高清福利片

By Rosemary Lyster

We must stop talking about Australia鈥檚 鈥榥atural disasters鈥� and start talking about our 鈥楿nNatural鈥� disasters.聽Natural聽disasters ignores the fact that our flood and bushfire disasters have been fuelled by human-induced climate change. Calling these disasters聽苍补迟耻谤补濒听disasters lets governments off the hook, and has the dangerous effect of lulling the community into thinking there鈥檚 an inevitability about them. This is not true.聽聽

As the聽聽report from the World Bank states, most disasters are really聽UnNatural. They occur when governments, the market and social institutions fail to work well together. To work well, interventions are needed across the three intersecting components of a disaster 鈥� the hazards (extreme weather events), vulnerability and exposure.聽

惭测听聽focuses on all stages of the disaster cycle 鈥� prevention, response, recovery, and compensation. Despite the hundreds of government inquiries including the 2020聽, Australian governments have a terrible track record of policies for disaster prevention, preparedness and response.

The Royal Commission recommended that the Federal government adopt 鈥榖ig country thinking鈥� and 鈥榓 national response鈥�, and called on the Prime Minister to give his attention to 鈥榥ational strategic leadership鈥�. The most recent floods will cost聽聽over four years, while a 2021聽聽estimates disasters will cost Australia $73 billion per year by 2060 and $94 billion a year where emissions are high 鈥� with climate change contributing 31% to floods. Yet, I鈥檓 struggling to find a truly integrated 鈥榥ational response鈥� from the Prime Minister and the聽.

We now live in an era of rapid climate disruption and disasters are coming thick and fast. Governments cannot wave a magic wand to make these disappear, but they could take urgent action to prevent disasters becoming worse. 罢丑别听聽recently reminded the Australian government that its first duty is to protect people from climate risks, and to discharge this duty Australia should be a leader not a laggard in reducing greenhouse gas emissions.聽

罢丑别听聽warns that 鈥渢he extent and magnitude of climate change impacts are larger鈥� than previously estimated. Yet Australian聽governments continue to make an outsized contribution to climate change by failing to adopt science-based emissions targets at home and by exporting emissions abroad by approving fossil fuel projects that are literally having an impact on planetary climate stability.聽In 2019-20, Australia was the聽聽of metallurgical coal and the second largest exporter of thermal coal. 罢丑别听聽ranks Australia 52nd in the world, just behind Saudi Arabia, for being a 鈥榗limate laggard鈥�. And now聽the Federal government is spending $100.2 million to聽聽more coal and gas projects, labelling this environmental 鈥榬eform鈥�.聽

If Australia is making an outsized global contribution to a swathe of new unnatural disasters then one would think that the least it could do would be to have world-class policies reducing disaster risk at home. After all the Australian government is legally bound by the Paris Agreement, and has made pledges under the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction, to engage in climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction (DRR).聽

罢丑别听聽contains broad statements such as relying on 鈥渟hared responsibility, partnerships and investment鈥�. Highlighting the聽聽as an example of Federal government resilience building raises a quizzical eyebrow given the critical condition of the Reef. 罢丑别听听补苍诲听聽say all the right things but when they will be implemented? Funding for DRR, including flood infrastructure solutions, is also woefully inadequate.聽聽

罢丑别听聽provides only $600 million over six years from 2021-27 and the聽聽delivered only $100 million in 2020-22. Given that聽聽could be at risk of flooding by 2030, these figures are paltry 鈥� especially considering聽the Federal government $660 million spend on car parks, to shore up their electoral fortunes,聽. This raises serious questions about where the government鈥檚 funding priorities lie and the聽. Do we now need an audit of which communities have been awarded funding for DRR and why?

Turning to the response phase, although it is now easier under聽聽for the Prime Minister to declare a national emergency and call in the聽, Federal governance of the flood response was too slow. There is still no national warning system. In Lismore, people were told to return home only for the evacuation alert to be聽聽10 hours later. There are claims that between Resilience NSW and the SES someone聽聽as citizens were forced to rescue stranded residents and pay for private helicopters.聽

Moving to recovery, in 2012 the聽聽said that land use planning is 鈥渢he most potent policy lever for influencing the level of future disaster risk鈥�. Yet the聽聽has just abandoned planning principles to manage climate risk citing developer costs and the need for new affordable housing supply. The Commission also called for an independent public inquiry into existing settlements 鈥渢o assess the community鈥檚 acceptable levels of risk for public and private assets鈥�. This never happened so a decade later questions about rebuilding in flood prone land, relocations and buybacks remain unresolved. Meanwhile,聽聽has revealed that local councils are 鈥榰nderfunded and undermined鈥� in their resilience-building efforts.

This brings us to compensation where the curious notion of 鈥榤oral hazard鈥� suggests that if government and insurers foot the post-disaster bill, individuals will take no responsibility to minimise their exposure to disaster. Government compensation is聽聽and there鈥檝e been concerns about the Prime Minister鈥檚聽聽of flood relief funding. Insurers have tried to signal the risk by increasing premiums in flood prone areas but then insurance becomes unaffordable. So the market fails as well. Prime Minister Julia Gillard established a $50 million聽聽after the 2010-11 Queensland floods. This was abolished by her successor Tony Abbott 鈥� another wasted decade of important policy work. The United Kingdom, meanwhile, has a 25-year聽聽partnership for catastrophic floods.聽

As I said,聽鈥楿nNatural鈥櫬爁lood disasters occur when聽governments, the market and social institutions fail to work well together. In these most recent floods it seems that only the social institutions 鈥� individuals, community groups and charities 鈥� functioned as they should while governments went missing.聽

Rosemary Lyster聽is the Co-Leader of the Disaster Justice cluster at the University of Sydney. She is a Professor of Climate and Environmental Law in the University of Sydney Law School and a Fellow of the Australian Academy of Law. Rosemary鈥檚 special area of research expertise is Climate Justice and Disaster Law.

In 2015, Rosemary was appointed by the Victorian government to a three person Independent Review Committee (IRC) to review the state鈥檚 Climate Change Act 2010 and make recommendations to place Victoria as a leader on climate change. The government accepted 32 of the IRC鈥檚 33 Recommendations which were included in the new聽. In 2013, Rosemary was appointed a Herbert Smith Freehills Visiting Professor at Cambridge Law School and was a Visiting Scholar at Trinity College, Cambridge in 2009 and in 2014. In other areas of Environmental Law, Rosemary specialises in Energy and Climate Law and Water Law.

She has published two books and numerous other publications in this area. Her books are聽聽(Edward Elgar: 2018) and聽聽(Cambridge University Press: 2016). Rosemary has been selected by the Australian Financial Review as one of the 2018 鈥�100 Women of Influence鈥� in the Public Policy category.

Header image:聽Brisbane, Australia - Feb 27, 2022: Roads flooded after the heavy rain in West End suburb by Alex Simbal via Shutterstock, ID: 2129704148.