Wednesday, 3 December 2025

 Melina BATH (Eastern Victoria) (15:43): I move:

That this house:

(1)   notes with great concern that Victoria remains inadequately prepared for the forthcoming bushfire season, with excessive forest fuel loads and insufficient mitigation works;

(2)   acknowledges that the Victorian bushfires royal commission recommended the annual fuel reduction of at least five per cent of public forest area, yet the government’s current program achieves on average only 1.5 per cent per year;

(3)   further notes that:

(a) Forest Fire Management Victoria has:

(i) completed only 67 per cent of planned fuel reduction and 26 per cent of priority works over the past two years;

(ii) expended over $1.1 billion above budget in nine years, with only 5 per cent of expenditure directed to direct fuel reduction activities;

(iii) grounded a significant proportion of its firefighting fleet at the commencement of the 2025–‍26 fire season;

(b) over the past 18 years, more than 60 per cent of Victoria’s mature forest has been lost to bushfire, much of which could have been prevented through effective mitigation and early intervention; and

(4)   calls on the Allan government to protect life, property, flora and fauna from preventable bushfire disasters.

This is a very serious and significant motion. I am sure all in this house understand to a greater or lesser degree about the impact of out-of-control bushfires on our fair state. In fact our fair state has been dealt the blow of significant bushfire impacts over the last 20 years. But indeed even as far back as the 1939 bushfires they have had a devastating impact not only on human life but also on our landscape, our forests, our flora and fauna, our stock, our humans and our infrastructure. So it is in this context that I want to raise this debate in this house at the start of December and on the cusp of the 2025–26 bushfire season. The seasonal summer bushfire outlook for 2025–26 has been alerted as a high-fire risk season with warmer than average summers, so we are going to expect a hot summer. We have seen that there have been significant mild and wet winters. The ultimate issue is that bushfires flourish on, expand on and create intensity on fuel load, and it is something that I am going to spend time addressing today. Because of the topography of Victoria that exists – we have hills, we have ravines, we have grasslands and we have forests and plains – and the weather that is coming, government cannot do anything about the weather in the short term, nor that much in the long term. But what the government can do, the lever that is within control of a state government, is manage the amount of fuel load. It is a significant burden on the state to mitigate bushfires, but prevention has to be better than cure. Prevention, forward planning, preparation and mitigation prior to a bushfire season, through mosaic fuel reduction, has to be the way forward, because we have seen – and I will put on record some statistics – that over the years billions of dollars have been spent attempting to suppress out-of-control bushfires that could have and potentially should have been reduced to a smaller intensity and therefore smaller impact fires had there been preparation made, certainly in the last 10 years.

Everyone knows that bushfire in the landscape is a natural phenomenon of Australia and Victoria. We know that our eucalypt forests have grown up because of bushfires or ignition from back in the day – it would have been over thousands and thousands of years – from lightning strikes. Of course if you read the book by Bill Gammage TheBiggest Estate on Earth, that academic has read, researched and investigated the early, I will say, explorers, early British colonialists, and the assessment that he made was that our traditional owners, our Aboriginal Australians, First Nations people, cultivated and used fire as a management tool to create expansive grasslands so that the animals that they used for feed and the herbs and medicines that they used flourished. They were managers of this land. Of course settlement disrupted that. However, if we go forward 200 years, governments need to look backwards and see how those cultural burns were done, and how the mountain cattlemen did pastoral burns as well, and learn from this. There is a plethora – you only need to go out and google it, and you will find firestick ecology written about in great detail.

I am not fool enough to think that we can just snap our fingers and go to that philosophy and put it into practice, but I firmly believe and the Liberals and Nationals know that you can walk and chew gum. This government should be and has not been doing fuel mitigation burns as recommended in the 2009 Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission recommendation 56, which prescribed 5 per cent on an ongoing basis for fuel reduction, and that could be through burns or through mechanical reduction. What this government has forgotten to do – it does a lot of lip-service – is embrace that philosophy. That philosophy that was borne out of the bushfire royal commission came from experts, witnesses and people who lived and worked in bushfire zones. Foresters, scientists and traditional owners gave evidence, and that was the target that they set, and what the government has not done over the last 10 years is provide that level of focus and action.

It is okay to have a policy, and the policy that the government introduced in 2015 was Safer Together. If you go out to my region, Eastern Victoria, and talk to a lot of locals down there in the various beautiful towns, particularly close to forests, they will tell you what they think of Safer Together. They think certainly it is ‘unsafer together’, and I will go into that in a little bit more detail. But what we see today at the start of a fire season is a government that is not prepared. We see a seasonal bushfire outlook of high risk, heightened risk and high fuel loads. And that is not a statement from me; go and look it up on the website. That is coming directly from a commission that deals with Australia and New Zealand. There is a website, and very sadly, right across from the western side of Victoria to central, central north and over to the south and west of Gippsland, it is red. It is on high fire danger alert.

What the government does with this Safer Together policy is – there is always devil in the detail and statistics – it takes fuel reduction at a district level, at a regional level and at a state level and then averages it out, so it can say that it is actually doing the work for its target. I challenge that – it is a flawed target – but it says that it is meeting its targets. But if we drill down to areas, we see that in the Grampians it is not meeting these targets; in Port Phillip, basically all of the city area, it is not meeting those targets; in Latrobe district it is not meeting targets; and in the Midlands district it is not meeting targets. I drove through the Yarra Valley recently a number of times when I was tripping around the state. There is a lot of fuel load in the Yarra Valley and of course in the Ovens Valley as well and in Gippsland, as I have said.

When Victoria experiences these fires – 1.5 million hectares were incinerated in 2019–20 – there is nothing more wholesome and heartwarming than a community that rallies under stress, that rallies in crisis. But we should not be putting these communities under this level of stress. We see the CFA, we see first responders and we see all manner of agencies, both government and volunteer agencies, come to the fore, and we really are at our best. One of the heartbreaking things that I saw during the 2020 fires was authorised officers going out with rifles on their backs, getting flown out to Mallacoota to shoot kangaroos that were maimed through this inferno. That is not saving either our flora or our fauna, and I put it to the government that it needs to be doing more.

If I go to some of the attributes in this motion and we look at, as I have said, the bushfire royal commission, I have put some questions in this house in adjournment debates and in questions on notice to the Minister for Environment, and one that has come back recently to me – it is a public document – states:

Over the past 10 years, an average of 100,700 hectares per year has been treated through planned burning …

And then it goes on:

Additionally, an average of 15,000 hectares per year … has been treated mechanically.

If we average that out into the total landscape, that comes to below 1.5 per cent of public forested area that has been treated, well below that 5 per cent of mosaic burns that was recommended by the bushfire royal commission.

The other thing I just want to touch on is this idea of residual risk, because it is a very strange concept. I even asked a gentleman who was one of the Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action (DEECA) – then known as the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning – staff who actually engaged in this when he was working for the department, and he said it is so confusing – many people get confused. The average – 70 per cent – residual risk is only 30 per cent below catastrophic levels. There is a definition for that – but catastrophic levels. This is calculated – and this is the clincher – after including area burnt by high-intensity wildfires. I have spoken about the 1.5 million hectares in the east and north-east of this state in 2019–20. That area that has been burnt out the government use in their calculations to meet their targets about saving Victorians and community. I challenge the government that this is certainly a flawed system and it needs to be reworked.

I also want to provide some context around point 3(a), that Forest Fire Management Victoria has completed only 67 per cent of planned burns and 26 per cent of priority burns over the last two years. When I was looking at this document and working through this document I was looking at the previous years in the Parks Victoria and DEECA reports. This latest one has just been dumped and is not in my calculations, but the theme is still there and the reality is still there: that Forest Fire Management has a poor track record on bushfire mitigation and fire control and that over the last few years only 67 per cent of its planned burns and a mere 26 of its priority planned burns have been conducted. As I have said, Yarra, Latrobe, Midlands, Ovens and metropolitan Melbourne are the most significantly affected. What we also know is that FFMV, Forest Fire Management Victoria, under the department of environment, spends a significant amount on fire suppression and disaster recovery. If you drill down into the fine weeds of the report, it only is actually spending about 5 per cent on actual fuel reduction, which is a key to bushfire mitigation.

If you couple that with other research that I have done in my time, the Liberals and Nationals are very concerned that, if you look at the stats and go in and drill down and see the management, there are overwhelmingly more managers and more executives, receiving about 70 per cent of the pay of income overall for that section of the department – 70 per cent of people working as a manager or an executive. Flip that, and under 30 per cent are field rangers, field officers, boots on the ground. We certainly feel and are highly concerned that this again reflects a citycentric, centralised decision-making philosophy rather than devolving the experience out into the regions and working in the department but with community. I will tell you many stories of frustrated citizens that have spoken to me about how it is not working. People are getting cut and hours are getting cut in the department. There is not that local content knowledge.

We argue about bespoke understandings in this place. The government even argues about being aware of what is happening in community. One of the best ways to find out what is happening in terms of bushfire mitigation and protecting our communities and the forests that surround them is to go out to those regions and talk to the experts that have been either working for the department for many years or in the CFA, which has had more constraints put on it. Victorians have seen higher taxes in terms of the emergency services levy. That is not all going to CFA or SES. Overwhelmingly it is for consolidated revenue, which once upon a time was for Emergency Management Victoria, Triple Zero Victoria and the like. We are seeing higher taxes on regional people, including CFA, including farmers, including anyone that owns a business or a house. We are seeing that happening, but we are not seeing the on-the-ground product, which should be bushfire mitigation.

I may be sounding like I am harping on, but in 2019 on 19 December I went to Orbost and I sat with people. One of them was a former department worker who had worked for the government over many different governments, who sat there – a very well respected person – and said, ‘Melina, I can tell you they got the map out and they said the Snowy River fire that occurred in the Snowy River through lightning strikes was let burn through uphill and down dale.’ If there had have been better tracks open, mitigation activity and more patchwork burns – they sat there with a forester, who still had a job at that stage, who had put his life on the line when it came through – it would not have burnt with such intensity all the way down to Mallacoota and in its place taken five lives, destroyed hundreds of buildings and ruined people’s lives. I do not shirk away from the Liberals or Nationals standing up for this issue and putting on the record that more needs to be done.

One of these dot points speaks to the significant portion of the fire fleet that is grounded. I have spoken about this. The Liberals and Nationals have spoken about this at length. We have got 290 G-Wagons and 59 Unimogs that are off the road, that are grounded. This government purchased them for $32 million eight or so years ago. There were structural defects in them; the government has taken them off. How many and what that meant we tried to ask in the Public Accounts and Estimates Committee the other day. We were shut down on that. I have put questions on notice. Victorians deserve to understand what is happening to our firefighting fleet. They deserve to understand how this government is begging New South Wales and South Australia for vehicles to backfill our loss. It also said to the CFA, ‘Listen, CFA, we might need some of your old and aged trucks,’ which are not being replaced at nearly a fast enough rate. You can hear about all the wonderful things the government is supposedly doing, but if you go and talk to the VFBV, Volunteer Fire Brigades Victoria, they will tell you of the reality, of the need to replace ageing trucks so old that they could get plates for vintage cars. This is an indictment on the government – I do put my serious concern.

The other thing that is really, really important about this is that our forests are fragile. I give the context of the alpine forests in those fires that came along around 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006 – those sorts of fires up in the alpine region. Alpine ash is a beautiful substance. It was used for hardwood of course, but no longer. What these prolific and returning fires do is that they interrupt the life cycle of mountain ash. Mountain ash need about 15 to 20 years to grow so that they can actually flower and produce seed that can then go and be used for further development. There needs to be a whole lot of work done on seed storage and protection. This government needs to take this seriously.

I call on the Allan government to protect life and property and flora and fauna from preventable bushfire disasters. I am not saying in any way that bushfire disasters are not going to happen. I understand that fire is in the landscape; it will be in our landscape. But what this government can do is reduce the intensity, reduce the impact and start to protect some of that life and property and flora and fauna, because we cannot cope with another season that we saw in the west, in the Grampians. It is too heartbreaking to cope with these massive megafires that exist in eastern Victoria and through the north. I commend this motion to the house.

 Michael GALEA (South-Eastern Metropolitan) (16:03): I rise to speak on the motion today that has been put by Ms Bath, and in doing so I acknowledge the incredible importance of this issue. In fact I quite appreciate the opportunity that Ms Bath has given this chamber to discuss what is a significant issue facing this state, with the latest data in from the Australasian Fire and Emergency Service Authorities Council showing large parts of central, southern and western Victoria at increased fire risk for this coming season.

However, I will not be supporting the motion that Ms Bath has put forward today, because while I acknowledge her sincerity and her passion for this issue, I am very much concerned that what she stated to the house is not the factual state of affairs. Notably almost the very first line refers to the preparation and how adequate it is – that is not the case. We have had repeated advice from the chief fire officer, who has assured the government that Forest Fire Management Victoria (FFMVic) are fully prepared to fight fires right now. We have had some unseasonable rain across much of this part of Victoria. That is obviously a bit of a double-edged sword when it comes to fire. When it comes to this time of year, we want the ground to dampen, but we also do not want to be having too much vegetation that can dry out when the weather changes. We do have that advice from the chief fire officer that Victoria is prepared right now and is as prepared as we reasonably can be. I do want to correct the record firstly in that respect. This is an important issue for us to be discussing. We should be discussing it, but it is all the more important that we discuss it soberly and stay as close to the facts as possible.

Indeed on that note I would also like to touch on another remark that Ms Bath made in her contribution in relation to the G-Wagon fleet. I understand that this has been a source of much discussion and a big topic of conversation and a topic of concern for many. Ms Bath indicated to the chamber that they are all out of service. That is simply not correct. I can confirm that the majority of G-Wagons are back and fully operational and are ready to go right now. The investments that this government has been making, specifically with the G-Wagons, but more broadly – which I will be happy to go into, time permitting, shortly – into FFMVic, just as investments have been made into the CFA and FRV, and indeed the SES, which is an important emergency service as well, are ensuring that our fire services are as fully equipped and prepared as they possibly can be. We have that advice from the chief fire officer saying that we are as prepared as we can be.

Whilst I welcome the opportunity to debate this, I really, really would hope that members opposite would not use this as a political ploy to try and have a go at the government, because this is a serious issue. I know members across the chamber agree on the severity of this issue. We have all, directly or indirectly, felt the consequences of some of the horrific fire seasons we have had, whether it was the Black Summer bushfires of 2019–20 or whether it was Black Saturday of 2009. I vividly recall, in fact, I was on my learners, driving back from the city on Black Saturday on the Monash Freeway, and you could not see the sky through Narre Warren because of the black smoke coming over Gippsland. To be overtaken by 20 fire trucks and of course to later find out that family members had to evacuate at the last minute from their property in West Gippsland – fortunately, they and their house were spared. These are the stories we all have, whether direct or indirect, in this place. It is an important issue, and it is an important for us to be as accurate as we can be. I do note the investment that has been made into FFMVic in particular. We know they have currently over 1700 total vehicles and heavy machinery ready to be deployed, as well as 1500 personnel, again, available right now. This is because of the investments that this government has been making consistently over the 10-year period to FFMVic.

More broadly, we know that whether our firefighters are in green or in yellow or in orange, we are giving them the resources that they need, and we will continue to do so. I will say that the Emergency Services and Volunteers Fund is a very big part of that, providing not only that enhanced funding model towards the CFA but, for the first time, a clear, sustainable funding model for the SES as well. Despite other misinformation that has been put out by Liberal and National party members on the ESVF, we know – and we had it confirmed indeed in the Public Accounts and Estimates Committee just last week – that each of these agencies have seen no cuts, despite what those opposite have said. We are seeing increases in investment in FFMVic, in CFA and in FRV.

We know that planned burning is an important part of bushfire management in this state, and we do of course take a risk-based approach to bushfire management, incorporating in those recommendations of the 2009 Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission. Planned burning is an essential component of reducing that risk, and there is a statewide risk-based target to design, deliver and monitor the effectiveness of the planned burning program on public land in reducing fuel-driven bushfire risk to human life and to residential property. The approach has been repeatedly reviewed by experts in inquiries and consistently been found to be a leading practice in Australia and indeed internationally. We know that the previous 5 per cent target recommended by the royal commission was found by the royal commission’s implementation monitor to not be achievable or sustainable over many years as well. What we are focused on is not an arbitrary figure but a risk-based approach that focuses attention to where it is needed most, understanding of course we can never fully predict every possible scenario or be able to respond proactively to every eventuality. But the risk-based approach means that we are doing the very best that we can so that our firefighters can actually prevent these dangers.

We know, though, that in the previous financial year, 2023–24, FFMVic treated bushfire fuel across more than 138,000 hectares, which was part of a planned burning program of 122,000 hectares, reducing the statewide fuel-driven bushfire risk to life and property by an estimated 64 per cent, again reflecting the value of going for the risk-based approach rather than arbitrary targeted figures of 5 per cent or any other. Risk calculations for the year are still underway and will be released at the end of the year. However, we are confident that we will achieve that statewide target once again.

We also know that, as Ms Bath talked about as well, the workforce is a critical component of the delivery of FFMVic’s land management, bushfire and emergency response duties. They do have access to, beyond what I have already mentioned, more than 3000 trained, accredited and medically fit emergency personnel for fire and emergency response across several different agencies. We know that our seasonal firefighters play a critical role alongside other experienced crews in responding to bushfires in some of the state’s most vulnerable and remote and challenging environments.

I do note the comments as well about CFA fleets, and indeed just about a month ago now I was very pleased to join with the Minister for Emergency Services Vicki Ward at the CFA state logistics hub, which is in my electorate in Scoresby – a fantastic site, as Ms Watt knows all too well as the hardworking Parliamentary Secretary for Emergency Services. I know that she has been out there many times, and indeed we were there to inspect and see the rollout of 50 Isuzu four-by-four crew-cab chassis, which will become light tankers for the CFA and will be rolled out to brigades across Victoria from next year – again, a really important component of continuing the process of upgrading and modernising and that continual renewal of the CFA fleet with modern equipment and safety features. It builds on the $40 million CFA rolling fleet replacement program, which was announced in December last year, alongside the $40 million program for FRV and another $30 million program for Victoria’s SES, ensuring that whether you are an FRV or a CFA firefighter or whether you are in the SES as a volunteer, you have got the most modern equipment that you can have.

There is always more to do, I hasten to add. But that is why that we are making these investments, and I will always continue to push for and support brigades and units in my region, especially in those outer suburban areas, that fire risk belt in the outer south-east, which have seen some tragedies, going back a bit longer ago now to Ash Wednesday, but are still very vulnerable. I will continue to fight for my brigades to have the best resources they can.

 Gaelle BROAD (Northern Victoria) (16:13): I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak on this motion, and I do want to thank my colleague Melina Bath for putting it forward, because this is a big issue, particularly for my electorate of Northern Victoria. I note the motion starts with ‘great concern that Victoria remains inadequately prepared for the forthcoming bushfire season, with excessive forest fuel loads and insufficient mitigation works’ and it goes on to highlight a number of issues. I was walking in Melbourne early this week while we have been down here for Parliament, and a fire truck passed through and set off the alarms, with the siren going. It made me think: this is the purpose of this motion, to say to the government that action is required – and urgent action is required. Just today we have had on the steps of Parliament a number of people who have put together a book, Our Mismanaged Forests. John Mulligan was one of those that compiled it, and I thank Ms Bath for her work in having them here to present it. They did speak about the significant concern of the fuel loads in our forest and talk through the experience – I think he was 94 years of age – of seeing bushfires over the years and the impact that it has had. The mountain cattlemen were there represented as well on the steps of Parliament today, and they talked about it not being a fire issue but a fuel load issue.

I know from my own husband’s experience with the CFA – I remember a night when he was out fighting fires, and our family stayed at a friend’s place because the smoke was very thick. We had very young children at the time, and it just gave me that eerie experience of what it is like. Many have lived through that experience. I have spoken with a number of residents that have been impacted by bushfires over the years, and it is horrific. It is an experience that no-one wants to go through, and communities take a very long time – that recovery process is very long. We need to do what we can to prevent these situations from occurring. I know Ms Bath spoke to this earlier and it is also described in the motion itself, but the 2009 Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission recommended the annual fuel reduction of at least 5 per cent of public forest area. Yet the government’s current reduction program achieves an average of only 1.5 per cent per year. I have spoken with people who work in forest fire management, and they are very concerned. I was contacted recently because they are so concerned by the fuel loads in our forests and the overflow of the lack of maintenance of tracks in our forests, which will inhibit emergency vehicles should the need for them arise. That fuel load just does not make any sense. We see, under this government, they have been closing down firewood collection areas, and yet there is so much in our forests. If that was managed better, it would certainly reduce some of the risk.

We have also heard and we have, as has been said, raised concerns about the 290 G-Wagons and 59 Unimogs, critical frontline firefighting vehicles that were taken offline due to chassis and subframe faults. It was good to hear Mr Galea speak earlier about some of those vehicles being back online. But the question is: how did we get to that point, and why did we get to the point where so many vehicles are out of operation? It makes me consider the truck issue and appliance issue that we see with the CFA. I have had many conversations with CFA volunteers who are very frustrated at the slow rate of new fire trucks coming through. Many still have trucks that just have coverage for two volunteers, and the rest of the volunteers and the crew are exposed on the back of the truck. Those upgrades are required to give our volunteers the proper resources to be out there protecting our local communities. Sadly, it currently takes about 5½ years from when they order a fire truck to the fire truck actually being delivered because there are parts of the truck coming from different parts of the world and put together. It is a very slow process currently. What we are seeing is it is going to take years for us to have the proper equipment. The CFA maintains close to 2000 tankers, and many of them are well past their use-by date. We have crews out there with trucks that are over 35 years old, and there is a whole cascading system of trucks where old ones pass on to the next ones, pass on to the next ones, and so it goes on. So many CFA volunteers are out there actually raising funds themselves for appliances. They are out doing the sausage sizzles and meeting with local businesses and trying to raise the funds. That is what they are doing off their own backs to protect their local communities because they care.

We saw a petition recently, signed by over 43,000 people, which flagged concerns about the new emergency services tax because, sadly, this government talks about that being for volunteers, but it is clear from speaking with volunteers that they know that that is not the case. We are seeing this government searching for more funds to cover the costs for public servants that were previously funded under the state budget, yet now we have volunteers being taxed. When I was at Axe Creek station just last week I spoke with a number of volunteers there, and with two of them – I just found this extraordinary – their rates notices are in their wives’ names, so even though they have been volunteering for decades they are not eligible to receive the rebate. I know CFA volunteers have written and they have put this on social media as well. They have voiced the concerns of many brigades, because this government have not been transparent about how many CFA volunteers are actually eligible, or ineligible, for the new emergency services and volunteers rebate. They repeatedly cite figures of over 55,000 CFA and VICSES volunteers being covered by the scheme, and yet there are nearly 29,000 operational members of the CFA but there is no publicly available breakdown of how many volunteers meet the rebate’s strict criteria. I spoke with another volunteer, who was very frustrated because he had been asked for information on the back of his rates notice. He said there is nothing on the back of the rates notice. It has been such a slow process for many of them, and questions have been asked in Parliament but the government has not been forthcoming. It is very clear that we need answers from the government about the number of CFA volunteers who meet the eligibility criteria, broken down by brigade and service category; two, the number of volunteers deemed ineligible and the reasons why; and three, the number of volunteers who have applied, been approved or been rejected since the scheme opened.

I have also talked in this chamber today about Axe Creek station and the lack of facilities that they have at the station. They are one of the oldest brigades in Victoria – over 110 years old – and yet they do not have storage facilities there. They only have a portable loo out the back. There is nowhere for women volunteers to change. So I have put to the minister the need to prioritise further assistance there.

I do think that our emergency services volunteers do not ask for much but do deserve honesty and clarity and respect for the service that they provide our community. It is so important that as a state we are prepared for bushfires, because we do have a lot of Crown land, and unfortunately the majority of major fires start in Crown land. So we need to reduce the burden that is on our volunteers by stopping it before it starts. This government could do so much more, and that is what this motion is about today. It is about raising awareness and asking the government to take action, because, yes, people and residents everywhere need to be as prepared as they can, and I encourage them to visit the CFA website because there is certainly a lot of information about what they can do to be prepared for bushfire. But what we need the government to do is to take responsibility, read this motion and ensure that Victoria is better prepared for bushfires.

 Sheena WATT (Northern Metropolitan) (16:23): I rise today to acknowledge the critical efforts of all Victoria’s firefighters in the lead-up to this year’s bushfire season. Victoria is one of the most bushfire-prone regions in the world, and the brave men and women that make up our brigades, agencies and other groups work tirelessly year round to keep our community safe. Forest Fire Management Victoria – FFMV – CFA, FRV, the Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action (DEECA) and several other agencies ensure that the Victorian community remains well protected from the threat of bushfire. The dedicated Victorians that make up these agencies mean that we are fully prepared to fight fires.

Bushfire risk is managed through a variety of measures, including prevention, preparedness and response activities. More specifically, these measures might include fuel management like planned burning and mechanical treatment, maintaining access to our road and fuel break network, maintaining diverse methods of detecting fires early and rapid first attack capability to keep fires small using both ground and air resources. Fuel management particularly is an essential part of this approach, but it works in collaboration with other agencies. Victoria takes a risk-based approach to bushfire management, meaning the resources we invest are directed where they will have the greatest impact on keeping Victorians and the property they value as safe as possible.

Planned burning is an essential component of our approach to reducing our bushfire risk. FFMV uses a statewide risk-based target to deliver, design and monitor the effectiveness of the planned burning program on public land in reducing fuel-driven bushfire harm to human life and to residential property. In the financial year 2023–24 FFMV treated bushfire fuels across 138,454 hectares in Victoria. This included a planned burning program of 122,291 hectares, which reduced the statewide fuel-driven bushfire risk to life and property to 64 per cent, clearly achieving the statewide target to reduce it to below or at 70 per cent of maximum levels. In the financial year 2024–25 FFMV delivered 270 planned burns, covering 92,473 hectares. Risk calculations for the year have not been calculated as yet, and they will be released at the end of the year. However, we are confident we will achieve the statewide target once again.

In areas where fuel reduction is not safe and is a risk for reduction, FFMV have complemented the planned burning program with a non-burn fuel treatment. That can in cases include actions such as slashing and mowing. 16,163 hectares were subject to non-burn fuel treatments last financial year, and planned burns were compliant and complemented by 17,464 hectares of non-burn fuel treatments. Bushfire risk is not just reduced through fuel management, whether through planned burning or non-burn fuel treatments; it is also reduced in other ways. There is also mitigation, planning, preparedness and response, which all work in sync to support safer and more resilient communities.

On-ground activities are weather-dependent, and parts of the state, as we know from this week, can experience conditions that are unsafe for safe and effective planned burning, while other parts of the state in fact have a window of availability. For example, planned burning when it is too cold and wet is, unsurprisingly, ineffective and risky when it is too hot and dry. FFMV uses weather data and on-ground information to make judgements about when and how to burn safely.

The Allan Labor government will always make sure that our emergency services have the funding, resources and strategies they need to keep Victorians safe. Like all emergency agencies, DEECA receives annual funding through the annual budget process and each year also receives funding supplementation for emergency response activities that are not able to be predicted or quantified at budget time, and it is supplemented each year for urgent or seasonal needs. The supplementary funding will be reflected in the revised budget in budget paper 3, but this excludes the supplementation of emergency response, which will be reflected in DEECA’s annual report, as it is typically allocated in late June when all the costs have actually been tallied. Therefore the differences in the opening and revised budgets published in budget paper 3 should not be misconstrued as overspends above budget. Furthermore, whilst direct fuel management costs may present as being a small component of the fire and emergency management revised budget, it is important to note that the direct costs are only costs incurred on the days of specific burn and non-burn operations. These are direct costs and include expenses on materials, plant, aircraft hire, overtime allowances, accommodation and meals. But what they do not cover are substantial indirect fuel management costs such as base salaries, training, vehicles, equipment, planning and community engagement. There are also expenses that sit outside of non-fuel management but that contribute to the work, such as the fire radio network costs, systems and other aviation.

Additionally, the Victorian government has also invested $290 million over four years for forestry contractor strategy in the 2024–25 budget, which provides DEECA with access to plant and machinery from former timber harvesting contractors, and that is something we have spoken about in this place before. These contribute to fuel management activities.

I would like to take the time now to thank the firefighters on the front lines who do the hard work of keeping Victorians safe. Whilst they are doing this difficult job it is our government’s job to make sure that these brave men and women are also kept safe. As part of our annual fleet checks before the season starts some structural issues were identified, prompting immediate action to ensure that the crews remain safe. A number of vehicles are being temporarily stood down while they are repaired and returned to service as soon as they are cleared. These vehicles are already coming back online. Contingency vehicles have been sourced to supplement the firefighting fleet, if they are needed, while this expedited inspection and repair program is underway. The expedited repair and return to service program, in conjunction with the sourced contingency vehicles, will see the fleet at or near full strength before the peak of the season.

The Allan Labor government is not just backing in these life-saving organisations with words; we will always make sure that every one of these organisations that works to both prevent and fight fires has all the resources they need to save lives. That is why we have doubled the funding in our emergency services. That includes $1.5 billion for the CFA over the past four years for more trucks, new stations and more support.

I had the good fortune in fact in the last couple of weeks of visiting a number of stations. Can I just say that many are entirely delighted with this investment. All this funding, however, is at risk because of the reckless choices of those opposite, when they say they are on the side of volunteers but have also said that they will walk back key recommendations from the 2009 Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission and cut the emergency services dedicated funding stream, the Emergency Services and Volunteers Fund. This inevitably means cutting new trucks and equipment from our SES and our CFA volunteers.

Ann-Marie Hermans: On a point of order, Acting President, this is not the time to be attacking the opposition with blatant lies.

The ACTING PRESIDENT (Jeff Bourman): I was not listening that closely, I will be honest. Let us not attack the opposition as a general rule.

Sheena WATT: I was about to explore the $11.1 billion black hole in the budget that is currently being presented to the Victorian community by those opposite, but I understand and will respect your ruling, Acting President.

For the benefit of the chamber, it is worth reaffirming our commitment to our firefighters. I particularly want to highlight again that our government will make sure that they have the right vehicles and equipment to keep all Victorians safe and the proper tactics to protect our homes and our lives.

We also recognise that climate change is making Victorian fire seasons hotter and drier. It is the sacrifices that our firies on the front line make that keep Victorians safe: the hours of work that they put in, not just when the fires are burning but in the months leading up to the season, clearing fuel responsibly through both controlled burns and other tactics, managing fire risks by observing the landscape from the air and monitoring our state’s increasingly volatile weather patterns to make sure that we can prevent bushfires entirely where possible. To all the firies right across the state who are preparing to face this summer’s fire season and their families: the Allan Labor government sincerely thanks you in preparation for the season ahead.

 Bev McARTHUR (Western Victoria) (16:34): I rise to speak on Ms Bath’s planned burn motion, motion 1139. I thank her for bringing it to our attention. We have heard a lot of damning statistics here about the government’s approach, and I strongly support that criticism. The speed with which the royal commission’s recommendations were ditched should alarm us all. But I want to touch on a couple of slightly different issues.

Firstly, I would like to endorse Ms Bath’s comments about Indigenous cultural burns and what that would do to improve the situation. For the benefit of the house I thought I would relay the message I got from the department when I raised this in the past. I thought it might be interesting politically to see how the state government reacted to this proposal, a measure in support of Indigenous practice but also involving environmental intervention. The response exceeded even my expectations. It seems another contributing factor in the government’s failure to meet the 2009 Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission burning targets is a fear that use of traditional techniques would constitute cultural appropriation.

Members interjecting.

The ACTING PRESIDENT (Jeff Bourman): Order! Mrs McArthur to continue without assistance, please.

Bev McARTHUR: Can you stop the clock? I will go back.

The ACTING PRESIDENT (Jeff Bourman): No, play on, Mrs McArthur.

Bev McARTHUR: I thought it might be interesting politically to see how the state government reacted to the proposal – a measure in support of Indigenous practice but also involving environmental intervention. The response exceeded even my expectation. It seems another contributing factor in the government’s failure to meet the royal commission on bushfire burning targets is a fear that use of traditional techniques would constitute cultural appropriation. Here is the exact reply I got when I encouraged the return of slow burns:

The government is respectful of the cultural and intellectual property rights of Traditional Owners. Knowledge of how to apply cultural fire and the purpose of that application is knowledge owned and held by Traditional Owners, not the Victorian Government or the Departments involved in forest and fire management.

Surely we should be prioritising planned burns, not promoting frankly indefensible intellectual property arguments.

The other point I want to raise is a different ideological danger. There is a strong link between the fashionable idea in the department and progressive political party ranks that humans somehow spoil the purity of nature. It is as if the simple act of locking up land equals environmental protection – it does not. The belief that people and nature should never interact is not conservation, it is ideology, and it is seriously damaging to communities, to local economies and to the environment itself. Good land management requires people, and I include in this planned burns. It needs active use through volunteers, campers, horseriders, bushwalkers, prospectors and forestry workers, who serve as the bush’s watchful guardians. Removing these people leaves forests unmonitored and mounting fuel loads, spreading invasive weeds and unchecked feral animals.

I have repeatedly raised fire management concerns in this Parliament. Victoria’s fire management is not working. As discussed today, the government abandoned the 2009 Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission’s recommended targets. They neglected track maintenance and failed to reduce fuel loads. Farmers consistently tell me that the government is by far the worst neighbour, with land overrun with weeds, excessive fuel loads and poor pest control. The native timber industry’s treatment has been disastrous too. Ending timber harvesting eliminated a skilled workforce that always contributed hugely to fire response. When the next major fire strikes, it will not be urban activists responding, it will be locals who actually know the land.

Finally, there is another important factor: the activists’ lawfare campaigns waged by environmentalists against state agencies. I have previously discussed the problematic relationship between professional activists, charities and academics. This coalition exploits well-meaning but uncritical environmental supporters. They run campaigns, raise funds, employ activists and finance biased research. This research fuels legal cases against the state, generating publicity that drives more fundraising, a cycle that destroys legitimate industries. Forestry demonstrates this perfectly. VicForests could not conduct lawful business. The minister even told VicForests to abandon legal action to recover $2 million in taxpayer funds from anti-logging group MyEnvironment. The activists won: native timber harvesting was banned and VicForests disbanded. Despite this victory, the ban will likely cause more environmental damage, not less, alongside devastating economic losses. Now they are focusing on planned burns. The native timber ban and the pulping of VicForests is not the end of the story. Facebook pages are fundraising for continued legal action, while Australian National University academic Professor David Lindenmayer has produced research claiming prescribed burning can worsen bushfires. The Victorian Forest Alliance’s Facebook page has mobilised, posting images of an apocalyptic scene of a planned burn, supposedly demonstrating how dangerous and ineffective planned burning regimes actually are. Professor Lindenmayer states:

We’ve understood for a long time now that logging can make bushfires worse, but it’s only in the last few years that evidence is showing that prescribed burning could be doing the same thing …

The pattern is familiar, and the campaign is gathering momentum. If we want to save planned burns, we need to resist this new development too.

 Ryan BATCHELOR (Southern Metropolitan) (16:41): I am very pleased to rise to speak on the motion about bushfire preparedness moved by Ms Bath. Obviously we all understand as Victorians, having in our lifetimes witnessed some particularly devastating fires, that Victoria is one of the most bushfire-prone regions in the world, and the ferocity, the intensity and the relentlessness with which fire can burn through our bush and destroy our homes, destroy businesses and, sadly on too many occasions, take lives means that we all collectively, and individually for those of us who might reside or be travelling through bushfire-prone regions at times of risk, have to take the question of bushfire preparedness so incredibly seriously. It is those functions working cohesively, whether it is individual preparedness, whether it is community support and resourcefulness or whether it is emergency services, and their deployments acting in concert that make sure that we as a collective community and those who are at the frontline and most exposed, depending on where a particular fire front may emerge, are best prepared to deal with these issues and these challenges, particularly as we head into another bushfire season that has a seasonal outlook that points to another summer of increased risk throughout our state.

We know that the risk to our seasonal outlook is being driven by long-term rainfall deficits. Despite what may be seasonal fluctuations dampening certainly parts of the soil, we are seeing, particularly in certain parts of the state, long-term trends of rainfall deficit, and that has a sustained and increased impact on the condition of the bush and its propensity to burn should conditions arise. We – some of us at least – believe that some of that activity and risk is being driven by climate change and the way that our climate is changing. That may not be a view that is held universally, but it is a view that is held near universally by those who listen to the science. We know that right across the state now dedicated brigades, particularly those of the volunteers in the CFA but more broadly as well, are getting ready. From the CFA to Forest Fire Management Victoria and across the board, this government is investing to make sure that those agencies have the equipment, the funding and the resources that they need to do their job of helping to keep Victorians safe.

The crux of this motion is wanting to make sure that we are adequately prepared for bushfire risk, and I think one of the ways that we collectively need to be adequately prepared for bushfire risk is by making sure that there is enough funding for our emergency services. It is very hard to be prepared to address bushfire risk if you are cutting funding to emergency services. It is very hard to be prepared for bushfire risk if your emergency services are worried that the funding that they are relying upon, the investment that they are receiving, is at risk of being cut. What this government has done, through the legislation that we have put in place to increase the amount of funding that is available to our emergency services here in Victoria through the Emergency Services and Volunteers Fund, is increase the amount of funding that is available to our emergency services. Every single dollar raised through the Emergency Services and Volunteers Fund, which is appearing on the rates notices of households right across this state – everyone is being asked, on those rates notices, to be part of this system, because collectively we are benefiting – is being invested in our emergency services. That means more money for the CFA and more money for other forms of fire management.

Back to the CFA: this government has invested $1.5 billion over the last four years for more trucks, stations and support. We have got $40 million of funding in a rolling fleet replacement program, and $62 million has doubled funding for equipment grants. Just last week the government announced over $22 million for the CFA through our volunteer emergency services equipment program – the largest allocation in that program – because of the additional funding that this government has provided through the Emergency Services and Volunteers Fund already hitting the allocations for emergency services, doing what it is intended to do, making sure that our emergency services, like the CFA, are prepared for the bushfire risk. That funding is not just supporting the CFA; it is also supporting other agencies like the SES, and I know there are two SES units in the part of Southern Metropolitan that I spend most of my time in that are absolutely grateful for the additional support that they are getting.

What they also know is that preparedness in future seasons might be put at risk, because the alternative government of this state wants to take that money away. When the Liberals get up and say, ‘We’re going to scrap the tax,’ what they mean is they are going to cut the funding, because if you scrap the tax you have got to cut the funding. That is how it works, because every single dollar raised from the Emergency Services and Volunteers Fund is going into funding our emergency services. If you take away the fund, you take away the funding. That is the program, that is the agenda, that is the promise that the Liberal Party and the National Party are making to the people of Victoria. They will scrap the tax and cut the funding, and they will not come clean about it either. They will not stand up here and admit it: ‘Yes, that’s exactly right. When we say “scrap the tax”, it means we’re going to cut the funding.’ They will not go round to the CFA or SES units and tell them that the increased resources they have been receiving are on the chopping block because of the policy decisions they want to make to get rid of the Emergency Services and Volunteers Fund. They go around, pat them on the back and have a nice cup of tea with one hand, and with the other hand what they want to do is reach into their pockets and take away their funding, because they promised to do it. They have promised to scrap the tax. They have promised to get rid of the Emergency Services and Volunteers Fund. When the Liberals say they are going to scrap the tax, when the Nationals say they are going to scrap the tax, what they mean is they are going to cut the funding. The reason that people can believe them when they say it is because they have done it before. The last time the Liberals and the Nationals were in government they cut funding to the CFA. They are being up-front at least in saying that they are going to remove the revenue stream that is providing additional resources to our emergency services.

It is incredibly important that communities right across this state are prepared against bushfire risk. It is an obligation that we take incredibly seriously. Recently, in some comments she made about what her biggest priority is at the moment, the Premier in a large tabloid newspaper said that she was incredibly worried about the upcoming bushfire season and it is absolutely on her mind. This government is not only concerned about the risk; we are making sure the funding is in place so that we can deal with it. What we are not doing is going out there and proposing to cut funding from our emergency services. That is exactly what the Liberals are going to do and that is exactly what the Nationals are going to do, because they have done it before and they will do it again. We know the cuts are coming.

 Wendy LOVELL (Northern Victoria) (16:51): Following that might be a little bit of fun, because what we have found this week is that the government have cut the funding to the CFA. The government are out there saying in their budget and in their Department of Justice and Community Safety annual report that the CFA budget was $352.6 million. But under FOI the actual budget signed off by the minister, Vicki Ward, was just $345 million. So the government are actually misleading the people of Victoria by saying that they are giving more funding to the CFA than they are actually giving. This is dishonest, and that is typical of this government, which is dishonest.

The Liberals and Nationals, as the government well know, did not cut any funding from the CFA’s core budget. The difference in the figure that the government like to bandy about as a cut was actually one-off funding that was given in one year for recovery after the 2009 bushfires, because brigades needed to replace trucks, needed to replace equipment and needed to replace fire sheds that were lost in the 2009 bushfires. So there was a significant amount of money given as one-off funding. It was not core budget funding, it was one year. There was extra funding in there for additional resources that the CFA needed, and that was a one-off funding application, so it did not appear in the next year.

I would like to congratulate Ms Bath on bringing this motion to the house, because this is a really important motion for my electorate. My electorate suffers from bushfires, and my whole career has actually been scattered with bushfires. I was elected in 2002, and it was only a matter of days before most of the eastern side of my electorate was ablaze with the 2003 fires. There were then the 2006–07 fires, the devastating 2009 Black Saturday fires and fires in 2019–20 as well, so bushfires are a real feature of my electorate.

What my electorate is really concerned about is the lack of prescribed burns by this government. Only 1.5 per cent of land has been burnt, when the actual 2009 Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission that the government rambled on about before recommended that 5 per cent be burnt every year. Yet you are only burning 1.5 per cent. We know that cool burns are better for the bush. They clear the undergrowth; they clear the fuel load. As John Mulligan said this morning when he launched his book Our Mismanaged Forests, Victoria does not have a fire problem, Victoria has a fuel problem. And he is absolutely right. The more fuel there is, the hotter and the worse these fires become. I have seen this firsthand in the Barmah forest, where there have been huge bushfires and the forest has never recovered. There are still stark skylines around Whittlesea and areas impacted by the Black Saturday fires where you just see the dead trees. They are in the alpine areas as well from the 2006–07 fires and the 2003 fires. We see that as country members all the time. We see the damage that Labor are doing to our environment because they refuse to fund cool burns.

Mr Mulligan actually gave a really good overview of history. He is 94 years old, so he has seen a lot. He said he has seen the change from the safe, clean, open forests of his younger years to the dangerous, overgrown, dense mess that we have today, and he is correct. We see that in the Barmah forest as well. We no longer have the big cleared areas and large river red gums growing, because the river has been regulated, so we do not have the floods that come through and clear the saplings. We get a dense undergrowth and saplings that grow, and that creates worse fires.

Mr Mulligan said that over the years the bureaucracy had been influenced to believe that burning was bad. He said it went back to the 1930s, when the bureaucracy of the Victorian forests commission was heavily influenced by an Englishman called Lane-Poole, who did not know how to manage Australian eucalypt forests and recommended that there was no burning in the forests. That began a period where Victoria did not have any burning in the forest, and that led to the huge megafires that we have had: the 1939, 1944, 1965, 1983, 2003, 2006–07, 2009, 2014, 2019–20 and the recent Grampians fires. These are devastating fires that kill forests, and the forests will never recover.

I was surprised with Ms Watt’s contribution, because I would have thought that she would have been heavily in favour of the Liberal and Nationals policy, which is to adopt the Indigenous community’s firestick policy and actually do proper cool burning of our forests, because our Indigenous people actually did understand how to manage the Australian eucalyptus forest. It is vitally important that this government actually invest in cool burning.

Harriet Shing: They’re not ‘our’ Indigenous people. That is so unbelievably disrespectful.

Wendy LOVELL: When I say ‘our’ I mean ‘Australian’. We are all Australian, so it is the Australian Indigenous people. I do not say that as an ownership thing; I say it as inclusive terminology, because we are all Australians.

It is quite ironic that this government will not adopt cool burning and conduct more prescribed burns to reduce fuel loads and reduce the damage on Victorian forests, because it costs far more to fund the recovery of communities than it costs to actually prevent these fires. Fires are preventable, and the government should actually invest in more cool burning and more resources for our CFA brigades and our SES brigades.

Harriet Shing: Why did you cut 66 million bucks from them?

Wendy LOVELL: I can tell you those volunteer emergency services equipment program grants that you were crowing about just before – the brigades are complaining. They did not get as much as they needed to actually fund the equipment that they need. Everyone got less than they applied for, and they are upset with this government, as is the whole Victorian community, because what this government has done is cost-shift those VESEP grants from government funding to a tax on all Victorian people. We know that everyone used to contribute under the fire services levy, and everyone was happy to do that because they wanted to support our emergency services. But this government not only shifted this to a tax on the people, they included, as things that can be funded out of this, government departments, the office of the emergency management commissioner and Triple Zero Victoria. These are things that were traditionally funded from consolidated revenue but are now funded directly by a tax on the Victorian people. The former fire services levy funded fire services, and the Liberal and National parties would restore that levy and take away this insidious Emergency Services and Volunteers Fund. It is actually embarrassing for the government that they call it a volunteers fund when most of the money is going to funding core government business like the operations of Triple Zero Victoria, the department and the emergency management commissioner. Not every cent is going to volunteers, and you know that.

 Tom McINTOSH (Eastern Victoria) (17:01): I will be the last speaker in this debate. Unfortunately this debate has shown where, over many decades, we have found ourselves in this conversation around our public land and bush management. I think it is fair to say that we all want to care for the bush. We all want to keep our towns, our businesses, our assets and everything that is in harm’s way safe, whether that is from grassland or bushland fires. There are a lot of strong feelings in this space. We have got people who want to protect our carbon stores, homes for wildlife and trees. As Ms Bath said about the mountain ash, they are being repeatedly hit by fire, and their ability to regenerate is diminishing every time that happens and the percentage of mountain ash we have left diminishes every time. At the same time, we have had the native hardwood industry move out of the bush, and communities are dealing with that change, with that transition, that they are going through. We have got locals, we have got tourists in great parts of our state that come through at the hottest times of the year, we have got threatened species, we have got farms, we have got towns and we have got businesses which are all heavily invested in us getting the management of our spaces right.

My first memory on the farm is of a CFA fire truck coming up to fight a fire at the back of the farm, a burn-off that had got away from a nearby farm. That was a relatively minor event, but it is my first memory in life. Obviously, we have had people talking about 2019 and have had people talking about Black Saturday, and these events stay in people’s minds. These events emotionally and financially scar people across our community. It is no wonder it is an incredibly emotive issue, but we need to find sensible solutions to a problem that will not go away rather than playing ping-pong with extreme versions of solutions to a complicated and big problem, particularly, as I think everyone acknowledges, as the ambient soil temperature is getting hotter over time. As we have had more and more significant burns, there are less mature plants that will burn more quickly right up the east coast of Australia. As we saw in 1920, with just huge swathes of Australia on fire, when the conditions are right for it, it is incredibly hard to stop.

Across Forest Fire Management Victoria, the CFA, the Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action and FRV, we have got a workforce that do something that the majority of our population would not dream of doing, whether that is getting out in preparation with burns, with mulching or with road management, let alone getting out there when there is a fire going, getting ahead of it, creating breaks and fighting it with water. We have got our teams that are abseiling out of choppers to go and fight on the ground. I am sure I speak for all of us when I acknowledge everyone working across our emergency services workforce to get ahead of fires and to deal with them when they occur. As Ms Bath said, it is a reality that we all have to accept that fires are going to happen. We have to get to a sensible solution so that over decades we can work to to ensure that as our climate continues to dry, which suits really, really bad fire conditions, for the sake of the bush and for the sake of those that live nearby, we have early detection, we have rapid attack and we can get on top of them as quickly as possible.

There was talk about the previous 5 per cent hectare target recommended by the 2009 Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission. It was found not to be affordable, achievable or sustainable in 2012 and 2013. The 5 per cent target incentivised the design and delivery of a planned burning program focused on maximising the area burnt rather than delivering smaller burns closer to communities at higher risk. I think it is about protecting the most ecologically valuable sections of bush so we do not lose them – mountain ash and things like that – forever but also ensuring that our towns are safe, whether that is getting around the towns with non-fuel treatments or burning at appropriate times of year as is available.

With limited time left, I just want to pick up on the commentary around the G-Wagons. The fleet is going to be back in service in mid-December. There has been a problem with the vehicle. The government has identified it and has addressed it. It is critically important that we keep our workforce safe. Some of the commentary around the vehicles has been perhaps a little bit excessive, because nobody plans for the chassis of vehicles to have issues with them. Nobody wants that to happen. It is about being in government and responding to issues when they occur to keep the workforce safe and to enable the workforce to get out and do their job.

I think we have spoken today for 90-odd minutes on an issue that is incredibly complicated and has incredibly high charges of emotion at various ends of the political spectrum. As I have said, for the sake of our rural, regional and indeed metropolitan communities we have to make sure that we find a way over the decades to protect our biodiverse spaces, our people and our assets.

 Melina BATH (Eastern Victoria) (17:08): I would like to thank those who contributed to this debate, noting that it was the Liberals and Nationals and the Labor members of Parliament.

I want to pick up on that at least two of the Labor members made comment in their contribution on the fuel-driven bushfire risk calculations being released at the end of the year. If anybody has had a look at their clock, their watch, their diary or their calendar, it is now 3 December, and it is now 18 months since we have seen the last fuel-driven risk calculations. Part of this information is about equipping communities at a district level to understand where they fit in this government’s so-called Safer Together program and understand where their fuel-driven risk is, but the transparency is not there. This government has hidden these fuel-driven risk targets and fuel-driven risk outcomes. It will be delivered at the end of the year, I heard. Well, I am sorry; it is December. Are we going to get it on Christmas Eve and just slip it in and hide it from the population? It is not fair. People need to be able to understand what their risks are and act as appropriately as they can on private property, because goodness knows the government is a woeful, woeful neighbour.

Let me give you some facts, and this is actually out of the government’s own reports and figures. In relation to the CFA, let us have a reality check on that. Level 3 incident controllers – in 2009 at the time of the Black Saturday fires there were a hundred level 3 incident controllers. Those are the people with their finger on the pulse when the action goes down. They are making good decisions out in the field to support mitigation, to support suppression, to support survival and to support those people who are at crisis point. In 2015, after the 2009 Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission had come and gone through and just at the end of the Liberals and Nationals’ four-year term, there were 150 level 3 incident controllers. And what have we got today? After 11 years of this government, in 2025, we have got 57 level 3 incident controllers. That includes the CFA, the FRV and the SES. That is scary. This government talks about how it has invested in the emergency services, how it is backing the emergency services. Well, the figures say that these people are getting so frustrated they are walking away from this. We have got almost 50 per cent less than we did in 2009 and three-quarters less than we did in 2015.

Let me put some more facts, and this is again out of the department’s report. Operational volunteers – at Black Saturday in the 2009 time period we had 39,870 operational volunteers. What have we got now in 2025? In October this year we had 28,755. That is a drop of over 11,000 volunteers. So if you are talking about how you are backing the CFA and the SES, well, just take a look at the CFA. These volunteers have had a neckful of your disrespect, of the way you treat them, of the way you are not funding them and of the way they are having to go cap in hand. No-one out in country Victoria believes the rhetoric that we heard from other members of the Labor Party about how they are backing the CFA volunteers. Nobody out there believes that when we scrap the tax we will not properly fund them. We will scrap that tax, and we will properly fund the CFA and the SES.

All this spin that we hear from government gives no satisfaction to people out in the regions – people who have got high fuel loads and danger in their environment. The government is saying to them, ‘Make sure you clean your gutters and cut your lawns.’ But you are not doing that on public land. Well, I am sorry, this government has been an atrocious neighbour. It is not a good conductor of fuel reduction burns, and that has been part of my synopsis today. We all know that the greatest threat to public land is out-of-control bushfires and pests and weeds. This government has been woeful at management of that.

In relation to the G-Wagons, we heard potentially more information from Mr McIntosh in the last few seconds than we have heard from the Minister for Environment in the last two months. We want to know that there are the equipment, personnel and strategies to protect Victorians from bushfire.

Council divided on motion: