Victorian Fires

[daisy]

NewsCom item;




But of course these levels could not have been reached without the willing complicity of the State politicians who will stoop to any levels to keep Green preferences.

Thanks Calliope. So therein lies the problem.

 

[daisy]

daisy,

and apart from the wealthier tree changes....most of that population were young people with families, who could not afford to own homes closer to the cities ....the housing was much cheaper out there....

cheers

This is something that hasn't really been brought out in the press. I was thinking wealthy tree changers and generations of the same families.

And this explains the number of fatalities that were children. Something I've found particularly difficult to deal with. (I'm sure we all have)
Economic reasons for living in these areas would most likely have meant extra money for bunkers wasn't available.
I did read that article you posted the link for about recommended building in future. I guess that extra cost will also mean these fireprone regions will become beyond the reach of younger families leaving them even more squeezed.
So now I better understand your solution by having a central area kept safe for everyone to go to.
Calliope, I would truly like to see a class action against the Greens. They do need to be held accountable for their irresponsible extremism (something that has always prevented me from voting for them.)
And if this were to occur it may help loosen the stranglehold that they have on state gov'ts...so that this kind of unnecessary loss of life never happens again.

 

[Prospector]

Is it totally the green's fault though?

People in Melbourne who have holiday homes in the areas affected say they are surrounded by ancient towering eucalytpus trees. People go to these areas because they want to be with the trees. I cant help but think that there is the ultimate irony that you go to an area because of the bush, then you cut it down so you can live there?

In not all towns, but certainly in some, people should not have been allowed to build there unless they can afford to build the bunkers that could save their lives one day!

 

[Calliope]

After all the maudlin hypocritical platitudes issuing from the mouths of some politicians over the last week, it is ironic that the much derided Wilson Tuckey is the only one with the guts to apologise to the victims, for the role he played in letting the conditions for this inferno develop, in this press release;

"I apologise to the people of Australia and particularly to those who have been directly affected by the Victorian wildfires, for my tolerance of the public policy that failed to maintain our forest estate as a safe environment. I didn't adequately prosecute the slogan: No Fuel, No Fire! My fault over the last five years is to fail to influence the Australian political establishment that certain public policy, driven by the pursuit of minor party preferences, was a recipe for disaster of the greatest possible magnitude for humanity and the forest itself.

"Worse, as the evidence I provided parliament on November 27, 2003 in the enclosed tabling speech ... demonstrates, I knew better."

 

[MrBurns]

After all the maudlin hypocritical platitudes issuing from the mouths of some politicians over the last week, it is ironic that the much derided Wilson Tuckey is the only one with the guts to apologise to the victims, for the role he played in letting the conditions for this inferno develop, in this press release;

Yes that did take guts, good on him.

 

[Julia]

Yes, kudos to Wilson Tuckey. He's one of the few politicians who genuinely says what he thinks, rather than what he thinks sounds good.

 

[Romano]

We can all say
"there but for the grace of god go I".
It could have been just about anywhere in Victoria that these fires occured. It has been so dry and so hot for such a long time, that one spark and anything could go up.
It all very well to say the building code has to change in "fire prone areas", but I think last Saturday that was just about every corner of the state.
There was a fire in suburban Melbourne (Narre Warren) and again through the week in Ivanhoe, that could have got out of control.
Do we call Narre Warren fire prone? It really could have been anywhere, the circumstances would have been the same.
fifty seven home burnt down in Bendigo, they were no in what you would call fire prone areas, they were just in the suburbs, 1km from the centre of town.
So does the building code have to change for all housing?

 

[daisy]

Dunno Ramano.
I've been in a state of disbelief about the death toll and I guess I was just trying to apply what I know to something that I clearly do not know.
It's scary isn't it?
What would you do?

 

[Romano]

We have lived in a state forest for the last 15 years, and always believed that we would stay, because we had a "fire plan".
For the first time in 15 years we were genuinely frightened last Saturday, before we even knew what was happening at Kinglake & Marysville. It was just one hell of a day.
Our so called fire plan changed late in the afternoon when we decided that we would go, not stay and defend, as we always said we would. Its just not worth it.
Yes, we have a lovely home, and all those possessions, but I think that we all have to get over the notion of stay and defend. In those conditions, no house is safe, you just cannot do it.
It is the nature of the Australian bush to burn, and burn fiercely, we cannot tame that. If we live amongst it, I now believe we must be prepared to evacuate. Your life is just not worth it.

 

[daisy]

Ramano.
Glad you got out. House and possessions are replaceable. Loved ones aren't.
A few people on this site have said they could see it coming but the papers and T.V. say people were caught by surprise because of the speed of it.
Then there are pictures of car accidents and pile ups and cars with people burnt inside them because they left it too late and fled in panic and terror. I can think of no worse way to die than by fire. I was just thinking that if they had had a bunker they wouldn't have.
And I agree the stay and defend policy does need revisiting but if entire towns have to evacuate where do all these people go and how early must they make that decision? I was thinking that human nature would probably mean that many people would still leave it too late.
I guess that becomes their choice then.

 

[Calliope]

Doesn't this tug at your heartstrings. It is obviously not posed.

 

[sam76]

I like the bemused look on the woman next to him...

 

[sam76]

Lessons from the ashes

Michael Bachelard and Melissa Fyfe

February 15, 2009

Were the fires a freakish combination of unavoidable circumstances, or could their impact have been less lethal? Michael Bachelard and Melissa Fyfe explain the key issues facing the royal commission.


http://www.theage.com.au/national/lessons-from-the-ashes-20090215-8810.html?page=-1

 

[Smurf1976]

I would truly like to see a class action against the Greens. They do need to be held accountable for their irresponsible extremism (something that has always prevented me from voting for them.)
And if this were to occur it may help loosen the stranglehold that they have on state gov'ts...so that this kind of unnecessary loss of life never happens again.

I will simply note that:

1. The Greens have never been elected in their own right to govern any Australian state. The closest they have come was the Labor-Green Accord in Tasmania 1989 -1992 and more recently all but wiping out the Liberals, also in Tasmania, thus becoming a legitmate opposition party. But the Greens have never won a majority at a state election.

2. Despite the above, the Greens have been remarkably successful at having their policies implemented. Most of those policies, and the party itself, lacked majority public support at the time. There are exceptions of course, but certainly the Greens have managed to get an awful lot of policies implemented despite never being in government.

I'll leave it at that and state that my comment is more about democracy than anything specifically to do with the fires.

 

[MrBurns]

Donations now around $100M thats enough to replace every uninsured house lost.
Thats serious money I hope non of it disappears.

 

[shaunQ]

Donations now around $100M thats enough to replace every uninsured house lost.
Thats serious money I hope non of it disappears.

I don't know how true it is, but ABC news just said that the average family of 4 children would get $10K. And I assume the 4 children would be make them get a higher amount. I saw an estimate that there was around 1000 houses.

So, thats $10Million. I appreciate that there would be other costs, but I hope that other $90Million is not going into thin air or into certain infrastructure that could be replaced by Government or Insurance, not charity.

 

[Smurf1976]

OK. I'll try again. What I cannot understand is why anyone living within a couple of hundred kms of any potential fire didn't get away to safety days before the firestorm on Saturday.

But where would they go? We're talking about evacuating, amongst other things, the entire city of Melbourne if we take that couple of hundred km literally.

OK, they could all drive to SA. But I don't see Adelaide having enough hotels to put an extra three million people in the city given that Adelaide only has 1 million residents to start with. And you won't find 3 million spare beds in Sydney either.

And what about islands? In the Australian context we've got one, Tasmania, with half a million people and its own history of horror fires which rank right up there among Australia's biggest natural disasters in terms of lives lost. It's not going to be easy evacuating an entire state, especially when it's an island where there are a lot more fires than most people realise.

I can see your point but I just don't see it working in practice. At least not whilst people have jobs etc to go to and can't simply walk away from everything because there's a fire burning at the other end of the state (any state). We'd be evacuating entire cities, and at least one entire state, many times each year - it's not a 1 in 100 year event more like a once a week scenario during the fire season.

 

[Calliope]

There are exceptions of course, but certainly the Greens have managed to get an awful lot of policies implemented despite never being in government.
.

Exactly, and awful is the keyword. It's because, as Daisy says, they have a strangle hold on some State governments who value their preferences above their principles.

 

[daisy]

I have just had a colleague of my husband to dinner. He used to live in Adelaide Hills and has been through two fires there. He now lives in Brissy. He said that he knew these fires were going to happen because the weather conditions were perfect for arsonists. Although I was aware that arson has been attributed as a cause of these fires and that someone had been caught, I had not appreciated the full implications of this, but from what our guest was saying this fire was a given.

 

[Julia]

But where would they go? We're talking about evacuating, amongst other things, the entire city of Melbourne if we take that couple of hundred km literally.

Is it really likely that the entire city of Melbourne would burn? That's quite an extrapolation from the places like Marysville which was as I understand it constructed amongst hills and gullies of trees. i.e. people moved there in order to live in a country environment surrounded by mature trees.
A big difference from the concrete and steel of capital cities.

OK, they could all drive to SA. But I don't see Adelaide having enough hotels to put an extra three million people in the city given that Adelaide only has 1 million residents to start with. And you won't find 3 million spare beds in Sydney either.

Smurf this sort of exaggeration is out of character for you.
Frankly I couldn't care less if there are beds available or not. We're talking about saving lives here. Wouldn't you sleep in your car for a couple of nights if it meant being alive at the end of it?

Jeez, I'd get on a plane to NZ if necessary!


Frankly, I'm getting pretty sick of defending the fact that I said what I would do is to leave at the first warning of danger. That, in the current scenario, was a week before the fire storm.
I have not said everyone should do this. It's up to individuals to do what they think is best. But clearly deciding to stay to defend your damn house has been less than productive for many who did this.

I can see your point but I just don't see it working in practice. At least not whilst people have jobs etc to go to

Sure as hell won't be going to any job if you're dead!