Labour, firefighters back law revamp
Fri, 10 Aug 2012 7:01a.m.
Government plans to revamp the fire service have received widespread support.
Both the Professional Firefighters Union and the Labour Party have welcomed the review.
Instead of paying for the service through insurance premiums, levies could soon be raised through council rates or bills to every householder in the country.
"The legislation hasn't changed since 1975," he says. "A lot of things have changed over that time. The fire service has become, simply by default… an all-purpose emergency service response, and the legislation really just concentrates on fire."
Post a Comment
Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide
(Won't be published)
13/08/2012 4:47:43 p.m.
Wow John,are you a proof reader? Focus on what is being said instead of a few spelling and grammer mistakes. You seem to miss the jist of the comment. If the fire service like doing the extra stuff then do it with out complaint. If they don't like it then get out. They do a fine job, and the comment about not putting out uninsured properties is tongue in check. I wouldn't want them to have to pick and choose because people could not afford insurance. I am also guessing you must correct others in your life, so much so you have to annoy others who can't tell you to f off in person. So concentrate on the message because you could spend the rest of your life correcting all the mistakes people make in life, and it will never ever be over, if that is your choice then you are welcome to do that.
10/08/2012 1:25:46 p.m.
@ Jan; You would "have" thought, not "of" thought.
In any case there are already a number of organisations supplying specialised emergency services; Coastguard, the various mountain clubs such as deerstalkers and tramping clubs, as well as the armed forces (a lot of specialised rescue skills there). While the armed forces are of course paid, the other groups depend on volunteers, and raise their own funds, as does St Johns. It works pretty well, though could possibly do with a little more co-ordination.
I don't have a problem with the Fire Service doing the jobs they do now; they're trained and equipped for it, but certainly think they should be government funded as well.
Only putting out insured premises fires is going back a couple of hundred years. It resulted in neighbouring buildings catching fire too.
"for the countries benefit" - what countries do you mean here? Or do you mean for our country's benefit.
10/08/2012 10:21:10 a.m.
I would of thought the fire service is a government agency, I think quite a few would think that. so they would be in effect public servants like the cops are. The same goes for the st johns service. Also why not create a new group to deal with rescue situations, instead of the firefighters turning up all the time. The new group could have a few mixed skills eg absailing, cat up tree type stuff and sweeping up the road after an accident. Fire fighters should not have to do those mundane things. The new group could also be used at roadside accidents so fewer cops are needed or have to hang around so long at an accident scene. A broad tax from everyone at the income eg wages or benefits, because there are quite a few people who are getting the fire service for free if its done through insurance. Maybe I think it could go back to no fire being put out if you don't have insuranc, you know user pays which the governments seem to favour instead of using the taxes they get for the countries benefit.
McDonald's workers striking will be a waste of time if a strike-breaking bill pa...
The NZTA is being accused of wasting taxpayer money, spending tens of thousands ...
Labour MPs are being called hypocrites for accepting Sky City's invitations to w...
ACC levies have gone down under this government, but at what cost? A prominent w...
The Prime Minister has dodged questions all week about whether New Zealanders ar...
Copyright © 2013 MediaWorks TV. All Rights Reserved.