 Found a word you're not familiar with? Double-click that word to bring up a dictionary reference to it. The dictionary page includes an audio sound file with which to actually hear the word said. |
Further implications
The concern regarding the payments to be given firefighters seems to stem primarily from apprehension that it will undermine the system of volunteers upon which Australia has so long relied for its regional fire defence.
A volunteer force has two primary advantages - it is flexible, and it is inexpensive. The two features are interdependent. Australia is a large country and bushfires are spontaneous and traditionally difficult to predict with precision. Maintaining a paid fire fighting force to deal with sporadic events would be both inefficient and costly.
Firefighters need what is termed 'surge capacity', that is, the ability to summon large numbers of people rapidly to a deal with a particular incident at a given location. They also benefit from local knowledge so that they can use their familiarity with topography to help combat a fire.
Australia's regional fire fighters grew as a spontaneous response to need. The New South Wales Rural Fire Service (RFS) is currently the world's largest volunteer fire service, with more than 70,000 volunteers (plus around 900 paid staff). It started, however, with a series of small, community-based fire brigades, beginning with the first volunteer bush fire brigade in Berrigan in 1896.
Over time, independent community-based brigades became more and more connected, as the government passed laws to provide legal protections and standardise equipment and training. But it was only in 1997 that the Rural Fire Service we know today was officially created.
It has been argued that this service and similar organisations that have formed in the other states and territories do not want or require a paid workforce, that their members are motivated by the sense of mutual need and obligation which gave rise to the original community-based brigades from which the larger regional services have developed.
Neil Bibby, the former chief executive of Victoria's Country Fire Authority, has claimed that paying regional firefighters would be counterproductive as it would achieve nothing and may undermine the sense of community service which holds the groups together. Bibby has stated, 'Paying volunteers, it won't give you more of their time, it won't give you more energy out of them, and a lot of them would take that as an insult anyway.'
However, there are others who are arguing that the purely volunteer model no longer fits Australia's bushfire fighting needs. Bushfires are no longer a sporadic, limited, seasonal event in Australia. Climate change is increasing the frequency of severe fire weather events and extending the fire season. Climate change-induced warming and drying of some regions is making it more likely fuel will be ignited by a spark and results in more intense fires, which behave unpredictably, spread rapidly, and pose significant challenges for fire services combatting them.
The Australian Climate Council has stated, 'Bushfire conditions are now more dangerous than in the past, and the risk to people and property has increased. For well over 20 years, scientists have warned that climate change would increase the risk of extreme bushfires in Australia. This warning was accurate. Scientists expect extreme fire weather will continue to become more frequent and severe...'
These new firefighting conditions have placed unprecedented demands on volunteer firefighters. The length of time that they can now expect to be called away from their jobs and other commitments is now much greater.
It has been suggested that a system such as applies with the Army Reserve should be applied to volunteer fighters which would mean that they would automatically be paid for the time they give to fighting fires. The question of what limits would be applied to this would have to be addressed. In the current ad hoc compensation being paid firefighters in New South Wales, Queensland and South Australia compensation kicks in for those who have fought fires for ten days or more. The appropriateness of this would need to be considered. It may, for example, be more equitable to pay volunteers for any time off work in the course of their firefighting duties.
It would also need to be determined who pays such compensation. Under the interim provisions that have applied for the fires over the end of 2019 and beginning of 2020 government employees and those employed by large companies are to be paid be their employer. The government will supply the payment for those employed by smaller employers. The long-term viability of this will need to be considered. It is possible, for example, that an additional surcharge might be placed on fire insurance to help meet this expense. However, it would be unwise to do anything that would discourage people to take out fire insurance given the growing risk.
Another area that will need to be addressed is the capacity of employers, especially small employers to maintain their businesses without the services of employees who have been drawn away for long term volunteer fire service.
There is also need to consider how to achieve improved co-ordination between fire fighting forces given that with the likelihood of much larger fires burning for much longer periods there will be a growing necessity to employ larger forces formed from the amalgamation of smaller local brigades.
The 2019/20 fires have also raised questions over the equipping of fire services. The popular consternation that has followed in the wake of reports that fire brigades were crowd funding or self-funding equipment such as chainsaws and high duty face masks suggests that this practice will be halted, and more formal funding arrangements will be made into the future.
The prime minister, Scott Morrison, has indicated that his government is likely to establish a national royal commission to investigate issues raised by Australia's most recent bushfires. The questions raised above, and many others, will hopefully fall within its ambit.