高清福利片

Prime Minister Scott Morrison on Sunday somewhat acknowledged the need for unprecedented action. He聽聽of calling up 3,000 Australian Defence Force reservists and mobilising navy ships and military bases to aid the emergency response. This has never before happened in Australia at this scale.

But it鈥檚 not enough. As this horrific summer of disaster continues to unfold in coming weeks, we clearly need to overhaul our emergency management plan with a workforce that鈥檚 large, nationally mobile, fully funded, and paid 鈥� rather than using under-resourced volunteers.

聽says weather and climate related disasters have more than doubled over the last 40 years.

Although expensive, the cost of not acting on disaster risk, planning and preparation will be greatly outstripped by the cost of future climate and weather catastrophes.

Our disaster management system needs upgrading

The states and territories are primarily responsible for disaster preparedness and response. Typically, the federal government has no direct responsibility, but lends a hand when asked through a variety of聽.

This may have worked in the past. But with ever larger and more complex disasters, these arrangements are no longer fit for purpose.

Our national emergency management workforce is largely made up of volunteers, who are聽.

What鈥檚 more, experts led by former Fire and Rescue NSW commissioner Greg Mullins聽聽significant changes in Australia鈥檚 disaster management preparedness and response. They鈥檝e signalled the need for new resources, policies and processes to tackle more frequent and complex disasters.

We鈥檝e also seen how consultation and collaboration between the Commonwealth and states are not working smoothly.

NSW Rural Fire Service Commissioner Shane Fitzsimmons聽聽that Defence reservists would be deployed when it was reported in the media. And it聽聽how new reservists would be integrated into existing response activities.

Finding a bipartisan way forward

The decade-long ideological battle between the left and right of Australian politics has paralysed climate policy development. This cannot continue.

Well-funded disaster preparedness and response inevitably builds resilience to climate change and extreme weather events like bushfires. This is something both sides of politics agree on 鈥� in fact, it was noted in the federal government鈥檚 own聽聽profiling our vulnerability to disasters and climate change.

Aside from needing bipartisanship, an overhaul of Australia鈥檚 disaster management will require money. While we鈥檙e lucky to have a dedicated, paid and exceptional set of state and territory disaster and emergency management agencies such as the NSW Rural Fire Service, most heavy lifting is done by agency volunteers.

But with fire seasons starting earlier and lasting longer, we can no longer rely for months at a time on volunteers who must also work, pay their bills and feed their families.

We need a larger, paid, trained, professional emergency management workforce. I聽聽that such a workforce would stand idle most of the year. Severe weather seasons are starting earlier and lasting longer, so these professionals will be busy.

The workforce could be divided in to areas of expertise to tackle specific disaster types, and focus on different aspects of the disaster cycle such as prevention and preparation. These continue year-round.

Alternatively, volunteers could be compensated through direct payments for lost income, tax offsets for volunteers and their employers, or rent or mortgage assistance.

What鈥檚 more, a new national disaster management approach must intersect with state and local governments to help reduce disaster risk.

These might include聽, building design and standards for construction in at-risk areas, or building partnerships with the private sector.

Funding disaster preparedness

All this will cost money. Australia must accept that taxpayers will pay for future disaster preparedness, response and recovery. We need a bucket of cash for when disasters strike. Scott Morrison聽聽A$2 billion for recovery, but disaster funds should be ongoing.

This would be no different to the national Medical Future Research Fund 鈥� a A$20 billion fund to focus on solving nationally important medical issues聽.

There are several ways the money could be gathered. Commonwealth, state and territory governments could rethink their insistence on achieving budget surpluses, and instead spend money on a disaster fund. A 鈥渄isaster levy鈥� could be applied to household rates bills, a tax on carbon introduced, or planned tax cuts for middle and high income earners abandoned.

The public could also contribute to the fund directly. The ABC鈥檚 recent Australia Talks survey found on average, Australians would be willing to chip in聽聽to pay for adaptation to climate change. If every Australian contributed, there鈥檚 another A$5 billion per year for the fund.

Future disaster management will require Australia to step up. It means making hard choices about what we want the future to be like, how we鈥檒l pay for that, and what level of risk we are prepared to tolerate. It also means demanding that our leaders deliver meaningful climate change adaptation, including disaster planning.

This article was written by 聽from the .听

It was first published on The Conversation as