Doug Cameron (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | Hansard source

I am glad that Minister Cash has raised this correspondence by Mr Peter Rau, because it was an issue that was discussed in the inquiry and questions were asked on notice of Mr Steven Warrington, the Chief Officer of the CFA, in relation to this very issue. Anyone listening should understand that what the minister has just gone through is the MFB. It is not the CFA. This is an issue that the MFB chief fire officer is raising, not the CFA. We are not talking about the MFB, but it again suits the minister to get into that approach of trying to mislead people about the issues. Anyone who was not aware of the details would think, 'Oh, that's a good point!' But the point is: this is not the MFB. We are talking about the CFA. They are two entirely different organisations.

Mr Warrington, the CFA Chief Officer, was asked to deal with the letter that you just read out. I will put on record what he said:

As requested, I have reviewed the letter that Mr Peter Rau, Chief Officer of the Metropolitan Fire and Emergency Services Board (MFB) sent to the Minister for Emergency Services, the Hon James Merlino MP, on 30 June 2016.

MFB and Country Fire Authority (CFA) are both Victorian fire services, but are governed by different pieces of legislation. The powers of the CFA Chief Officer (CO) and the MFB Chief Officer are expressed differently. Furthermore, CFA and MFB are culturally distinct organisations, in part because of CFA's founding as a volunteer organisation with a large jurisdiction.

Due to the differences between CFA and MFB, I do not think that issues faced by MFB under its enterprise agreement can be extrapolated to CFA's experience.

That is completely at odds with what the minister has just said. The minister just will not listen to the chief fire officer. He goes on to say:

I also make the following specific comments in response to issues raised by Mr Rau in his letter—

and this is under subparagraph (a)—

Mr Rau details several occasions where the need to consult with the United Firefighters Union (UFU) prevented Mr Rau, as Chief Officer of the MFB, deploying resources and people during emergency events. I have a letter from the Chair of the CFA Board—

and he enclosed it—

stating that:

'… the Fair Work Act 2009 and any award or agreement made under it cannot interfere with or detract from (my) powers and obligations under the Country Fire Authority Act 1958 concerning directions to perform work relating to the provision of essential services or in situations of emergency.'

This letter has provided me with assurance that I will not be prevented from deploying resources in an emergency as required.

He goes on to say:

(b) Mr Rau referred to the requirement to consult and agree as a UFU 'power of veto'. I do not agree with Mr Rau's characterisation of the consult and agree provisions of the Proposed Agreement. The agreement provisions require an agreement between the UFU and the CFA. This does not constitute a veto power for either party.

He goes on:

(c) Mr Rau expressed concern that arbitration by the Fair Work Commission (FWC) is not an effective mechanism to resolve disputes. As I stated in my evidence before the Committee, it has not been the experience of the CFA that I or the officers under my control have been 'locked away' at the FWC, attempting to resolve a dispute whilst we are in an emergency situation. Further, the CFA has negotiated a joint statement of intent with the UFU which, among other things, records the parties' intention to resolve disputes as quickly and efficiently as practicable …

(d) Mr Rau referred to the recommendation of Judge Lewis in relation to the clause 47 of the CFA Enterprise Bargaining Agreement 2002 dealing with "Uniforms and Equipment". The CFA consults with volunteer and career firefighters on uniform and personal protective equipment. Firefighting is a dangerous activity. The uniforms and equipment that firefighters wear and use is of critical importance. Decisions about these matters must be made carefully, with significant deliberation and research and with a process to take into account the views of those most directly affected—firefighters, whether they be career staff or volunteers.

(e) Mr Rau identified his need, as CO, to be able to immediately direct the deployment or relocation of resources as particularly important in the current evolving security and threat environment. I do not believe that, as CO, I would be prevented from deploying resources during an emergency event, which includes an emerging security threat.

Every point that Mr Rau raised, the chief officer, Mr Steven Warrington, says is not a problem for the CFA. So the arguments that the minister has put up do not hold any water. It is another example of this minister and this government trying to demonise the firefighters who are paid by the CFA. It is another example of this minister and this government trying to gain political advantage by arguing for division between the CFA volunteers and the paid firefighters, and the CFA Chief Officer has demolished every argument that the minister has put forward.

In relation to what she has just put to the Senate, anyone listening would think there is a problem with this agreement. The chief officer has constantly and continually said that this agreement will not take away from his power to look after the Victorian community. That is the bottom line, Minister. You are well aware of it. You certainly should not be continuing the propaganda—and that is all it was—that you peddled during the election campaign. You continue to peddle it here to try to diminish the rights of career firefighters, who, as anyone would argue, are as brave, courageous and committed to the Victorian public as any volunteer firefighter. In fact, in every station where they work together, they work together well, they deploy effectively together and they understand the issues faced by each other in relation to dealing with emergency situations. Minister, you should stop the propaganda and start dealing with the facts.

Sitting suspended from 18:30 to 19:30

Just before the break I went through the correspondence from the chief officer, Mr Stephen Warrington, in response to the MFB chief officer, Mr Peter Rau, which clearly indicated that the chief officer of the CFA did not see any problems in the CFA that Mr Peter Rau—I think he is the former chief officer—claimed he had experienced. So I put that proposition on the record.

Senator Cash, I now want to turn to two other issues that you raised in your response to Senator Rhiannon. You spoke about cross-crewing. I am advised that the cross-crewing has nothing to do with whether volunteers cross-crew. Cross-crewing is about career firefighters being designated to two different trucks on station where each truck should be separately crewed. So it is a safety issue for the firefighters to deal with this. Again, Senator Cash, I will draw your attention to the fact that this agreement is not about volunteers; it is about firefighters who are employed by the CFA. It is the career firefighters. So this has nothing to do with the volunteers. There is no ban on volunteers cross-crewing. If you look at some of the evidence that we had from those volunteers who work with the career firefighters on a regular basis, they actually say that this is not a problem. So this will not affect volunteer firefighters. I want your views on that.

On peer support, again you would have to read the agreement in the context that the agreement is about career firefighters. It is about the paid employees. The career firefighters—the paid employees—have issues about peer support. When you talk about peer support in this document you are not talking about peer support for the volunteers; you are talking about peer support for the firefighters who are career firefighters. This is, I am advised, highly personal. It is about personnel getting peer support after traumatic incidents. As you would be aware, many of the career firefighters attend traumatic incidents and the career firefighters have set up in this agreement a proposition where their counselling—where their peer support—will be done by their peers. Can you just clarify your position on this in the context of you saying this is a problem for volunteer firefighters? Because the agreement is clear: this is an agreement between the paid firefighters and the CFA, and both the cross-crewing and the peer support is simply about the paid firefighters.

The third area is about different uniforms. The agreement says that volunteers and careers need to be separately identified so that the incident controller can immediately identify their skills and qualifications. I want to know whether there is a problem with that. Why would there be a problem with being able to identify by looking at someone's uniform what skills and training they have had? Every career firefighter, I am advised, is fully trained for all seven roles on the fireground. Volunteers may or may not be fully trained for those seven roles. Many volunteers do not have breathing apparatus training or competency in that area. So it is vital, I am advised, that the incident controller can make instant decisions on the fireground and that different identifiers will do that. They can have the same uniform, it is just that there will be an identifier on the uniform. Are you aware of these issues, Minister?