Bugger The Bush

[Garpal Gumnut]

From the Australian Financial Review.

The Productivity Commission recommend that subsidies be removed from bush communities after flood and fire.

They obviously think that our nation's wealth is generated in our southern cities.

One supposes that Brisbane, a major recipient of recent relief would be included in their "model".

http://www.afr.com/p/national/overhaul_natural_disaster_drought_31thhRimoOygZZtD0n3UYL

MARCUS PRIEST
Natural disaster and drought payments should be overhauled as they may stop communities from preparing for the impacts of climate change and could be a significant future liability for the federal government, according to a new report by the Productivity Commission.

In its final report on climate change adaptation, the commission also called on the government to ditch its plan to require insurance companies to provide flood cover to all households unless it could show the community benefits outweighed the costs.

The release of the report came as a new report by researchers from RMIT University found climate change and rising sea levels could benefit some Australian ports by reducing the need for dredging.

In its report, the Productivity Commission underlined an inadequate focus by the federal government on preparing for natural disasters. It highlighted that while it spent $5.6 billion on disaster recovery and rebuilding in 2011, only $27 million was spent on disaster-mitigation works.

It also warned that current Natural Disaster Relief and Recovery Arrangements requiring the Commonwealth to pick up a large portion of state and territory government disaster recovery costs reduce their incentives to properly insure for extreme weather events and undertake disaster-mitigation measures.

As a result, it called for an independent review of the NDRRA.

What a mob of muppets.

While probably not making those of us who live North of the Brisbane Line disgruntled, it may make us at least, gruntled.

I would hesitate to describe the reactions of those in WA, NT, Country SA, Vic, NSW and Tasmania to such a pointy headed conclusion.

gg

 

[banco]

With regards to the compulsory flood insurance I'm not sure why the rest of Australia should subsidisepeople who chooose to live in areas that are prone to flood every few years.

 

[Julia]

With regards to the compulsory flood insurance I'm not sure why the rest of Australia should subsidisepeople who chooose to live in areas that are prone to flood every few years.

+1. Whether this be by our tax dollars going to provide flood grants for people determined to stay living in proven flood prone areas, or by paying hugely increasing insurance premiums in order to subsidise those same people.

 

[Country Lad]

+1. Whether this be by our tax dollars going to provide flood grants for people determined to stay living in proven flood prone areas, or by paying hugely increasing insurance premiums in order to subsidise those same people.

I shall tell my friend that you reckon he should move his 60,000 ha cattle farm after being affected by floods recently. I am sure he will be impressed. Should be a simple task, can do it with a couple of trips in the ute.

Cheers
Country Lad

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

With regards to the compulsory flood insurance I'm not sure why the rest of Australia should subsidisepeople who chooose to live in areas that are prone to flood every few years.

+1. Whether this be by our tax dollars going to provide flood grants for people determined to stay living in proven flood prone areas, or by paying hugely increasing insurance premiums in order to subsidise those same people.

The Premier of Queensland is on record as saying that people in flood prone areas need to be assisted in relocating to higher ground.

This is the Australian way, assist your mates.

Legislating against country agricultural and mining people outside of our major cities, who provide most of our wealth, would not seem to be a good way of dealing with this problem.

Increasing insurance premiums will lead country people to under insure, and require more government assistance.

gg

 

[sptrawler]

Coming from W.A, what I can't understand, is why all the old pictures of Queensland homes, they were on stilts or poles.
They were affectionally refered to as Quennslanders, how come all the flooded homes were sitting at ground level on concrete slabs?
That may be due to the greenies not letting people build houses out of hardwood.

 

[banco]

The Premier of Queensland is on record as saying that people in flood prone areas need to be assisted in relocating to higher ground.

This is the Australian way, assist your mates.

Legislating against country agricultural and mining people outside of our major cities, who provide most of our wealth, would not seem to be a good way of dealing with this problem.

Increasing insurance premiums will lead country people to under insure, and require more government assistance.

gg

Funny how you seem to have a much more benign view of Government spending when it's spent on your area of the country. A closet agricultural socialist?

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

Funny how you seem to have a much more benign view of Government spending when it's spent on your area of the country. A closet agricultural socialist?

Agrarian actually.

Unlike the left Pol Pot thinking, we believe that the bush and the city are complimentary.

Present left thinking is wedge politics.

It never ceases to amaze me when I visit George St. in Brisbane or Sussex St. in Sydney how well paved and kept are the paths.

At what cost?

Those in west Sydney and Melbourne, no doubt agree with me.

Inner city types live in a Panoptikon built by the blind.

gg

 

[Julia]

I shall tell my friend that you reckon he should move his 60,000 ha cattle farm after being affected by floods recently. I am sure he will be impressed. Should be a simple task, can do it with a couple of trips in the ute.

Cheers
Country Lad

No real need for the sarcasm is there? Your response is disingenuous at best.

Fairly obviously I was talking about ordinary householders in ordinary houses on small suburban flood prone properties, usually close to a river which floods repetitively.

If you find it sensible that they should continue to receive either insurance or taxpayer funds to rebuild their places time after time, then I simply disagree.

And, gg, it's not a case of 'bugger the bush'. The people I'm talking about live in regional towns eg Bundaberg.

 

[explod]

Coming from W.A, what I can't understand, is why all the old pictures of Queensland homes, they were on stilts or poles.
They were affectionally refered to as Quennslanders, how come all the flooded homes were sitting at ground level on concrete slabs?
That may be due to the greenies not letting people build houses out of hardwood.

You can stand them up on concrete forms using 44 gallon drums. Done right complies with regs and a lot of people can do it themselves. They are starting to do it in north west Victoria and will gain pace. Anyone wants a hand just let me know.

Used to own a Queenslander with verandar all round across the road from the State School at Longreach. No air conditioner either, must have been cooler then Lol.

 

[explod]

Unlike the left Pol Pot thinking, we believe that the bush and the city are complimentary.

Present left thinking is wedge politics.

gg

You poor bugger, are we really all that bad.

But yeh, maybe we need to look harder at some of the heads to get to the stumps.

 

[Calliope]

Unlike the left Pol Pot thinking, we believe that the bush and the city are complimentary.
gg

Complimentary? Wishful thinking GG. The ideal would be to be complementary.

 

[Smurf1976]

It could be argued that Sydney is, due simply to its' size, an unacceptable risk. Close to a fifth of the national population living in a concentrated geographic area which is an obvious terrorist or, in the event of war military, target in addition to the risks of earthquake or other natural disaster.

I agree with the points made about houses in flood prone areas etc, but in a broader sense it's not just the bush that is effectively subsidised. Every single Australian is, via the implied Government obligation, carrying the financial risk of a future major disaster in Sydney or Melbourne simply due to the potential scale.

If Adelaide or Hobart are somehow destroyed, by whatever means, then Australia as a whole will have suffered a significant setback but will ultimately rebuild and carry on. If Sydney or Melbourne is reduced to rubble then economically and in practical terms Australia will be crippled for a considerable time.

Are the two big cities simply too large a risk to sustain? Every Australian is carrying the risk.....

 

[Country Lad]

Fairly obviously I was talking about ordinary householders in ordinary houses on small suburban flood prone properties, usually close to a river which floods repetitively.

Umm, no not obvious when the topic is about the bush communities with the topic being started by:

The Productivity Commission recommend that subsidies be removed from bush communities after flood and fire.

They obviously think that our nation's wealth is generated in our southern cities.

Cheers
Country Lad

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

Complimentary? Wishful thinking GG. The ideal would be to be complementary.

My apologies Calliope, thanks for picking that up. I did mean that the bush and city are complementary.

We need cities to organise the sale of our agricultural and mining wealth, to house hairy legged feminists in isolation from our young men, to be home to the Green kelp that passes for a sustainability party, to hold government, to be home to colourful characters such as the Obeids and Union head honchos, and to provide Museums, Galleries and other yurts of the yartz, so that we may broaden our country minds when we visit.

gg

 

[McLovin]

the commission also called on the government to ditch its plan to require insurance companies to provide flood cover to all households unless it could show the community benefits outweighed the costs.

Can't argue with that...

I'm trying to think of the last time Queensland had a tax imposed on it to pay for something that happened in NSW or Victoria.