Ivan Dean, Speeches Index

Wednesday 6 September 2006

EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT BILL 2006

Mr DEAN (Windermere ) - Mr President, I agree with the member speaking on the previous bill, this was sprung on us at very short notice today. I was expecting it to probably come tomorrow, but anyway.

Ms Thorp - It's been on the Notice Paper all week.

Mr DEAN - I do not think there is any doubt, Mr President, that we need a strong emergency services response in this State. It is abundantly clear to me who, as the Commander of Police, was responsible for part of the emergency services in the north of the State for a long period of time. We do need that. There were a number of difficulties with the previous act in the clarity that was needed in certain areas, and I think this bill will provide us with some very clear directions in relation to emergency services and where we are going in the future.

There are a couple of issues here, and I have referred to this before when I have spoken on bills that come into this House. I want to quote the comment of the officer in the Launceston City Council who is responsible for working in this area. His comment is, and I quote:

'As I have already expressed, I am deeply concerned by the limited consultation and time for consideration of the draft bill. Especially given the extended time it has taken the State to get the draft document completed and out for comment. The impact on Local Government, should it go through in its present form is significant and I firmly believe more opportunity for consultation and review should occur.'

That has created some problems within our council, and it is not a case of you having a number of people within an organisation that are capable of reviewing and looking at these draft bills when they come in. In the case of the Launceston City Council which I am aware of, there is one member only that has that capability. That member has other functions and responsibilities as well, so it is not a matter of just pushing it all aside to pick up an act - and it is quite a large bill, it is not a small one at all.

It does create some concerns and, as he indicated to me, in the very short period of time it was available to him, he went through it and identified a number of concerns with it and provided that information to the Government or to the department responsible for the bill. I think some of those amendments are included now in the current bill that we have. I just want to raise that again; it is really unsatisfactory, in my view, Mr President, that that situation should occur.

The other comment made from that same officer, and I will quote his comment again, is:

'The obligation to maintain an SES Volunteer Unit is a new and additional impost on Councils. These units are then to be managed and directed by the Director SES. In theory, this should go some way to enabling a regional if not State wide response in capability. In practice, pressure will come to bear on these units to stay with the municipality that funds them. This in my mind will perpetuate the current situation where SES resources and units are hindered in responding across regions to meet a need that may be outside their area.'

The Leader might be able to address that in closing the debate.

The comment then goes on to state, and I quote again:

'This stipulation could be interpreted as cost shifting from the State to Local Government.'

Very clearly, Mr President, that is the only interpretation that you can give in relation to the way this bill is now drafted and this act will, if agreed to, impact on local government. It is a part that will incur greater cost to local governments.

In making that comment, I want to refer to this document: the Inter-governmental Agreement establishing principles, guiding intergovernmental relations on local government matters, and I want to make two quotes from this document, Mr President:

'The agreement is a culmination of a process which began with the November 2000 report of the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Economics, Finance and Public Administration, Rates and Taxes: A Fair Share for Local Government. The report recommended the development of an inter-governmental agreement to address cost-shifting onto local government. The Australian Government, in its response, announced that such an agreement was supported, in principle, and that development of an agreement would be pursued.'

I now refer to another point on page six of that document, and I quote:

'The parties agree, in principle, that where local government is asked or required by the Commonwealth Government or a State or a Territory Government to provide a service or function to the people of Australia, any consequential financial impact is to be considered within the context of the capacity of local government.'
So what this document does, Mr President, is address the issue of cost-shifting onto local governments and when one looks at the signatories to this document then, of course, we see the signature of our own Premier, the Honourable Paul Anthony Lennon, MHA, and signed on the 24th day of April 2006.

So, very clearly, I will be raising at the appropriate time through the Committee stage some questions in relation to the costing and how certain parts will be funded, and there are one or two other areas that in the Committee stage I will be raising. But, in essence, I support this bill because it does provide a much clearer way forward for us in relation to emergency management but I do have some concerns with it, Mr President.

Return To Main Page.

Return To Speeches.