More Bipartisan Flood Mitigation Projects in Challenging Times?

The AIM Network

3 years ago

By Denis Bright

Delivering financial support for sustainable infrastructure were recommendations of the Morrison Government’s Inquiry into the future of our cities in 2018. Commitment to sustainability in an era of profound climate change receives 363 mentions in the Building Up & Moving Out Report.

These changes cannot be left to the states and territories alone. This is a real challenge locally when 50.2 per cent of state revenue in Queensland’s 2021-22 budget is derived from the Commonwealth in combined grants and CST allocations. Queensland’s own taxation revenue is merely 27.3 per cent of current budget revenue.

The projected deficit exceeds $6 billion but the urgency of both sustainable planning and flood mitigation have never been greater.

In some of my previous articles for The AIM Network, I also had reservations about the South East Queensland (SEQ) Regional Plan 2017 and its capacity to deliver the ambitious stated goals without more federal financial assistance. The planning mechanisms ploughed on with some lofty goals which were not supported by adequate financial assistance:

[textblock style=”4″]

ShapingSEQ provides a regional framework for growth management, and sets planning direction for sustainable growth, global economic competitiveness and high-quality living by:

identifying a long-term sustainable pattern of development which focuses more growth in existing urban areas
harnessing regional economic strengths and clusters to compete globally
ensuring land use and infrastructure planning are integrated
valuing and protecting the natural environment, productive land, resources, landscapes and cultural heritage
promoting more choice of housing and lifestyle options
locating people and jobs closer together, and moving people and goods more efficiently and reliably
promoting vibrant, fair, healthy and affordable living and housing to meet all of the community’s needs
valuing design and embracing the climate to create high-quality living environments
maximising the use of existing infrastructure and planning for smarter solutions for new infrastructure
supporting strong rural communities and economic diversification.

[/textblock]

At a public seminar organized by the Planning Institute of Australia (PIA) in Brisbane on 14 November 2016, the need for more financial commitment from the federal government to support Queensland ShapingSEQ priorities were raised for consideration by representatives from the office of the Director-General of State Planning at the event.

[textblock style=”4″]

The Queensland Government is committed to working with the Australian Government to establish and implement City Deals for Queensland under a memorandum of understanding (MOU) agreed to on 10 November 2016.

Under the MOU, a comprehensive SEQ City Deal is set to become Queensland’s second tripartite City Deal, following Townsville which became Australia’s historic first City Deal signed in December 2016.

This commitment recognises the significant work already undertaken by the Queensland Government and the Council of Mayors (SEQ) over the past two years. Collectively, this work has already identified a series of regional challenges and outcomes to be addressed under a City Deal for the SEQ region.

[/textblock]

Without more federal funding for sustainable urban development, appalling levels of forest clearing were tolerated in the Shaping SEQPlan. Turning hillsides into outer suburban and semi-rural subdivisions accentuates flood run-offs.

The extent of potential greenfield development (new urban expansion) was anticipated by each of the twelve local authorities in SEQ. Established urban areas in Brisbane, the Gold Coast, Moreton Bay, Redlands, Sunshine Coast and Noosa were less dependent on new urban expansion. However, many of the semi-rural local authorities became havens for this new expansion. Catchments from these hinterlands feed into the coastal local authorities.

Offering hardship assistance to the victims of flood inundation needs to be supplemented by stronger planning controls on the new town plans of hinterland local authorities. This is not a criticism of the need for essential short-term financial assistance to flood victims.

Services Australia is offering only token financial assistance to the flood victims of SE Queensland (SEQ) and NSW despite some fanfare about the level of generosity in public pronouncements (Services Australia web site):

[textblock style=”4″]

The Australian Government Disaster Recovery Payment is a Lump Sum Payment

Federal Financial Assistance Rates for Major Property Damage

$1,000 per adult

$400 each child younger than 16

[/textblock]

In the traditions of the federal LNP for political marketing style of communication, the Prime Minister’s office has grossly inflated the level of emergency assistance offered across Australia by adding COVID-19 relief to total expenditure (PM 27 February 2021).

Most local authorities are fully aware of the risks of the more flood-prone subdivisions where flood market insurance premiums are unbelievably high. In the case of the Moreton Bay Regional Council and some other local authorities, probability estimates of flooding risks are available for most residential addresses. All new riverside residential developments pose potential flooding problems and drainage hazards even if the sites have not been affected by recent flooding problems.

The media office of BWC Group which operates for property developer Peet Limited explained that drainage problems on the Riverbank estate in Caboolture South within the Moreton Bay Regional Council had been minimal during the current flood run-off problems.

Readers can offer their own feedback on the level of financial assistance to flood victims in high-risk localities across other localities in Eastern Australia. The feedback mechanisms offered by The AIM Network will facilitate your comments.

Even before the great Queensland floods of 1893, local authorities and their colonial governments were aware of the financial and emotional costs of major floods and other natural disasters. The liability of local authorities for allowing housing subdivisions in flood prone areas in New Zealand was reviewed by Sean Brennan as part of his honour research programme in law at Victoria University in Wellington in 2015. Here are some concluding remarks of his paper:

Flooding is a significant problem in New Zealand. Its cost is surpassed only by the recent Canterbury earthquakes. Councils and communities have a real interest in protecting against flooding as best they can, but some of these measures will eventually fail, either because natural forces exceed the limits of the works, or because of problems with the protections themselves.

This article demonstrates that councils can be liable for flooding damage in respect of their own torts, but that a non-delegable duty is arguably not owed to general members of the public. This may have the effect that where a property is uninsured and the contractor who did the work leading to the damage is insolvent, the property owner cannot recover. The extent to which councils should be liable ultimately falls to whether the moral obligation of socialising loss outweighs acknowledging individual responsibility to insure one’s own assets.

In the author’s view, while councils should remain liable at least for harm caused by their negligence, it would be more economically effective for individuals to remain responsible for protecting their assets through private insurance policies.

Stricter legislative bans might be considered on new residential subdivision of flood-prone areas. Voluntary purchases of existing flood prone land for community uses are a possibility in situations where owners and landlords cannot afford to continue high rates of disaster insurance. Some residential relocations have already been completed in the township of Grantham in the Lockyer Valley with support from the Queensland Government.

Fulfilling more sustainable planning initiatives is an ongoing challenge throughout Australia in the decades ahead when federal financial support is available to support the planning acts in all states and territories. Let these bipartisan initiatives continue in the interventionist traditions of economic and social economist Noel Butlin (1921-91) whose works predated the debt and deficit rhetoric of the federal LNP’s post-1996 political era in Australia.

[textblock style=”6″]

Denis Bright is a financial member of the Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance (MEAA). Denis is committed to consensus-building in these difficult times. Your feedback from readers advances the cause of citizens’ journalism. Full names are not required when making comments. However, a valid email must be submitted if you decide to hit the Replies Button.