Debate resumed from 24 September 2009.

Mr PAUL McLEAY (Heathcote) [10.03 a.m.]: There are few crimes as mindless, callous and irresponsible as arson. According to a report by the Australian Institute of Criminology, 20,000 to 30,000 vegetation fires across the nation are deliberately lit each year. This is outrageous and unacceptable. The Rees Government has introduced the Rural Fires Amendment Bill 2009 to give our bushfire investigators the powers they need to adequately investigate all cases of bushfire. When one considers the tragic loss of life in the Victorian bushfires, the grief and despair of the families of those who perished, the thousands of people left homeless, the property, environment and wildlife destroyed, one understands why the Government remains determined to tackle bushfire arson as a priority.

In the fight against bushfire arson, bringing those who commit this dangerous and mindless crime to justice is another important weapon at our disposal. In order to gather the necessary evidence it is therefore essential that our fire investigators be given sufficient power and resources to carry out this task. For that reason, the amendments before the House provide new investigative powers to assist the Rural Fire Service [RFS] in identifying the cause and origin of fires without hindrance and with appropriate legal authority. The New South Wales community abhors the crime of arson and we believe that penalties for arson offences should be significant in order to function as an effective deterrent to such behaviour.

Earlier this year, at the request of the Premier, the Attorney General reviewed New South Wales laws relating to arson. We wanted to make sure that the punishment for those who deliberately light bushfires is tough enough and reflects the seriousness of the crime. As recommended by that review, these amendments double the on-the-spot fines for minor bushfire offences, such as lighting a fire during a total fire ban, or failing to extinguish a fire. This Government and our fire services remain resolute in our commitment to protecting life and property from the threat of bushfire, and especially those that are deliberately lit. We have a proud history of legislative reforms, unprecedented funding and practical measures to back this up. As I say, the Government and the Rural Fire Service have absolutely no tolerance for the appalling crime of arson.

The Rural Fire Service currently has 131 specially trained wildfire investigators who work closely with the Police Force to investigate suspicious fires and ensure that offenders are brought before the courts. Another 16 trainees are undertaking their wildfire investigation training this very week. As well as this, Rural Fire Service senior officers are trained in site preservation and arson-related behaviour to help with the identification and prosecution of those responsible. These amendments will provide the commissioner and his authorised investigators with the power to enter certain lands to investigate the cause or origin of a fire. This power may be exercised up to 24 hours after the fire has been extinguished.

Bushfire arson has the potential to destroy families' homes, belongings and livelihoods, endanger lives and damage huge areas of our natural environment. For this reason, the penalties are severe. Anyone found guilty of intentionally causing a fire or who is reckless in spreading a fire can face a jail term of up to 14 years. A person who maliciously destroys or damages other people's property by fire can face up to 10 years jail, or 25 years if the action is intended to be life threatening. These penalties are intended to be a major deterrent to this antisocial, reckless and potentially life-threatening behaviour. I understand that a recent example of the application of these penalties was the conviction of Murray James Toomey for 31 offences relating to deliberately lit bush fires on the Central Coast in October 2006. On 14 April 2009 he was sentenced to a total of eight years and two months, with a non-parole period of five years and two months. Highly trained Rural Fire Service fire investigators worked closely with the Police Force in the investigation of this individual, and their information led to his apprehension and subsequent conviction.

I will also talk about things we can do to prevent fires. I recently attended the Rural Fire Service's Region East exercise at the Cataract Scout Park, near Appin, on the weekend of 18 to 20 September 2009. I did so as a volunteer firefighter with the Bundeena Bush Fire Brigade. Our crew, led by our captain, Ian Nightingale, spent a very worthwhile two nights and two days. For our new recruit, Maxine Hall, it was the first time she saw live fire and her strength as an individual showed in her coolness and comfort on the fire ground. Jen Edwards, our FireWise officer for our brigade, was also part of the crew. She did an excellent job, including on the Sunday. She was our officer in charge for the day. Our officer in charge for the event was Troy Dillon. Troy joined the Bundeena Bush Fire Brigade six or seven years ago as a cadet. He has been a very committed firefighter. We were very proud of him on the day. In fact, the sector leader of Strike Force Delta, which we are in, handed him over as the officer in charge for the sector on the Saturday afternoon. Troy did a magnificent job with maturity and skill, and his training came to the fore.

I am pleased to say that our crew met the Premier, who was there on the day. Also present were the member for Wollondilly, who is a member of the Lakesland brigade; the Minister for Emergency Services, who is in the House this morning; and the New South Wales Rural Fire Service Commissioner, Shane Fitzsimmons. They witnessed the excellent activities that took place. Region East covers most of the greater Sydney area, the Hunter and the Illawarra, and it holds an exercise each year. Usually this involves competitive events based on firefighters' skill sets. This year, however, the exercise was unique in that it comprised a large hazard reduction burn plus four challenge events and one competitive event. The events were all based on brigade training skills sets.

An incident management team managed the fire. The team consisted of Rural Fire Service members who required assessment or mentoring in these roles. An experienced and well-trained team of mentors and assessors coordinated the exercise. I particularly draw the attention of the House to Superintendent Terry Jackson, who did a magnificent job. There are a lot of well-intentioned volunteers at these events and it can be quite traumatic, but he kept his cool and kept the burn on track and contained. He did a splendid job.

A main reason for including the hazard reduction as a component of the exercise was a risk management strategy to help protect the Scout Jamboree that will be held on that site in January 2010, at the height of the bushfire season. There were will be 12,500 Scouts and leaders camped on the site over a two-week period, with day attendance numbers rising to approximately 16,000 Scouts. We know what little boys can do in the bush in the middle of a drought. It was a good time to have a significant hazard reduction burn in the area. The Cataract Gorge exercise had 24 rural fire brigades from across Region East participating and involved about 280 RFS personnel, including helicopters on the site.

I also bring to the attention of the House three of Bundeena brigade's firefighters, who I think just got back from Queensland this morning. They were near Bundaberg at a little place called Gin Gin. They went up there on Monday afternoon as part of a team of 10 from Sutherland district, which is part of Region East. They have been well trained. I offer my support and prayers and wish them well. They were the Deputy Captain, Dean Nightingale; Scott Burton, who is an excellent firefighter and a man who is very committed to the brigade and his work; and a good friend of mine, Brian Hartrick, who not only has a lot of skills but is an essential member of the brigade because of his driving capacity.

Recently, Rural Fire Service brigades across New South Wales held their open days. The Bundeena open day went very well. Each year as part of the process of keeping their community safe brigades provide information to residents on how to be prepared. The message is simple: prepare, act, survive. I commend the amendments to the House. I take the opportunity to remind the community that information from members of the public is crucial in any investigation. Anyone with information about suspicious behaviour near bushfires is urged to call Crime Stoppers on 1800 333 000. I commend the bill to the House.

Mr DARYL MAGUIRE (Wagga Wagga) [10.14 a.m.]: The Rural Fires Amendment Bill 2009 provides that certain fire hazard management functions of local authorities such as councils are to be exercised instead by hazard management officers of the Rural Fire Service; enables the Commissioner of the Rural Fire Service to enter and inspect land, with or without the consent of the owner or occupier, to investigate the cause or origin of a fire; enables the commissioner to apply for a search warrant to enter and inspect land to investigate the cause or origin of a fire; enables an officer of a rural fire brigade to remove persons or things that are an interference from a fire or other emergency; and increases the penalty notice amounts to $1,100 under the principal Act, for certain fire-related offences, such as failing to comply with hazard reduction notices, lighting a fire during a total fire ban and leaving fires unattended.

Members who have spoken have given a comprehensive outline of this bill. I will make a number of points but first I put on the record my appreciation, indeed the appreciation of the community of Wagga Wagga, for the enormous amount of work that the Rural Fire Service does on our behalf in either a voluntary or paid capacity. We can only admire the great dedication we see, the acts of bravery that occur and the tremendous self-sacrifice of these officers to protect people, communities and property. From time to time arsonists have carried out acts that have caused enormous grief to communities. It has resulted in the deaths of individuals and families and loss of property and livestock. The cost to the community is incalculable. Some things can never be replaced but the loss of human life is a tragedy. Such acts do occur. Members on this side do not oppose this bill. These measures are important and the Government has indicated that it takes this issue very seriously.

We all recognise that the reduction of litter and fuel load is important and that it must occur in a managed way. This bill will go some way towards allowing that to occur so that the risk is reduced. The airwaves are full of commentary about the risk in New South Wales where we have been lucky enough to have substantial rainfall. The undergrowth has grown and the litter load will increase. Even in residential areas there are problems: Gutters are full of leaf litter and people are unprepared. The message is going out loud and clear. Indeed, last Saturday I listened to the ABC and heard about the Rural Fire Service holding open days and inviting the public to come along. The Rural Fire Service was giving out information to people so that they could prepare for what could be a very difficult fire season.

While the Minister is at the table I would like to make a suggestion. This is just me thinking out loud; it is not official policy. Perhaps at some stage the Minister could consider giving more responsibility to the Rural Fire Service in the management of tree removal rather than have councils do it. There is always an argument about removing trees for safety. Members of the public apply to councils and a council officer comes out to assess the tree for removal. Perhaps the Rural Fire Service could take on that role. I understand councils charge a fee for someone to assess a tree for removal. Perhaps there is an opportunity for the Rural Fire Service to help in this regard and use their expertise. In a fire, if the Rural Fire Services regards a tree as a fire hazard it has the authority to remove it or have it lopped. It may be possible to utilise the expertise of Rural Fire Service officers. In some of the more remote areas, or areas that are not the subject of intense focus, it would be a great additional tool for the community of New South Wales if fire service officers were able to carry out that task.

We rely on and admire the efforts of the Rural Fire Service. My local bushfire service, the Eunony brigade, holds fundraising campaigns regularly; funds are very important in providing up-to-date equipment, such as fire sheds and tankers. Eunony raises money by holding garden open days and garage sales. It also holds familiarisation days. The next one is on Sunday 1 November. All members are encouraged to come along and upgrade their technical skills so they can use the new machinery acquired by the Rural Fire Service. That is important in rural areas.

I encourage people who read Hansard and who live in residential areas surrounded by national parks or State forests to contact the Rural Fire Service and use the benefit of their knowledge to gain information and, indeed, help from the Rural Fire Service. We have learned from the fires that occurred in Victoria. Indeed, the fire that ripped through Canberra started in the Tumbarumba area, which in those days was part of my electorate. History records that the fire was devastating. Even to this day problems occur with trees falling on the roadways and the National Parks and Wildlife Service has to monitor the situation because the roads become unsafe. Along the Alpine Way, where the fire destroyed vast tracts of land, falling trees present significant difficulties.

I have covered everything I want to say about the bill. I believe the bill will pull the management of the issues together. I understand that through the shadow Minister there has been consultation with the Rural Fire Service Association and others, who are comfortable with the amendments in the bill. I appreciate the work of the shadow Minister. Indeed, the Opposition agrees with 99 per cent of legislation that comes before the Parliament. It is important to get it right for the safety of residents and the wellbeing of the Rural Fire Service.

In conclusion, I make special note of a highly regarded local identity involved in the New South Wales Rural Fire Service for most of his life, the late Bill Baker. I attended his funeral last Friday. There was a large turnout for his funeral, which was an enormous show of respect from a community that valued his contribution not only as a member of the Rural Fire Service but also as a member of the community and a vocal participant in the NSW Farmers Association. Bill Baker was a passionate farmer, a passionate community advocate. He supported young farmers and always spoke out on various issues. He was never backward in coming forward in advocating for the Rural Fire Service and its needs. Whether it was new equipment or legislation such as this, Bill Baker would always have his say.

Bill was a life member of The Nationals and so is his wife. They frequented many of my functions as well. His wife, Robyn, and their two children, Julian and Sally, were very proud of Bill's achievements. The Rural Fire Service had a guard of honour for Bill. I have never before seen the church packed with so many people. They were paying their respects to a man who has dedicated so much time to the Rural Fire Service. I thank the House for the opportunity to make this contribution.

Mr RAY WILLIAMS (Hawkesbury) [10.24 a.m.]: I make a brief contribution to the Rural Fires Amendment Bill 2009. As the member for Hawkesbury, it is worth pointing out that the Hawkesbury electorate is perhaps one of the most bushfire-prone areas within New South Wales. It is the interface between the developed areas, small farms and major bushlands. The Hawkesbury encompasses no less than seven national parks. Residents in rural farmlands live in close proximity to those national parks and when summer approaches they are normally under threat from bushfire.

My area also has some of the most ably assisted fire control officers, bushfire brigades and Rural Fire Service members from anywhere in the country. I acknowledge the fire control officer from The Hills, John Hojel, the fire control officer from the Hawkesbury area, Karen Hodges, and the Hornsby fire control officer, Angelo Baldo, who serve the area well and conduct the activities of the Rural Fire Service with aplomb and expertise that is second to none.

In relation to the amendments and further controls, it is important to note that Rural Fire Service officers do not have sufficient control over or say in where hazard reduction takes place. I undertook a survey a couple of months ago across the Hawkesbury. I received thousands of responses that highlighted a lack of hazard reduction across the Hawkesbury area. This may be because of close proximity to national parks and the build-up in bushland areas. It is good to note that in the last month the Hawkesbury and The Hills areas have undertaken a more stringent approach. Hazard reduction has increased in those areas, which has pleased residents.

This bill must formalise changes so that fire control officers can be in control of their own destiny and make decisions when and where hazard reduction takes place. Sometimes decisions are made because the undergrowth is too dry or too wet, or there will be too much smoke. People face the real potential of losing property and life unless we undertake appropriate hazard reduction. Time and again Rural Fire Service members have told me that they are not allowed to undertake hazard reductions because of restrictions from the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water. The department has told them it is dangerous to the environment, it would produce too much smoke, the weather is too hot or there is the threat of fire. It is important to cut through the bureaucracy and the red tape and give control to the Rural Fire Service, the people on the ground, who are usually community members who know best how to undertake hazard reduction.

I know the rules stipulate that hazard reduction should be undertaken every eight to nine years in a mosaic pattern across areas. I guarantee that is not the timeframe currently undertaken for hazard reduction across the Hawkesbury, The Hills and Hornsby areas. We must allow Rural Fire Service members to undertake hazard reduction when they see fit. That will happen when it is driven by good action through government not through the bureaucratic red tape of the environmental departments, which are overriding what should be common sense hazard reduction.

Mr STEVE CANSDELL (Clarence) [10.28 a.m.]: I do not oppose the Rural Fires Amendment Bill 2009 as it will bring all parts of the State into line. My parliamentary colleagues have referred to the fact that much of the authority has been taken away from local Rural Fire Service brigades. Over the past 12 months I have met with several fire captains. The most contentious issue they raised relates to the seven- or eight-page form they have to fill out and send to the regional office when they want to carry out hazard reduction in the winter months. When those applications are rejected they feel disempowered in many ways. In the past, when someone wanted to burn off an area, the fire captains would go out and inspect the area and ask whether they could assist with the burn-off. They would be present at every cool burn-off to ensure that the fires did not get out of control, and to secure the safety of the flora and fauna. If there are not many cool burn-offs we could end up with a major fire such as those that occurred in Victoria where everything died.

For the past 20 years, after every bushfire has occurred, a royal commission has been appointed to inquire into the loss of life. In order to resolve these problems we must ensure that the fire trails are kept open. We require more hazard reduction in State forests, national parks and on other land where there has been a huge build up of fuel and no cool burns have occurred during the winter months. Recently there were some pretty horrific fires at Brooms Head on the North Coast. The bushfire brigade fought the fires that were burning three metres from the back fences of homes at Brooms Head. A slight change in the weather and the dedication of Rural Fire Service volunteers prevented real tragedy and the fires were put out.

This morning I spoke on the phone with a lady who was concerned about an article in yesterday's Sydney Morning Herald in which I had been misquoted. The article, which was written by Mr Malcolm Brown, said that the locals were complaining about fire trails being opened because they did not want four-wheel drives to go through them. In fact, I had said that the locals were concerned that the fire trails were not opened, that they were overgrown, and that very little hazard reduction had occurred. Residents were concerned that some national parks had attempted to close some of those fire trails so that four-wheel drive vehicles could not use them.

Last week the Hon. Melinda Pavey and I were taken to the Rural Fire Service lookout at Brooms Head to see firsthand the extent of the fires across the valley. One Rural Fire Service volunteer who had been up for 16 hours fighting the fires—he managed to get only four hours sleep—accompanied us to the lookout to assess the danger and to see whether he needed to go back to work. That volunteer said to me, "Steve, we were given two new trucks that we did not even ask for, which is fantastic, but we could not get them up the fire trails because they were so overgrown, which put the lives of firefighters and the community at risk." National park administrators must make more effort to effect cool burn-offs and local fire captains must have more control of and more say in them. Last winter it was too wet, too dry or too windy, or there was some other reason why we could not effect cool burn-offs.

Over the past eight or nine years many impediments have prevented bushfire hazard reduction in local areas. Many national parks are in receipt of a hazard reduction budget, which in my view should be increased. Over the past 20 years we have seen a doubling in the size of national parks, but there is no point in locking them up if their maintenance and budgets for hazard reduction and feral animal control are not improved. National parks become overgrown with weeds, feral animals multiply and lives are put at risk when major fires go through these areas. I said earlier that I did not oppose the bill. I congratulate all the dedicated volunteers who fought the fires, prepared the meals, and ensured that the firefighters were well fed and watered, and had rest when they needed it. I thank all the volunteers from the Northern Tablelands and from down south who assisted the local guys and gave them some respite in the later stages of the fires. I commend the bill to the House.

Mr ROBERT COOMBS (Swansea) [10.35 a.m.]: My contribution to debate on the Rural Fires Amendment Bill 2009 will be brief, as all members are at one with the proposed amendments that will improve or increase hazard reduction by the Rural Fire Service. Recently there was a large fire in Blacksmiths, a small town in my electorate. It is alleged that the fire was deliberately lit and police investigators are closely examining the facts. That fierce fire came close to a number of homes in the area, which was a concerning and frightening time for residents. A number of residents came to see me and wrote letters to me acknowledging that foul play might have occurred. However, a number of residents were also quick to remind me that hazard reduction had not occurred in the area for a long time. I concur with their observations.

I wrote to Lake Macquarie City Council Mayor Greg Piper and to the Minister for Emergency Services, the Hon. Steven Whan, who is in the Chamber, and said that I concurred with the comments of residents in the area. A planned process of investigation and assessment must be implemented with a view to ensuring that regular burn-offs take place in the area. After assessing similar sorts of fires that have occurred across the State I found, alarmingly, that fires take place when there is a lot of undergrowth and when the conditions are right. As I said earlier, no hazard reduction has occurred in this area for a long time, and residents are now relieved that this legislation will ensure that that happens. Local fire authorities have been alerted to the dangers that exist in these areas. I hope that this legislation results in greater activity, investigation and work to ensure there is no loss of land, homes or limbs.

Mr THOMAS GEORGE (Lismore) [10.38 a.m.]: The overview of the Rural Fires Amendment Bill 2009 states:

The object of this Bill is to amend the Rural Fires Act 1997, (the principal Act), as follows:

(a) to provide that certain bush fire hazard management functions of local authorities (eg councils) are to be exercised instead by hazard management officers of the NSW Rural Fire Service.

(b) to enable the Commissioner of the NSW Rural Fire Service (the Commissioner) to enter and inspect land, with or without the consent of the owner or occupier, to investigate the cause or origin of a fire for up to 24 hours after the fire has been put out.

(c) to enable the Commissioner to apply for a search warrant to enter and inspect land to investigate the cause or origin of a fire.

(d) to enable an officer of a rural fire brigade to remove persons or things who or that are an interference from a fire or other emergency.

(e) to increase the penalty notice amounts for certain fire-related offences under the principal Act.

I refer to offences such as failing to comply with hazard reduction notices, lighting a fire during a total fire ban, and leaving a fire unattended, which will incur a penalty of $1,100 under the principal Act. As members on this side have indicated, the Opposition will not oppose the bill. However, I will raise a few matters. The bill certainly will streamline the bushfire hazard management protocols of councils across the State. I do not think anyone would disagree that we need to control burns with hazard reduction not only in this State but also across the entire country. Each and every one of us has vivid memories of the bushfires that occurred in Victoria earlier this year. I have vivid memories of one particular gentleman whose house was left standing after the fires. The gentleman had taken action to cut down trees around his house—he had virtually undertaken hazard reduction around his house—but as a consequence the local council took him to court and he was virtually bankrupted. However, after the fires his house was the only house left standing in the area. It simply shows that common sense prevails above the law at times, and that we must undertake proper hazard reduction and proper control burns. As I understand it, this will now be left in the hands of the local Rural Fire Service.

We must have common sense in good neighbourhood policy. I question the good neighbour policy of the National Parks and Wildlife Service. I have plenty of constituents in my electorate, especially in the Woodenbong-Legume area, whose properties adjoin national parks. On many occasions the residents of those areas adjoining national parks—whose families have lived there for more than one or two generations—have rung the National Parks and Wildlife Service at the appropriate time to seek permission to undertake a hazard reduction burn or to advise the service that they will be doing some hazard reduction. The National Parks and Wildlife Service has said to them, "Don't you dare let the fire get into our place, because if you do we will sue you." If the service were to work with the neighbouring residents whose properties adjoin the national parks and allow them to carry out control burns and proper hazard reduction, it would probably put the whole community in a better safety situation, rather than the way the issue is attacked now.

The member for Clarence spoke about the way fires come up to the back fences of people's properties. In many coastal areas, national parks come up to the back fences of people's properties. In the electorate of the member for Clarence at Evans Head, where the area adjoins the Bundjalung National Park, the residents, in their wisdom, had mowed some 50 metres back from their fences as a precautionary measure against fires. A representative of the National Parks and Wildlife Service came along and said to the residents, "Who has done this?" The residents were chastised because they had taken the initiative to mow away from their back fences. The National Parks and Wildlife Service officer said, " I don't want to see that; that should not have happened." Common sense has gone from hazard reduction in this State. I know from my experiences with the Minister in the north of the State that he has been listening to the residents' concerns.

Hopefully, now that hazard reduction and control burns are the responsibility of the Rural Fire Service the local residents will have a say in what happens in their own areas rather than decisions being made for the whole State. I hope that there is a valley-by-valley approach, to enable the local Rural Fire Service officers—who fully understand the local weather conditions on days when people apply for a control burn permit—to issue the appropriate certificates on a day that is suitable to the local community. As other members on this side of the House have indicated, the Opposition will not oppose the bill. It ensures statewide consistency in hazard management approaches and will remove discrepancies in the definition of community safety. I am pleased to support the bill.

Mr STEVE WHAN (Monaro—Minister for Emergency Services, Minister for Small Business, and Minister for Rural Affairs) [10.44 a.m.], in reply: I thank the members who have taken part in this debate—the members representing the electorates of Hawkesbury, Clarence, Swansea, Lismore, Tweed, Lane Cove, Blue Mountains, Heathcote, Wollongong and Wagga Wagga. The Rural Fires Amendment Bill 2009 will allow the commissioner and officers of the NSW Rural Fire Service to play an enhanced role in preventing bushfires, and to respond effectively to fires and other emergencies. The debate is timely, given the bushfires that have occurred over the past weeks around New South Wales, particularly on the North Coast. We are also seeing significant fire activity in Queensland, where we have recently sent 50 volunteer firefighters plus four Rural Fire Service staff.

The bill allows the commissioner and officers to enter and inspect land to investigate the cause or origin of a fire, and to apply for a search warrant for the purposes of such investigations. It enables brigade officers to remove persons and obstacles from a fire or other emergency, and shifts the responsibility for bushfire hazard management from local government to the NSW Rural Fire Service. In most cases around New South Wales that was already the case; the bill essentially makes it consistent around the State. These changes will further the State's strong position in being prepared for bushfires. It is likely that we will have a tough bushfire season ahead, and it is critical that the community prepares for that as much as is practicable.

The tragic loss of life and destruction of property in Victoria on 7 February this year, and the disruption and dislocation of whole communities, provides a sobering reminder of the need to continuously improve the ability of the Rural Fire Service to protect New South Wales communities. The bill addresses exactly that. In particular the bill will truly make the NSW Rural Fire Service a one-stop shop for the community of New South Wales in relation to bushfire hazard management. The bill also responds to calls from peak bodies including the Local Government and Shires Associations, which have championed such calls for streamlining processes and resolved some two years ago that the provisions of this bill should be included in the rural fires legislation.

As I said when introducing the legislation, the bill will also empower an officer of a rural fire brigade to remove any person, vehicle, vessel or thing that may interfere with the work of any rural fire brigade or the exercise of any of the officer's functions. Any person has the right to defend his or her property against fire or other emergency. However, the presence of members of the public at the scene of a fire or emergency may hinder the performance of trained fire brigade officers. The provisions are designed to ensure that members of the public do not do that. This applies particularly to people who are sightseeing and so on, which unfortunately occurs in many of these situations.

The bill also provides for the Rural Fire Service commissioner or those authorised by him with the power to enter land—other than that used only for residential purposes—to investigate the cause or origin of a fire on that land or any adjacent land. This power of entry will be exerciseable for up to 24 hours after the fire has been put out, where the owner or occupier of the land does not consent to the entry for the purposes of an investigation into the fire's cause or origin. In most cases people consent to the entry of fire investigators. Therefore, the provision is required only in cases where an owner or occupier does not allow fire investigators to enter the land.

Yesterday the member for Tweed raised questions regarding this section of the legislation, asking whether 24 hours was an adequate period. The Rural Fire Service believes that 24 hours is adequate. It is not a matter of sending the investigators out from the city, as the member for Tweed suggested. We have fire investigators in a number of locations around the State. Indeed, in my travels around rural New South Wales I have met a number of them. In any event, if the 24-hour limit is not adequate, the Rural Fire Service can obtain a warrant to go onto the land. Our advice from the Rural Fire Service and the Attorney General's Department is that the 24-hour limit is a reasonable provision. It certainly substantially improves fire investigators' access to those properties.

A number of other matters have been raised during the debate. The member for Tweed raised a matter regarding Aboriginal land. The advice I have received from the Rural Fire Service is that all landowners, public and private, have a general duty of care to manage their lands under section 63.

Mr Thomas George: National Parks as well.

Mr STEVE WHAN: Indeed, National Parks as well. The commissioner has powers under section 66 for private lands and under section 74F for public authorities to, upon receipt of a complaint, inspect and, if warranted, serve a notice on the landowner/manager to remove the hazard. If they fail to do so, the commissioner can do the required work and recover costs. Those powers are contained in existing legislation. It was clear that the member for Hawkesbury had not read the legislation before he made some of his comments. The member for Tweed also referred to Roads and Traffic Authority land. It is open to any member of the community to lodge a hazard complaint with the Rural Fire Service either in writing or online. The Rural Fire Service will inspect the hazard and carry out the steps I have outlined, if it is warranted.

The member for Tweed also sought clarification for penalties affecting arsonists. After the February Victorian fires Premier Rees directed the Attorney General to carry out a review of arson penalties. The review found that New South Wales penalties were comparable to those of other States and that the sentencing schemes were satisfactory. In other words, at the top end of the scale when somebody has deliberately lit a fire that can cause death, severe penalties can be imposed. The challenge of all States is actually getting convictions, not so much the extent of the penalties. The review found that it was warranted to increase the penalties on a number of minimal-type offences, which this bill does, but that penalties for more serious offences were adequate. Our challenge is to get convictions and to do that we work closely with the New South Wales Police Force to ensure that it is able to collect the evidence required. Part of that work also includes the participation of fire investigators, about which I talked earlier.

Government members made a number of positive comments about the Rural Fire Service. The member for Heathcote, who, of course, is a volunteer firefighter, talked about the number of hazard reduction projects in which he has been involved in the past few weeks. This year, in spite of other comments in this debate, has been extremely successful for hazard reduction. Certainly in some areas weather conditions have made that difficult. Volunteer firefighters have done a lot of work, as highlighted by the member for Heathcote. The member for Hawkesbury said that decisions were being made by people presumably not to proceed if undergrowth is too dry or too wet. Quite frankly, that is exactly the right decision. If undergrowth is too dry and if conditions are bad, the Rural Fire Service will not light a hazard reduction burn if it feels property and lives could be endangered. The member for Hawkesbury in making his simplistic statements and spreading gossip—

The DEPUTY-SPEAKER: Order! The member for Hawkesbury will come to order.

Mr STEVE WHAN: —should reflect on the fact that the experts in these organisations make judgements on when hazard reduction is safe to undertake. Much planning goes into hazard reduction burns and clearances, including mechanical clearing as evidenced in asset protection zones around the State. When a hazard reduction is planned, the experts plan containment areas, determine the source of water and undertake a large amount of work to ensure a safe and effective hazard reduction. Local brigades are directly involved in that process. For people like the member for Hawkesbury and the member for Clarence who suggested that the process is too complicated, I suggest they go to the Rural Fire Service website and click on the link to apply for a permit to burn and they will see how simple it is. The process is very simple and the Rural Fire Service guarantees a response within a certain period of time, which it manages to achieve in approximately 90 per cent of cases.

The member for Clarence commented that only through a slight change in the weather were houses and properties saved during the Brooms Head fire. The Rural Fire Service advised me that the wind changes played a small part, but that the most important feature was that Brooms Head was surrounded by an asset protection zone, including some natural areas of swamp, which obviously cannot burn. The service had been working on the asset protection zones around the town, and the hard work of local firefighters saved buildings in that area. Patchwork hazard reduction had been undertaken to the west of the fire, and this also helped to reduce the fire intensity. Unfortunately, Opposition members like to make simplistic comments without thought on these issues. The shadow Minister said that the brigade received a couple of trucks it did not even ask for—a comment repeated today by the member for Clarence. Somebody asked for them because the Government receives bids from local areas for new trucks and supports that as part of the fleet upgrade. This makes our Rural Fire Service the safest and most effective in the world.

The re-equipment program that this Government put in place makes our Rural Fire Service volunteers safe when fighting fires. It was this Government that put that program in place. Many volunteer firefighters have told me that when this Government came to office the Rural Fire Service had antiquated equipment because the previous Liberal Government did not bite the bullet and make the necessary changes and provide funding. Even today, Opposition members suggested that the funding model for the Rural Fire Service, which includes contributions from insurance companies, is unfair and they do not support it. That tells the Rural Fire Service volunteers that those opposite are not committed to maintaining the growth in funding that we have provided since coming to office.

Members of this House should be aware that each local area has committees that plan hazard reduction using local knowledge and input from landowners within the area. The legislation makes it clear that, unlike in most other States, the New South Wales commissioner has the final say over hazard reduction and also the ability to impose hazard reduction if a landowner resists. This Government took action in the early 1990s to make sure our Rural Fire Service has those powers. Local members should be aware of that. Indeed, they probably should be aware also of the work their local committees have undertaken to plan hazard reduction for their regions. It is disappointing sometimes to hear that they do not acknowledge that work.

We have worked hard with local councils in the past few years to get them to establish asset protection zones around housing. Often that protection is achieved through mechanical clearing along the fence line behind houses, as some members commented during the debate. Earlier in the season during the South Coast fires in the Shoalhaven area firefighters burnt off the asset protection zones created by council as part of their involvement in hazard reduction planning with the local fire service to save houses. It was effective and extremely impressive work. We do not hear much from the Opposition about actual policy—we hear a lot of gossip—but today the member for Clarence repeated the comments of the shadow Minister. I have listened carefully to the shadow Minister's comments on hazard reduction. Recently she suggested that at the current rate of hazard reduction it would take 112 years to complete all works. That statement completely bemused the Rural Fire Service commissioner and anyone taking an intelligent look at the fire service.

I delved further and I think I have worked out what she means. I think she is suggesting that every five to six years we should clear about five or six million hectares of land with hazard reduction work. She says New South Wales has more than 20 million hectares of bushfire-prone land—that is true. She suggests that each year in New South Wales we should burn off 12 times more than the amount of land that burned in the Victorian fires in February. What a completely ridiculous notion! Hazard reduction is undertaken in New South Wales on the basis of protecting strategic areas of assets and lives. That is why we focus on asset protection zones around homes and why much work is undertaken to prevent fires damaging the most important thing: people's lives.

This year there has been a record level of hazard reduction in national parks. In my electorate I have observed intensive and widespread hazard reduction in the Kosciuszko National Park. The member for Blue Mountains will be pleased to know that some of the incendiary work done by helicopters in the Kosciuszko National Park was done on ridge tops. I had an interesting discussion with one of the helicopter pilots who undertook that work. The member for the Blue Mountains spoke about hazard reduction on ridge tops in his contribution to this debate yesterday. The Rural Fire Service is working very hard to ensure that the required record amount of hazard reduction work is carried out. However, there is one fundamental point that people need to understand: the Rural Fire Service does not own the land; the land managers own the land—

Mr Adrian Piccoli: Thank goodness.

Mr STEVE WHAN: That is not the sort of vote of confidence the Government likes to hear. The Rural Fire Service works with land managers to ensure they undertake hazard reduction. The Opposition recently issued a press release saying that some areas of New South Wales were to receive only a few hundred dollars per year for hazard reduction and fire trail maintenance. That related only to one grants program that tops up the work done by the land managers in hazard reduction in conjunction with the Rural Fire Service. That is an example of either a complete lack of knowledge by the Opposition in this matter or a willingness to mislead the public. I suspect it is the latter.

The bill is a very positive one and I am pleased the Opposition supports it. It will enable the Rural Fire Service to work in areas previously retained by councils for hazard reduction—there are only a few of those. It clarifies the powers of the Rural Fire Service and increases offences for people who allow fires to escape from their properties or leave fires burning. I commend the bill to the House.

Question—That this bill be now agreed to in principle—put and resolved in the affirmative.

Motion agreed to.

Bill agreed to in principle.

Bill declared passed and transmitted to the Legislative Council with a message seeking its concurrence in the bill.