HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-First Parliament, Second Session (51-2)
2008-03-06 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Question Time

FIRE SERVICES EXPENDITURE

The Hon. S.G. WADE (14:20): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for Emergency Services a question relating to fire services expenditure.

Leave granted.

The Hon. S.G. WADE: During the last five years of the previous Liberal government, fire services expenditure per 1,000 people increased by 15 per cent. The recent productivity commission report on government services shows that since the Rann government was elected in 2002 expenditure on fire services per 1,000 people has increased by only 1 per cent. At the same time, on average, fire services expenditure in Australia has increased by almost 25 per cent.

Under Labor, South Australia now spends less on fire services per 1,000 people than does any other state or territory in Australia, bar Queensland. Since 2002, response times have increased by more than a quarter in South Australia to the point that we now have the longest response times in the nation. The United Firefighters Union has linked the increased response times to the government's failure to adequately fund fire services, and they particularly highlight the case of the Beulah Park Fire Station, the fire station with no crew.

My question to the minister is: if the government is unwilling to properly fund fire services in South Australia, what other strategies does the government have to redress the blowout in response times?

The Hon. CARMEL ZOLLO (Minister for Emergency Services, Minister for Correctional Services, Minister for Road Safety, Minister Assisting the Minister for Multicultural Affairs) (14:21): I thank the honourable member for his question. I think I am on record in this place as saying, on a number of occasions now, that as the UFU is about to embark on a new enterprise bargaining agreement clearly we have had a spray all over the place, at one stage ranging from the police greys to how money is spent from the emergency services levy in other areas.

An honourable member interjecting:

The Hon. CARMEL ZOLLO: The productivity report is always carefully analysed for improvement in our services. That is the reality, and that is what it is about. Basically it is, if you like, a self audit that makes us more accountable in the provision of services to the public.

It should be noted that national comparative performance evaluation of emergency management is a recent development, with the first comparative information published in only 1998. The Productivity Commission itself acknowledges that there are issues of data definition and quality to be resolved to improve the reliability of longitudinal analysis, and I am told this includes a lack of standardisation for factors other than population.

I understand that on page 20 of that report there are really only two performance indicators for fire events that are comparable: the fire death rate and the fire injury rate. I should also note that there is always a lag between government policy and management initiatives and their effects, so trends sometimes do not become apparent for a few years. I would also like to say that, of course, a detailed analysis of the productivity report will be provided to the SAFECOM board to, I guess, better consider strategies to target community risk services.

As I have also said before in this place, SAFECOM is always analysing risks by researching factors contributing to fire-related deaths and injuries as well as issues such as false alarms, which we have heard about. This work will develop policies to meet SAFECOM's strategic objective of reducing fire-related deaths and injuries to below the national averages by 2015. Of course, we can have a major tragedy like the Wangary bushfires, where we saw the loss of those lives, and that will spike up the figures.

I should also put on record that SAFECOM is appointing a director of community resilience—which does not mean another full-time staff member—to target high risk areas and coordinate sector resources to better implement appropriate strategies to increase community preparation and prevention. So, to say that this government is not spending extra money on fire services is a furphy. As I have said before on other occasions in this parliament, the previous government actually completely gutted the MFS.

In relation to preparedness, South Australia has been a leader in the introduction of fire safety measures, smoke alarms and detectors, and our legislation should improve these preparedness indicators in the report. Despite this, other states can sometimes have below average fire related deaths. As I have said, one single incident can spike up those figures. I am told that response times in all major mainland states, with the exception of Western Australia, have increased.

As the honourable member knows, the new station at Seaford is being built and will be ready in a few years. Also, the repositioning of crews at Paradise and Beulah Park will assist in reducing these times. I am told that the report states that the containment of fires to the object room of origin has been below the national average for years. But we should bear in mind that South Australia also has the highest rate of evaporative air-conditioning, which is thought to be a contributing factor—and that is why the statistics show what they do.

The HAZMAT incident attendance appears to be high but, again, both South Australia and the ACT report minor combustible liquid spills and minor gas leaks under 200 litres. This is not the case in New South Wales, and incident reporting in Queensland was incomplete. So, I think there are very sound reasons why some of those figures are not comparable. But, as I have said, this is a very important audit and, obviously, one we will look at very seriously and work towards improving.

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