Comments Off

By Les Scammell, February 7, 2011 12:07 am

Hundreds of thousands of Australians in North Queensland battened down the hatches for what was to be Australia’s worst ever cyclone. Luckily for most, the cyclone crossed the coast in a less densely populated area. While Tully and surrounding areas bore the brunt, heavily populated areas like Cairns and Townsville were spared the full wrath of a category five event.

In the aftermath, we have to look at the planning that went into protecting people and property. In general terms, the planning and execution of those plans was faultless. For once, the Queensland Government and the supporting agencies got it all right. To date, there have been no deaths or serious injuries reported as a direct result of the cyclone. In fact, there has only been one report of a death, and that was caused indirectly – a young man losing life through asphyxiation, simply because he didn’t ventilate a room he was in that had an electric generator running.

There will most likely be some criticism leveled at the government when it comes to certain actions. Some will question whether or not Cairns hospital should have been totally evacuated. I have two comments to make on this – first, although Cairns was spared, if it hadn’t been, the hospital would have been empty so all resources could have been used to treat any injuries. Secondly, simply as an exercise in evacuation, it was a great success. Okay, the cyclone didn’t hit – it still made for a real life training exercise.

I am hearing calls for all North Queensland towns to have dedicated evacuations centers. I can see the point being made, but where would you build them, how big would they need to be, and how many would you build? Cairns and Townsville would each need five or six centers – possibly more. The second question is who would fund them? I like the response of the Queensland treasurer who has questioned the cost and feasibility of dedicated centers. Having centers that are dual purpose is another matter, and one I agree with.

These centers could be school halls or sporting halls. They would be used on a day to day basis for a range of activities, yet built to survive the worst that nature can throw at them.

For the people of North Queensland, most you dodged a bullet as they say. For those that didn’t, we are thinking of you. To the Queensland Government, you planned and executed those plans well – let’s hope you can do the same with the recovery. We’re in Gympie, and we had our dramas – but then, the whole state has suffered in some way this summer = it does prove one thing – Queenslanders are a tough mob, we’ll pick up the pieces and start all over again – keep smiling peoples.

Comments (2)

By Les Scammell, January 27, 2011 10:43 am

That Used To Be A Road

With much of the east coast of Australia now heavily involved in the clean up following recent flooding, the question is now turning to who will foot the bill. It’s a thorny question that is bringing the best and worst out of many people. Insurance companies are ducking for cover and trying every strategy possible to avoid payouts, governments are crying poor, and the Australian population together with many from around the world have already dug deep to the tune of around $80 million. However, with a flood bill estimated to be close to $6 billion, the money has to come from somewhere.

The $80 million that has been raised should and will go to the victims of these floods. The $5-$6 billion that is being touted refers to the cost of rebuilding infrastructure – roads, bridges and rail rebuilding will chew up a lot of those funds. Australia as a nation relies on this infrastructure. In central Queensland, coal exports have been brought a virtual standstill with millions of dollars being lost everyday. Around the country, roads, bridges and rail are essential for transporting the fruit, vegetables, grains and meats from rural areas to centralized markets.

Should we buy sea planes

Because we rely on this infrastructure for our food, we as a nation have to be responsible for the costs of restoring it. If that means a small increase in the Medicare levy – so be it. However, I would much prefer to see a small permanent levy introduced for disaster relief – if you like, a national disaster relief fund. This should be funded by residents, businesses, insurance companies and governments at all levels.

There is a lot of anger being expressed around the community because of the mis-information that is being spread in some sectors. There are many that believe that a Medicare levy would be used to help those who didn’t have insurance for example. This is not, or at least should not be the case. Any levy imposed must be restricted to infrastructure spending alone as would any funds accumulated in a national disaster relief fund.

Australia is a great country. We do however experience the best and worst of what mother nature has to offer. When droughts, floods and cyclones hit, they do it big time. We are lucky that earthquakes, tsunamis and volcanoes are not a part of that list. Add to this the disasters we create with bush fires, occasional road and rail incidents, and you will find that we have a disaster of some description on a regular basis. We are I guess fortunate that we have never had a major air disaster let alone an air disaster over a heavily populated area. We are also fortunate that terrorism has not found its way onto our shores in the way it has in many other countries.

A .25% or .5% levy, while perhaps costing us $5 a week extra in taxes, is nothing compared to the increased costs in food if this infrastructure is never repaired. Better yet – I wonder if Gillard and Co are prepare to think long term and introduce a national disaster fund. It was one major recommendation that came out of the 1974 funds – but no one had the political vision to run with it. I wouldn’t hold my breath this time either.

What do you think? Would you support a national disaster relief fund? How much are you willing to pay – o.2% 0.15% 0.25%? After all, it is our country and it is our food supplies at risk!

Road and Rail underwater

Comments (1)

By Les Scammell, January 18, 2011 10:48 am

Australia can be a fabulous country to live in. We have it all – desert, rain forests, great beaches, the Great Barrier Reef, great seafood and a population that is, generally speaking, easy to get on with. Compared to the US and Europe, we have low crime rates, very low murder rates, and only one or two ghetto type suburbs, and they are slowly disappearing.

The Australian environment can be very harsh. We live for many years under drought conditions, and when the drought breaks, we are often inundated with heavy rain and widespread floods. Yet we continue to live along the coast and along rivers – knowing full well that floods are just around the corner. Do we build levees to help prevent floods? No, it will spoil our fun of the water. Do we build high-set homes to escape the floods? We used to, but not today.

When insurance companies refuse to cover us for floods – we wonder why. Australians do have to take some responsibility for their own actions. You choose to live in flood areas, then expect to get flooded. It’s a very simple equation really.

Dams are not the solution – learning to live within our environment is the solution. We do live in a lucky country – the biggest problem though is that we haven’t really learned how to live in this country. Perhaps one day we will.