private property owners who want to do a cool burn (a burn-off), because they often do not have the resources to handle a cool burn on their own property. There is a fear that if it gets away they will be devastated in terms of imposed costs.

I do not think that as a society we have really got a handle on the way in which the burns should occur, the frequency and so on. A lot more effort needs to go into helping to reduce the risk of intense fires by having a better managed prevention program based around appropriate cool burns. Access and egress in terms of the Adelaide Hills is pretty important, and the committee could obviously look at that issue. I live in a high risk area for bushfires and I do not believe that in a bushfire people would be able to get out easily in areas like Coromandel Valley and Upper Sturt.

The final point—and the committee could look at it—is that, in many areas close to Adelaide, if you go out on the Karoonda Road, you cannot get mobile phone coverage. So, if you have an emergency, you have a disaster situation. There is no way, unless you have a satellite phone (which most people do not), you can contact someone in some of those areas. I have just written to the federal government urging them to help provide better mobile phone coverage in all areas, including within 130 kilometres of Adelaide, because it is important for emergencies and potential disasters. I commend this initiative.

Mr VAN HOLST PELLEKAAN (Stuart) (11:29): It will not surprise the house that I certainly stand to passionately support the member for Davenport in his urging this house, urging the government, to establish a select committee to look into natural disasters. I draw the house's attention to the most recent speech I made on exactly this topic on 12 July last year. I will not go back over all of those points other than to say that the member for Davenport has worked incredibly hard to keep bringing this issue forward, and keep bringing it forward and bringing it forward. The government keeps knocking it back and knocking it back.

You can see where we are heading. Eventually, quite possibly, there is going to be a natural disaster that is so significant that everybody here will say, 'Gee, I wish we had done this.' It is really important to recognise that this is not about the management of natural disasters; this is about a select committee that would work on preparedness for natural disasters. I seek leave to continue my remarks.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.

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