Despite Australia’s dependence on local government to respond to natural disasters, it often lacks the resources and skills to do so – according to a new report.
When a major event occurs, “Australia is increasingly reliant on a local level of government, and community, which has the least capacity and often limited capability,” say the authors of an independent review of disaster funding – this “should be cause for concern”, they add.
The report recommends that state and territory governments are mandated to conduct “regular capability assessments of local governments” to identify “the readiness of a region to handle a disaster event”.
The authors add: “Priority should be placed on assessing capability, capacity and investment requirements, as well as assessing any barriers to enabling locally led action.”
As well, “the Commonwealth should seek to establish enhanced relationships with key non-government and private sector partners as part of reforms to the disaster management system”.
The authors also call for the establishment of a “national training and exercises regime” to strengthen Australia’s preparedness.
In response, Matt Burnett – president of the Australian Local Government Association – said: “ALGA has consistently advocated for an increased focus on disaster mitigation and risk reduction. We look forward to working with our members and the federal government on the recommendations.”
Elsewhere in the 65-page report the authors recommend prioritising risk reduction and resilience measures to reduce government spending on natural disasters.
“This will not only establish the Commonwealth’s priorities for funding objectives” but it will also “place downward pressure on the anticipated increases in natural disasters expenditure”, they say.
Multiple participants – both government and non-government – told the review “about the need to introduce more structure and consistency into the current arrangements if there is to be a collective effort to prioritise investments that reduce the risk and subsequently the impact of events”.
At present, “disaster funding decisions are mostly reactive and are not understood in terms of consistency, certainty, nor transparency”.
While the foundations of Australia’s natural disaster arrangements are strong – principally that emergency management remains the core responsibility of state and territory governments – “disaster management costs are continuing to rise, resources are stretched, and an uncertain future is proving increasingly difficult to plan and prepare for”, say the authors.
“With a deliberate, focused and evidence-informed approach, the Commonwealth can do more to build resilience to the types of extreme events Australia is projected to experience in the coming decades,” they add.
In isolation, each of the reforms contained in the report will improve Australia’s disaster management system, say the authors. “However, their true impact will only be realised if they are implemented in a strategic and coordinated fashion.”
This will rely on involvement from all members of Australia’s disaster management arrangements, conclude the report’s authors. “Disaster management in Australia is heavily reliant on all levels of government working seamlessly with each other and with communities … and the success of the reforms will necessarily rely on genuine collaboration.”
Leave a Reply