HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Fifth Parliament, First Session (55-1)
2023-08-31 Daily Xml
Contents
Xml

Parliamentary Committees

Economic and Finance Committee: Emergency Services Levy 2023-24

Mr HUGHES (Giles) (11:01): I move:

That the third report of the committee, titled Emergency Services Levy 2023-24, be noted.

Under the Emergency Services Funding Act 1998, the Economic and Finance Committee has an annual statutory duty to inquire into and consider a report on the Treasurer's determinations regarding the emergency services levy. The committee must provide a report on the written determinations within 21 days after referral to the committee. This year, the committee received the Treasurer's statement on 2 June.

The Emergency Services Funding Act 1998 compels the Treasurer to include determinations regarding the funding targets required via the levy to deliver emergency services, the expenditure on specific kinds of emergency services and the benefits for South Australians across the state. The emergency services levy funds the following organisations to deliver vital emergency services across Adelaide and the regions: the South Australian Country Fire Service, the South Australian Metropolitan Fire Service, the South Australian State Emergency Service, Surf Life Saving SA, Volunteer Marine Rescue organisations, SA Police, the Department for Environment and Water, SA Ambulance, state rescue helicopter, and the shark beach patrol.

On 19 June, the Economic and Finance Committee held a public hearing with representatives from the Department of Treasury and Finance, the South Australian Fire and Emergency Services Commission, the MFS, the CFS and the SES. The witnesses outlined the funding targets, rate setting and expenditure for the proposed levy for the 2023-24 year. In accordance with its 21-day obligation under the act, the committee considered the determinations and tabled this report on 15 June.

Firstly, the committee would like to thank the staff and volunteers of our emergency services for providing vital assistance to South Australians when they need it the most. All the agencies have their own operational activities, challenges and opportunities, and all complement each other to play an essential role in the safety and resilience of all South Australians. They work tirelessly in our communities to protect life, property and the environment, deploying personnel and resources to not only South Australia but other states and territories and, indeed, other countries.

Recently, we witnessed major floods and bushfires across the nation. The SES and CFS deployed personnel to New South Wales to work in flood-damaged communities in Sydney, the Central Coast, the Hunter region and the South Coast between July and October last year before returning to our state to assist with the largest flood in South Australia's history in the last 50 years.

The River Murray flood was a protracted and complex event impacting 11 major towns across seven local government areas. Over 1,000 staff and volunteers were involved in the coordination and response to the event, often collaborating and demonstrating leadership outside of what may be their expected type of emergency response.

That said, I would like now to highlight the key elements of the 2023-24 emergency services levy as observed by the Economic and Finance Committee. The Treasurer's statement noted that the 2022-23 total expenditure on emergency services was projected to be $365.1 million. Total expenditure in 2022-23 is now budgeted to reach $373.2 million, mainly due to additional funding required for the significant River Murray flood event. Total expenditure on emergency services for 2023-24 is projected to reach $380.6 million. ESL receipts for 2022-23 are expected to be $4.7 million above original expectations due to higher than expected remission payments and fixed property ESL revenue.

Expenditure on emergency services for 2023-24 will be funded primarily by ESL payments from fixed property of $325.1 million, mobile property of $52 million, minor revenues of $2.2 million and a $1.2 million cash run-down in the Community Emergency Services Fund (CESF). On 30 June 2023, the cash balance in the CESF was forecast to be $14.2 million. For 2023-24, the government will pay $140.1 million into the CESF.

In regard to this year's emergency services levy, bills are calculated by applying the prescribed rate on assessable property value in accordance with the property's purpose and location. For 2023-24, the committee can provide the following information. With calculations based on an average median house value of $670,000 in the metropolitan area, the average residential bill in metropolitan Adelaide should be $151.30. This is $6.95 more than last year, or 4.8 per cent. For a median commercial property figure of $1 million, the average bill for the commercial property owners should be $1,221.85. This is $43.95 more than last year, or 3.7 per cent. Rates in major country towns were based on median sale values of $350,000.

Property owners should receive their bills from 1 August through to the end of September. Given recent increases in the cost of living, I would like to draw attention to the flexible payment options available to property owners. ESL bills can be paid in four equal instalments upon contacting RevenueSA prior to the bill's due date. Revenue raised from the ESL strengthens the frontlines and operational capacity of our emergency services. The 2023-24 target expenditure of $380.6 million is $7.4 million more than the 2022-23 figure of $373.2 million.

The additional expenditure will include $6 million to enhance the CFS aerial firefighting fleet, $1.3 million for the SES acquisition of a strategic flood barrier cache, $1.2 million carryover of expenditure from 2022-23 for the surf lifesaving club facilities development, $6.9 million for enterprise agreements outcomes and increases to the superannuation guarantee, and half a million dollars for additional mental health and wellbeing support for emergency services volunteers, staff and their families.

The Economic and Finance Committee has fulfilled its obligations under the Emergency Services Funding Act 1998. I would like to thank the members of the committee, the representatives from the Department of Treasury and Finance, the Chief Executive of the South Australian Fire and Emergency Services Commission, and the chief officers of the Metropolitan Fire Service, Country Fire Service, and State Emergency Service for their contributions. Therefore, pursuant to section 6 of the Parliamentary Committees Act 1991, the Economic and Finance Committee recommends parliament note this report.

Mr COWDREY (Colton) (11:10): I would like to begin my contribution today by putting forward thanks from this side of the house to those emergency services employees and volunteers who have served the state over the last 12 months. Obviously, the fundamental underpinning of the emergency services levy is to fund, to a degree, the activities and work that are undertaken by those emergency services across our state.

It feels that we have been reflecting each and every time these particular reports come to this chamber over the last couple of years that the work for those services has been above and beyond in terms of natural disaster, and again this year, when we look at the bushfires that the Chair of the committee has reflected on, both interstate in New South Wales and, in more recent years, here in South Australia. There were not just bushfires this year, of course, but also an unprecedented flooding event through the River Murray and surrounding jurisdictions that led to one of the biggest recovery efforts, which I think everyone would reflect on in terms of mitigation and things that we can potentially learn and do better next time.

Part of the evidence of the committee, and something that I still do not quite understand, has been the resistance from this government to this point to undertake any sort of independent review in terms of the flood response. Evidence that was provided to the committee certainly outlined the fact that there is clearly precedence to undertake an independent review into flood events and also major natural disaster responses. It is certainly something that we on this side of the house still see as being necessary—not so that we can point fingers, not so that anybody can say that things were not done as well as they could be, but so that we can learn and do better next time.

It is silly and it is perverse to say that there were not lessons that could be learned from this significant event. Again, as per evidence given by the witnesses who appeared before us through the committee, it is clearly the view of some within the emergency services that there is precedent. Certainly from our view, it would be a worthwhile exercise for the state to undertake an independent review so that we can do better next time.

In terms of the other evidence given to the committee, the committee Chair has also already touched upon the increase coming for South Australian households this year of nearly $7 added to their emergency services bill. I just want to take this opportunity this morning to contrast the clear difference in approach from the previous government to this, in terms of tax burden and cost-of-living burden to the South Australian public.

While there was a commitment from those opposite to no new taxes, what we have seen is that, in the absence of actually doing anything in terms of the settings of those existing taxes, essentially the relative tax burden for every South Australian is increasing and will continue to increase over the forward estimates. We had the Treasurer present the budget just a couple of weeks ago, and that is clear: the significant increase in tax revenue across the forward estimates is clear. It is black and white and it is on paper, despite the fact that the Treasurer was not too keen to confirm any of those things through his own words. He has simply let his budget documents do the talking for him.

Whether that be the significant changes that were made to the threshold in regard to payroll tax by the former government that saw a number of businesses no longer needing to pay payroll tax, what we have seen obviously over the last couple of years is wage increases across the board but no relative change to the threshold in regard to payroll tax. There are now, one would assume, more South Australian small businesses—and, certainly anecdotally, that is what the opposition is hearing—paying payroll tax than there were previously.

When you look at stamp duty and rates, obviously we have seen property values go up across suburban Adelaide, and there is strong property growth across really the whole of the state. Again, what does that lead to? Increased collections from stamp duty and rates. With ESL, one of the key commitments the previous government made—with the Liberal Party taking government in 2018—was to provide significant remissions for South Australians in regard to the ESL levy paid. What have we seen from this government so far? Again, just increases.

One of the other significant costs to South Australian families is water, SA Water prices. Again, under the previous government, those prices came down for South Australian families. There is a clear and stark contrast between this government and the previous government in terms of an approach to reducing the cost of doing business in South Australia and also reducing the cost of living for South Australians.

We will be watching very closely as the next 12 or so months unfold, when we get the rubber hitting the road in terms of the changes to the regulatory cycle for SA Water and the rate setting, to see what will be delivered by this Treasurer in that regard. We know that the previous Labor government had seen the regulated asset base significantly overvalued which just delivered higher SA Water corporation costs to South Australian families. We know that the Treasurer had an intimate connection to that fiasco, so we on this side will clearly be keeping a close watch on where SA Water prices go into the future.

One of the most concerning pieces of evidence that I think came through the hearing in regard to the ESL this year actually linked back to the flood issues that we talked about previously. It was uncovered that somewhere in the order of 1,500 to 2,200 residents within flood-affected communities had not, to that point of the year, paid their ESL bills, and RevenueSA did not decide to contact those families and households to say, 'You haven't paid your ESL bill. Could you please perhaps try to find a way to do that?'

Instead of acknowledging that your ESL bill may have been stuck on your fridge or sitting on your desk but instead of being on your desk or your fridge it may now be down the river or out into the sea, RevenueSA made the decision to roll over that debt, to charge penalty provisions, interest provisions, on that owing amount, and to roll that over to a bill that was soon to be put out to those families and households, without any communication to those families or households.

It was conceivable that these families and households that had gone through one of the most traumatic events in terms of being affected by floods could foreseeably have received a bill for two years' worth of ESL levy, plus penalty provisions, without any knowledge that they had not paid the fee for the previous year. When pushed on this, RevenueSA's view, and the view of the Treasury officials, was that there was no issue here—no issue whatsoever—no issue that there was no communication with those families and no appreciation that perhaps letting them know this may be helpful.

I know that since there have been some changes in that regard to what the initial view was from Treasury for this, but I think that underpins the approach from government to some of these issues. We really need to have a greater appreciation, greater communication, particularly when we know that people are being impacted. To just make assumptions simply is not good enough. It just simply is not.

I reflect on the evidence given before the committee, particularly with respect to that issue. Frankly, I think everybody here should be rightfully disappointed with the approach that was taken originally by Treasury. In the remaining time I have, I would like to provide my thanks to those organisations within my local community covered by and funded by the ESL, in particular the surf lifesaving clubs of Grange, Henley Beach and West Beach, for the work they continue to do to keep my local community safe.

Mr PEDERICK (Hammond) (11:20): I rise to speak to this report by the Economic and Finance Committee on the emergency services levy. This is a levy that has been in place for just over 20 years to be the main funder of our emergency services because there are a lot of lessons to be learned from events such as the two Ash Wednesdays to make sure we have the appropriate funding in place, especially for our volunteer firefighters and also our paid staff in firefighting.

Obviously, there are a lot of them in the Metropolitan Fire Service, and there are paid staff throughout the Country Fire Service as well. That translates also through to the State Emergency Service. The beauty of it is that there are at least 15,000 volunteers who contribute to these services. In the long run, we must never forget that. As to all the bureaucracy that goes on, bureaucracy is necessary, but sometimes it does become overburdensome, and that does have an impact on volunteer retention, I can guarantee it. I am a CFS volunteer, and I know there are others in this place who are as well.

It is interesting to note that in this report there was extra funding that had to be spent in regard to the River Murray flood event. The total expenditure funded from the Community Emergency Services Fund for 2022-23 was budgeted to reach $373.2 million, up from $365.1 million, and that was mainly due to the additional funding required for the significant River Murray flood event.

I must say, as a local member but on the other side of the house from the government, I was proud to play my role, certainly in Hammond and certainly as the shadow emergency services spokesperson, to work with communities right up and down the river and with the government. I would suggest that around 95 per cent of the time we worked hand in glove because we had to get the right outcomes for the communities up and down the river.

That is why, as the member for Colton said, he is astounded and I am astounded at why the government has not instigated an independent inquiry into the management of the River Murray floods, because a lot of good outcomes were achieved. A lot of it was done with collaboration across the sector. I am not sure what the government has to fear about that. Certainly, it was pleasing to have the ear of the emergency services minister, Joe Szakacs, and also the Premier, Peter Malinauskas, during this event. They were my main ministerial keys during the flood event.

To have direct access to chief executives, like Chris Beattie from the SES, John Schutz from the Department for Environment and Water and others, was so handy, and that direct contact was kept up. I certainly want to acknowledge the great work of Scott Denny, who was the local police superintendent for the Riverland and Murraylands. They saw how well he operates and transferred him to Adelaide: our loss is Adelaide's gain, as he is a fine police officer.

It was a very difficult time with the flood event and the coordination with communities right up and down the river with what needed to be done. A lot of the speakers from the various departments, the public servants, came out and spoke to communities right up and down the river. I went to several meetings at Mannum and Murray Bridge and, if I could not get there, my staff went. I commend those public servants because it was a bit hard to get across to some people that they were going to get wet feet. Some people did not think they were going to get flooded and it was a bit of a surprise when they did.

I remember the meeting at Mannum and both myself and the Mid Murray Council said to people at that meeting, 'You should prepare for up to 250 gigalitres a day coming down.' One of the confusing things was that there was always a low number predicted and then a high number for the flood, and that gave some people surety that perhaps it would not get as high as we thought. It came through on the reader that it was about 194 gigalitres a day at the high flow—that is a heck of a lot of water. After about two and a half days of that you have a Sydney Harbour.

I commend all the volunteers and staff, the thousands of volunteers, who did that vital work, along with the contractors, who I have spoken about before, shifting the 150,000 tonnes of clay to protect Renmark, the volunteers who worked alongside them and the staff who would have done overtime for no reward. Certainly, as you came further down the river, to towns like Cobdogla and Mannum, it had the effect of having to protect the lower reaches of the town. At Mary Ann Reserve, we had to get the levee banks in place.

I take my hat off the Ben Scales, the CEO of Mid Murray Council, who I think at midnight on New Year's Eve was there when there was no one else to man the pumps to pump out around the rowing club. So many people stepped up to the plate, and I acknowledge the work of our emergency services, as I said before.

The SES got that DefenCell in place when we could, in a timely manner. Sometimes councils balked at delivering that decision, but that was not the fault of the SES. Volunteers stepped up and put sandbags in place, and I met many volunteers at the relief stations who had come from Adelaide or other places to assist people filling their sandbags and getting on the job. It really showed a sense of community, and the community downstream from Murray Bridge along the levee banks—a few got flooded out towards the Swanport Bridge—put in a massive effort, along with emergency services. Certainly, the Army came into play as well.

I want to also acknowledge the vital work of all our fire services. They were all encompassing in this event, both the CFS and the MFS. They work right across the community in keeping us safe through fire events, certainly the 13,000-odd volunteers and staff from the Country Fire Service and the many people who work for the Metropolitan Fire Service, whether they be the staff, retained firefighters or full-time firefighters—they do magnificent work to save life and property—and people who rescue people; whether it is the surf lifesavers or those who rescue people who get in trouble offshore, I take my hat off to them. They are prepared to put their hand up. They are prepared to go above and beyond to rescue people in need.

I commend this debate around the emergency services levy and I commend everyone involved in the field, especially in relation to the recent River Murray flood event.

Mr HUGHES (Giles) (11:30): Once again, I join with everyone who has spoken today, all members of this house, in acknowledging the amazing work done by our volunteers, professionals, when it comes to the emergency services in our state. We would be seriously lost without them. When you sometimes look to the future, look at what has gone on in the Northern Hemisphere, in parts of Europe, in Canada, you just wonder what might be in store in the Southern Hemisphere come the warmer weather and the shift in climate patterns. With those words, once again, I thank all members for their contribution. I commend the report.

Motion carried.

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