Slash and burn as government cuts firefighting funds

    EXCLUSIVE by Andrew Clennell
    The Daily Telegraph
    January 11, 2013


RURAL Fire Service firefighters yesterday attacked damaging cuts to its frontline operation, saying the bushfire-ravaged state was now in even greater danger.     :(

They said a NSW government decision to slash cash for the replacement of tankers and fire brigade stations over the past year had severely hurt their fire-fighting capability."Governments cut emergency services at their peril," RFS president Mr Brian McKinlay said yesterday.

"What it means is infrastructure items such as tankers and capital equipment and control centre (construction) hasn't proceeded as in previous years."

Premier Barry O'Farrell, who has posed with RFS bosses as they fought fires across the state, tried to hose down the claims last night, saying the government had increased funding to the RFS.     :-?   

But the RFS claims were backed by figures released by the Auditor-General last month which showed cuts across the board.     :(


NSW Rural Fire Service firefighters hold the line of the Shoalhaven fire at Princess Highway near Sussex Inlet / Pic: Craig Greenhill Source: The Daily Telegraph

The Auditor-General reported total expenditure on the Rural Fire Service fell from $307 million in 2010-11 to $287 million in 2011-12.

The number of tankers supplied or refurbished fell from 216 in 2010-11 to 177 in 2011-12.

The number of active, trained firefighters in 2011-12 had decreased from 94 per cent to 82 per cent and local government firefighting and equipment spending had fallen from $128.7 million in 2010-11 to $109.5 million in 2011-12.

Public Service Association industrial officer Shane Howes said the RFS had been told to cut labour costs by $12 million over four years, which would lead to 120 redundancies.     :(

In an association newsletter last year, Mr McKinlay wrote: "With dismay we note the reduction in the Rural Fire Fighting Fund from $271 million in last year's budget to the figure of $263 million in the FY12/13 state budget."

Of even greater concern was that " the total allocation for brigade stations and fire control centres amounts to $5 million from the O'Farrell government. In the last two years of the Keneally government this allocation for the same period was over $30 million".     :-?





The budget for the tanker replacement program "has been dealt a similar fate".

The government disputed some of those figures and claimed that in 2012-13 funds had actually been increased significantly. But Mr McKinlay said some of those figures involved money "carried over" from the time of the Labor government.

The Premier's Office referred the matter to Emergency Services Minister Mike Gallacher. A spokesman for Mr Gallacher said: "Funding of $30.1 million is available for tankers and other vehicles and $9.9 million for brigade stations and control centres in 2012/13."

Opposition's emergency services spokesman Nathan Rees said: "Only a government with its priorities completely out of whack would consider cutting funding for fire tankers.     :(

But but but...Phony Tony and the Libbos love the Country Fire services  ;D

adelcrow wrote on Jan 11^th, 2013 at 6:22am:

But but but...Phony Tony and the Libbos love the Country Fire services  ;D

This is a state decision, not a federal one. Abbott can't tell O'Farrell what to do...

Armchair_Politician wrote on Jan 11^th, 2013 at 6:44am:

adelcrow wrote on Jan 11th, 2013 at 6:22am: But but but...Phony Tony and the Libbos love the Country Fire services  ;D This is a state decision, not a federal one. Abbott can't tell O'Farrell what to do...

Phony Tony is a leading member of the NSW Liberals and hes using the NSW country fire services for political stunts so it has everything to do with him.

adelcrow wrote on Jan 11^th, 2013 at 7:01am:

Armchair_Politician wrote on Jan 11th, 2013 at 6:44am: adelcrow wrote on Jan 11th, 2013 at 6:22am: But but but...Phony Tony and the Libbos love the Country Fire services  ;D This is a state decision, not a federal one. Abbott can't tell O'Farrell what to do... Phony Tony is a leading member of the NSW Liberals and hes using the NSW country fire services for political stunts so it has everything to do with him.

No, he is leader of the federal Liberals, not the state Liberals. As for his volunteer work with the fire service, we wouldn't expect a dole bludger like you to understand...

Armchair_Politician wrote on Jan 11^th, 2013 at 7:04am:

adelcrow wrote on Jan 11th, 2013 at 7:01am: Armchair_Politician wrote on Jan 11th, 2013 at 6:44am: adelcrow wrote on Jan 11th, 2013 at 6:22am: But but but...Phony Tony and the Libbos love the Country Fire services  ;D This is a state decision, not a federal one. Abbott can't tell O'Farrell what to do... Phony Tony is a leading member of the NSW Liberals and hes using the NSW country fire services for political stunts so it has everything to do with him. No, he is leader of the federal Liberals, not the state Liberals. As for his volunteer work with the fire service, we wouldn't expect a dole bludger like you to understand...

Wow..when the ex SA Labor Premier Mike Rann who was also a member of the CFS did the same thing the SA Libs and right wing media in the state called it a stunt and said he should be ashamed of himself.
Tony Abbott obviously learned how to pull his stunts from Mike Rann  ;D
As usual the Libbos are lowlife hypocrite's

green tape, red tape and black tape  causes

no pie production in rural communities  causes

government unable to collect any pie as taxes  causes

no pie to fund CFA  causes

burning down of the whole area of pie production


the new economic cycle of the labor/greens :D :D :D :D

aquascoot wrote on Jan 11^th, 2013 at 7:22am:

green tape, red tape and black tape  causes no pie production in rural communities  causes government unable to collect any pie as taxes  causes no pie to fund CFA  causes burning down of the whole area of pie production the new economic cycle of the labor/greens :D :D :D :D

Australia is a wealthy country by any standards so there's plenty of money but unfortunately the Conservatives have a bad habit of punishing the public for keeping them out of power and these cuts are just more of that punishment.
They certainly never cut the handouts to their wealthy tax dodging mates  :D

adelcrow wrote on Jan 11^th, 2013 at 7:45am:

aquascoot wrote on Jan 11th, 2013 at 7:22am: green tape, red tape and black tape  causes no pie production in rural communities  causes government unable to collect any pie as taxes  causes no pie to fund CFA  causes burning down of the whole area of pie production the new economic cycle of the labor/greens :D :D :D :D Australia is a wealthy country by any standards so there's plenty of money but unfortunately the Conservatives have a bad habit of punishing the public for keeping them out of power and these cuts are just more of that punishment. They certainly never cut the handouts to their wealthy tax dodging mates  :D

according to pavlovian behaviour theory, the voting public should eventually learn not to vote them out of power  ;) ;)

aquascoot wrote on Jan 11^th, 2013 at 7:52am:

adelcrow wrote on Jan 11th, 2013 at 7:45am: aquascoot wrote on Jan 11th, 2013 at 7:22am: green tape, red tape and black tape  causes no pie production in rural communities  causes government unable to collect any pie as taxes  causes no pie to fund CFA  causes burning down of the whole area of pie production the new economic cycle of the labor/greens :D :D :D :D Australia is a wealthy country by any standards so there's plenty of money but unfortunately the Conservatives have a bad habit of punishing the public for keeping them out of power and these cuts are just more of that punishment. They certainly never cut the handouts to their wealthy tax dodging mates  :D according to pavlovian behaviour theory, the voting public should eventually learn not to vote them out of power  ;) ;)

Yep..thats why they always do it

Meanwhile in VICTORIA - we're running on "dumb luck" !







State fails to meet fire goal
Melissa Fyfe
January 23, 2012.

http://images.theage.com.au/2012/01/22/2908950/fires_ipad_new-420x0.gif



DOZENS of Victorian suburbs and towns remain overexposed to extreme bushfire risk this season because the Baillieu government failed to meet its targets to reduce fuel loads around the state's most vulnerable communities.

A leaked document has revealed the government's multimillion-dollar planned burning program - designed to burn off bushland to curb damaging fires - achieved only 16 per cent of its target in the densely populated central region, which includes 54 towns and suburbs assessed by the Country Fire Authority as facing extreme risk this summer.

The Department of Sustainability and Environment burnt only 1818 hectares of the 11,400 hectares it was aiming for in the central region, which covers Melbourne and its urban fringes, including the fire-prone Dandenongs and Yarra Ranges. But in the less-populated north-east, where 20 towns are at extreme risk, the department burnt 64,969 hectares, or 150 per cent of its goal

http://images.smh.com.au/ftsmh/ffximage/2009/02/10/bushfire13_gallery__592x400.jpg



Critics say the government is burning large areas of remote bushland to meet a royal commission target, but failing to prioritise the difficult and strategic burns around fire-prone communities.

''When the next really big fire happens, people won't ask 'did you meet the target'?, they will ask 'did you do the burning in key areas that reduce risk to life and property'?'' says La Trobe University zoology professor Mike Clarke.

Both Labor and the Coalition adopted the royal commission's recommendation to burn 5 per cent of public land, or 415,412 hectares annually, by 2013-2014, tripling planned burning across Victoria.


http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/state-fails-to-meet-fire-goal-20120122-1qc93.html#ixzz1kGlhiu4y







http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FvkI8c9eALQ&feature=related






[/quote]



Baillieu failing over bushfire safety
Clay Lucas
December 14, 2011.


THE Baillieu government is failing to properly deliver on at least 10 key recommendations made by the royal commission on the 2009 bushfires, a new analysis shows.

The royal commission last year made 67 recommendations that it hoped would prevent Victorians ever again being left defenceless in the face of massive bushfires.

Premier Ted Baillieu and Bushfire Response Minister Peter Ryan - who repeatedly criticised former premier John Brumby for failing to act on every one of the recommendations - pledged while in opposition to implement them ''lock, stock and barrel''.


Now a ''scorecard'' on the royal commission's recommendations shows the government has so far:

■ Failed to put in place a working emergency alert system.

■ Not set up recommended ''safe places'' in half of the state's most bushfire-prone towns.

■ Not completed a register of vulnerable residents in bushfire-prone towns.

■ Proceeded with a far more limited buyback of land in bushfire zones than was promised.

Energy Minister Michael O'Brien also remains silent on the laying underground and the upgrading of power lines - although the government's response is promised by the end of the year.

Other recommendations that have not been completed are: creating enough incident control centres, fixing black spot radio coverage, and making sure firefighting crews have adequate helicopters and planes to fight a large-scale fire - and not enough has been done on arson prevention and on modifying building codes to make new homes safer from bushfires


http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/baillieu-failing-over-bushfire-safety-labor-20111213-1ot8a.html#ixzz1lCG46ZXM








The MESSAGE is - You're ON YOUR OWNi



http://greenicebergs.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/kingslakefirepicture.jpg






Kudos to the CFA voluteers - who are doing a FANTASTIC job - DESPITE a first ever CUT to funding

Irrespective what Politicians may think, some funding will need to increase, not be cut.

In fact, you can guarantee that some issues, such as Firefighting & Health Care, Expenditure will increase significantly, due to Climate Change & the Aging Baby Boomers AND it would actually be counter productive to try to cut those Expenditures! 

CROOK N E W S ----> read all about it........ :exclamation

Cuts required due to irresponsible fiscal mismangement by Labor State Governments nation wide for years and years

S T U P I D ....pinko eco-socialists trying to blame the Coalition for their own idiocy

http://www.smiley-lol.com/smiley/quotidien/arg04.gif
http://www.smiley-lol.com/smiley/quotidien/fauche2.gif

The tax-paying public is not fooled by CROOK LEFTY propaganda

::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)

(DISCLAIMER---> except for some rusted on pinko OP fanatics that live in their marxist utopia waiting in the dole queue for their hand out.....) ;D ;D ;D

IS IT ANY WONDER ...



Quote:

Australia's most LOATHED government

buzzanddidj wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 10:17pm:

NO NOT the one you might THINK Baillieu goverment faces a drubbing: poll Date January 4, 2013 The Victorian government is facing a drubbing from voters, the latest Newspoll suggests. The poll has Labor with a commanding 55-45 lead over the coalition on a two-party preferred basis, the same result as two months ago. The coalition's primary vote was down a point to 36 per cent, and while Labor's actually fell three points to 38 per cent, it was offset by a rise in the Greens' popularity. Premier Ted Baillieu's net satisfaction rating slid to minus 15, one of the worst results for a leader in the past two decades, while Opposition Leader Daniel Andrews improved his standing to minus six, his highest standing since the 2010 state election. http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/baillieu-goverment-faces-a-drubbing-poll-20130104-2c7om.html#ixzz2HCCuVuaF VICTORIAN Labor has cemented its election-winning lead over the Coalition, and Premier Ted Baillieu remains deeply unpopular, despite his frenetic year-end attempts to win back angry voters. Newspoll has revealed that Labor is holding a 55 per cent to 45 per cent lead on a two-party-preferred basis, which would easily hand the ALP's Daniel Andrews the premiership. If replicated at an election, it would render the Baillieu Government the first one-term Victorian administration since the 1950s. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/state-politics/alp-ready-to-make-baillieu-history-newspoll/story-e6frgczx-1226547376833

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1357474651

The tax-paying public is not fooled by CROOK LEFTY propaganda

::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)

(DISCLAIMER---> except for some rusted on pinko OP fanatics that live in their marxist utopia waiting in the dole queue for their hand out.....) ;D ;D ;D[/quote]

perceptions_now wrote on Jan 11^th, 2013 at 8:24am:

Irrespective what Politicians may think, some funding will need to increase, not be cut. In fact, you can guarantee that some issues, such as Firefighting & Health Care, Expenditure will increase significantly, due to Climate Change & the Aging Baby Boomers AND it would actually be counter productive to try to cut those Expenditures!

i think youre right perceptions,

which is why gonski and the ndis will probably be scrapped and (dare i say it)  so will the nbn when they realise it will ultimately be a governent cost

perceptions_now wrote on Jan 11^th, 2013 at 8:24am:

Irrespective what Politicians may think, some funding will need to increase, not be cut. In fact, you can guarantee that some issues, such as Firefighting & Health Care, Expenditure will increase significantly, due to Climate Change & the Aging Baby Boomers AND it would actually be counter productive to try to cut those Expenditures!

Spending more than you earn is unsustainable.  Can't you see that?

Especially when as you mention socalled 'Baby Boomers" are just about to enter the welfare state en mass.

Labor Governments always notoriously overspend KNOWING that it is unsustainable (which is even more outrageous) but they do it to pork barrell and so remain in power until they become so toxic even their own True Believers turn on them.  Labor always overspends and goes into debt rather than commit suicide by increasing taxes.

The debt becomes repayable by future tax-payer revenues which in effect is just a BIG CLAYTONS FUTURE TAX INCREASE for taxpayers.....that is the Lefty legacy -> D E B T and T A X E S

As for "climate change" that is a bull schitt argument as it works both ways.  'Climate Change' thankfully filled the dams last year and this year we get a hot Summer and the grim reapers appear.... ::)

Swagman wrote on Jan 11^th, 2013 at 11:19am:

The tax-paying public is not fooled by CROOK LEFTY propaganda

No, but they are fooled by the crooked righty propoganda

:o :o

aquascoot wrote on Jan 11^th, 2013 at 11:38am:

perceptions_now wrote on Jan 11th, 2013 at 8:24am: Irrespective what Politicians may think, some funding will need to increase, not be cut. In fact, you can guarantee that some issues, such as Firefighting & Health Care, Expenditure will increase significantly, due to Climate Change & the Aging Baby Boomers AND it would actually be counter productive to try to cut those Expenditures!  i think youre right perceptions, which is why gonski and the ndis will probably be scrapped and (dare i say it)  so will the nbn when they realise it will ultimately be a governent cost

That may well be correct!

As we look for areas to reduce Public Expenditure, it could be the most recent promises, those that haven't actually got under way, they are the more likely targets for scraping, UNLESS they can be shown as an area to increase Productivity.

And Productivity, really is one of the key issues!

That said, we will need to address Expenditure across the board AND get rid of a lot of dead wood, including one whole level of government, that being the Local Councils, which are a net dead loss!

However, we will all, also have to face the fact that whilst we will have to do more with less.

We will still need to realise that Revenue/taxes will also need to rise, because there will be substantially less workers to tax, as the worker to none worker ratio was around 8/1 in 1950 & by 2040 it will be around 2/1, which is largely due to Demographic issues.

Swagman wrote on Jan 11^th, 2013 at 12:01pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Jan 11th, 2013 at 8:24am: Irrespective what Politicians may think, some funding will need to increase, not be cut. In fact, you can guarantee that some issues, such as Firefighting & Health Care, Expenditure will increase significantly, due to Climate Change & the Aging Baby Boomers AND it would actually be counter productive to try to cut those Expenditures!  Spending more than you earn is unsustainable.  Can't you see that? Especially when as you mention socalled 'Baby Boomers" are just about to enter the welfare state en mass. Labor Governments always notoriously overspend KNOWING that it is unsustainable (which is even more outrageous) but they do it to pork barrell and so remain in power until they become so toxic even their own True Believers turn on them.  Labor always overspends and goes into debt rather than commit suicide by increasing taxes. The debt becomes repayable by future tax-payer revenues which in effect is just a BIG CLAYTONS FUTURE TAX INCREASE for taxpayers.....that is the Lefty legacy -> D E B T and T A X E S As for "climate change" that is a bull schitt argument as it works both ways.  'Climate Change' thankfully filled the dams last year and this year we get a hot Summer and the grim reapers appear.... ::)

Yes, I can, see reply 18.

Not increasing Taxes, when appropriate, is not restricted to Labor, although they certainly try to restrict increases, on what they see as their constituency. However, the Liberals do the same, on what they see as their constituency, in the higher individual incomess & Business tax rates. 

We will need to adress both Taxes & Expenditure, whilst focusing on Productivity. A simple round of AUS-terity won't work this time. In fact, it would worsen an already bad situation.

As for Climate Change, whatever you may think of the AGW angle, it is certain that we are approaching the top of this warming cycle and IF the bulk of scientists are correct & I think they are, THEN we are speeding up this warming cycle, THUS bringing the worst on, somewhat quicker. BUT, even if the scientists are wrong on the AGW issues, we are still nearing the top of this warming cycle AND those related issues still lay in wait for us.

In any event, I think you will find that the cost of mitigation, will far outweigh the Cost of the Risk Mitigations involved.

Those Mitigation steps can be successful, BUT ONLY IF the effort can be extended worldwide.

In any event, IF the worst outcomes can be avoided altogether OR at least postponed for 50-100 years, THEN the mitigation costs will have been worth it!

perceptions_now wrote on Jan 11^th, 2013 at 12:30pm:

aquascoot wrote on Jan 11th, 2013 at 11:38am: perceptions_now wrote on Jan 11th, 2013 at 8:24am: Irrespective what Politicians may think, some funding will need to increase, not be cut. In fact, you can guarantee that some issues, such as Firefighting & Health Care, Expenditure will increase significantly, due to Climate Change & the Aging Baby Boomers AND it would actually be counter productive to try to cut those Expenditures!  i think youre right perceptions, which is why gonski and the ndis will probably be scrapped and (dare i say it)  so will the nbn when they realise it will ultimately be a governent cost That may well be correct! As we look for areas to reduce Public Expenditure, it could be the most recent promises, those that haven't actually got under way, they are the more likely targets for scraping, UNLESS they can be shown as an area to increase Productivity. And Productivity, really is one of the key issues! That said, we will need to address Expenditure across the board AND get rid of a lot of dead wood, including one whole level of government, that being the Local Councils, which are a net dead loss! However, we will all, also have to face the fact that whilst we will have to do more with less. We will still need to realise that Revenue/taxes will also need to rise, because there will be substantially less workers to tax, as the worker to none worker ratio was around 8/1 in 1950 & by 2040 it will be around 2/1, which is largely due to Demographic issues.

totally agree perceptions.

i see the possibilities as

1 a raid on super
2 a land tax which includes on the family home (a poll tax)
3 raising the gst
4 death duties
5 making the elderly with equity in their homes pay for health and welfare services and the money be recouped by government upon the winding up of the estate


all of these thing will be wildly unpopular but you can only raise so much by issuing parking tickets and raising the cost of visa and passports ;) ;)

aquascoot wrote on Jan 11^th, 2013 at 12:58pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Jan 11th, 2013 at 12:30pm: aquascoot wrote on Jan 11th, 2013 at 11:38am: perceptions_now wrote on Jan 11th, 2013 at 8:24am: Irrespective what Politicians may think, some funding will need to increase, not be cut. In fact, you can guarantee that some issues, such as Firefighting & Health Care, Expenditure will increase significantly, due to Climate Change & the Aging Baby Boomers AND it would actually be counter productive to try to cut those Expenditures!  i think youre right perceptions, which is why gonski and the ndis will probably be scrapped and (dare i say it)  so will the nbn when they realise it will ultimately be a governent cost That may well be correct! As we look for areas to reduce Public Expenditure, it could be the most recent promises, those that haven't actually got under way, they are the more likely targets for scraping, UNLESS they can be shown as an area to increase Productivity. And Productivity, really is one of the key issues! That said, we will need to address Expenditure across the board AND get rid of a lot of dead wood, including one whole level of government, that being the Local Councils, which are a net dead loss! However, we will all, also have to face the fact that whilst we will have to do more with less. We will still need to realise that Revenue/taxes will also need to rise, because there will be substantially less workers to tax, as the worker to none worker ratio was around 8/1 in 1950 & by 2040 it will be around 2/1, which is largely due to Demographic issues. totally agree perceptions. i see the possibilities as 1 a raid on super 2 a land tax which includes on the family home (a poll tax) 3 raising the gst 4 death duties 5 making the elderly with equity in their homes pay for health and welfare services and the money be recouped by government upon the winding up of the estate all of these thing will be wildly unpopular but you can only raise so much by issuing parking tickets and raising the cost of visa and passports ;) ;)

I would suggest, the Henry Report would be a good place to start from, BUT any moves need to be selective towards the aims of Productivity & an overall Net positive outcome. However, changes will certainly be required, BOTH in Expenditure & Revenue/Taxes!

Whilst there may be an urge to simply make cuts in expenditure the order of the day, that would certainly not produce the positive outcomes required, as suggested in the following article.

In the end, there will be quite a few "unpopular" decisions, BUT so long as they are fairly spread around, THEN the decisions will be finally accepted.

However, IF these "unpopular" decisions have the appearance of being "unfairly" targeted, THEN things could get much more difficult???

=============================
Debt Crisis Could End In War, According To Kyle Bass

Bass didn't explicitly say it would be in Europe. However, he did say this:

    I don't know who's going to fight who, but I'm fairly certain that in the next few years you will see wars erupt, and not just small ones [CNBC]

He bases this view on the high levels of debt in the world, by his calculations this has reached 340% of global output, and the world has never lived with these levels in peacetime. He also doesn't expect the eurozone to survive in it's present form so it's fair to say that the eurozone is in the hot seat.

How realistic are these apocalyptic predictions? Well, there are a couple of mechanisms we can imagine that could spark conflict:

    These high levels of debt have to be restructured or monetized, the chance that these can be reduced through normal economic growth and/or austerity is rather slim. This sets up creditors against debtors.
    The main route through which countries, most notably in the eurozone periphery, have dealt with the high debt levels is through cutbacks in private (deleveraging) and public spending and tax hikes (austerity). But this has made matters worse, not better.

The latter point is especially important. Here is a scenario: Large parts of the population of a peripheral eurozone country don't see any improvement, only worsening of their economic plight. Falling wages, rising unemployment and little hope of a turn-around any time soon. Sacrifices are reasonable as long as there is light at the end of the tunnel, but there is still very little of that in most eurozone peripheral countries.

With monetary policy mostly out of commission, the task of reviving the economy falls on fiscal policy. However, the austerians have rendered that option not only powerless, austerity is compounding the economic downturn. When both the private and public sector are reducing spending, and monetary policy is largely impotent, the resulting sharp economic downturn can't be surprising.


http://seekingalpha.com/article/1102301-debt-crisis-could-end-in-war-according-to-kyle-bass?source=email_macro_view&ifp=0