AUSTRALIAN
GOVERNMENTS
VERSUS FIRES
In Australia,
who should be
held accountable?
The Australian
Constitution says
land management,
and therefore
bush fire
bush fire
management,
is the
responsibility
responsibility
of the states.
State governments
decide how their land
will be managed
Local government
authorities are
accountable too.
Premiers, ministers
and various agency
bureaucrats have
ignored the warnings
of bush fire scientists,
for decades,
that a disaster
was imminent.
The climate and
vegetation makes
Australia
an inherently
bush fire-prone
country.
Along with anywhere
else in the world with
hot dry summers,
periodic droughts,
and flammable
vegetation.
Despite the findings
of many past "inquiries",
successive governments
in Qld, NSW and Victoria,
over the last 25 years,
go out of their way
to make things worse.
-- Reduced fuel
reduction burning.
-- Closure of access roads
and trails in national parks.
-- Decimation of
professional forestry
and their fire management
expertise.
-- Ignoring the creation
of residential subdivisions
that can not be defended
from fires, because they're
located too close to fire-prone
areas.
-- The deliberate destruction
of the forestry profession
meaning far more volunteers
have to be used to fight
forest fires.
-- State agencies seem to think
more and bigger water-bombing
aircraft is the answer.
-- Water and fire retardant
bombers in NSW
have been very expensive,
and not very ineffective.
One decade ago,
Victoria’s Black Saturday
( February 2009 fires )
royal commission
studied the
water-bombers --
DC-10 aircraft,
contracted from
the United States,
by the National Aerial
Firefighting Centre.
The total cost of the trial
was about $10 million.
Once airborne, the aircraft
had to discharge thgeir load,
of up to $45,000 worth
of aerial suppressant,
to enable a safe landing.
NAFC
General Manager
General Manager
Mr Richard Alder
stated that
given the
airport
limitations,
and specific
requirements
for operating
in Australia,
the DC-10
may not be a
cost-effective
option …
Anti-fuel reduction
burning academics
have no practical
understanding
of bush fire
management.
Premiers,
ministers
and senior
public servants
overseeing the
land-management
agencies
should have
rejected
the academics’
green ideology.
The Federal
Government funds
fire suppression
and recovery,
rather than
helping the states
to invest more in
fire prevention
and fuel reduction.
Better to rebuild
burnt communities,
than spend much less
money to prevent
the communities
from burning down
in the first place ?
Based on past inquiries
and reviews, government
employees who were
really accountable
will never be named,
shamed, or fired.
Governments are
full of "experts"
for every occasion,
with no practical
experience, or
the wisdom gained
from such experience !