Future for emergency management
Climate change and the global war on terror have made emergency management a key issue for Australians. Leigh Funston reports on future possibilities.
Private sector organisations appear likely to play a greater role in the nation's disaster response efforts.
That is the message from the Federal Government's Director General of Emergency Management Australia, Tony Pearce who said the private sector held most of the resources needed to respond effectively to emergency situations.
Mr Pearce said the increased natural disaster threats posed by climate change meant government authorities were planning for a range of possibilities.
"Public/private partnerships provide the best way in the future to ensure that we are at least halfway resourced to respond to large-scale events, possibly even events of a magnitude that we have not experienced in the past," Mr Pearce said.
The EMA chief said the private sector resources needed for response efforts included tradespeople, professionals, transport providers and utility companies.
"Part of our planning should take options such as the development of public/private partnerships into consideration and where the option is considered appropriate, agreements should be entered into with those organisations willing to partner with us.
"Whilst having agreements in place with private organisations will not ensure that all of the resources required to manage a large-scale emergency are going to be available, any enhancement of capacity and capability has to place us in a better position than we might be were such agreements not in place."
Mr Pearce is the first emergency manager to head up Australia's emergency management organisation. Prior to Mr Pearce's appointment as EMA chief in August 2006, his predecessors had been recruited from the Department of Defence.
Key to being successful
During an extensive interview with ASM, the EMA boss said he believed the key to being successful in his position was not about the use of power but more about how he used influence.
"In reality and in practice, responsibility for preventing, preparing for, responding to and recovering from emergencies and disasters rests with the states and territories," he said.
Mr Pearce told ASM there were key areas in which EMA was able to influence outcomes in the nation's emergency management sector:
* coordination of the Commonwealth Government response to emergencies in support of states and territories
* identify areas of emergency management where a nationally consistent approach would benefit the Australian community
* work with jurisdictions, local government, Commonwealth agencies and non-government organisations to develop appropriate strategies
* be a major contributor to national emergency management capability development initiatives.
The EMA chief said the conduct of emergency management operations in Australia compared very favourably with that of other nations.
"I have been fortunate enough to benchmark Australia's emergency management practices against most of those who would be seen to be leaders in this business including the US, UK, New Zealand, Canada and Singapore.
"I believe Australia is at the forefront of emergency management practice internationally and in many ways our national approach and collaborative processes are best practice."
All-hazards planning
Central to Australia's approach to emergency management is the "all-hazards planning" concept.
"The way in which emergency service organisations would (for example) plan for and respond to a (building) structure collapse is no different regardless of whether the event was caused by an act of terrorism or as a result of an inherent structural weakness in the building.
"In my mind, this (all-hazards planning) is a great strength of the Australian emergency management system."
In Australia and other western nations the large increase in the funding for emergency management has been linked to 9/11 and subsequent terror incidents such as the Bali bombings and attacks on public transport in London and Madrid.
"In the minds of some, there was a fear that terrorism would result in a complete focus by all levels of government on that specific threat to the detriment of ensuring our ability to manage the consequences of natural disasters," he said.
"Any fear that some might have had in this regard has progressively been put at rest. We have seen a significant amount of increased effort both nationally and internationally focused on preparing communities for the unpredictability of natural events."
Specific examples of government expenditure in Australia in the natural disasters area include:
* $49m by the Commonwealth on the Working Together to Manage Emergencies grants scheme to assist local government develop and implement community emergency risk strategies and to assist volunteer-based emergency service organisations
* the Natural Disaster Mitigation Program to address natural disaster mitigation risk priorities across Australia. This $139m program is funded on a cost shared basis between all levels of government
* $68.9m investment in the Australian tsunami warning system.
For Australia, a nation with a long history of battling natural disasters and now faced with the impact of climate change, there is undeniable logic in having a Commonwealth entity to coordinate a major disaster response. Given the performance of the EMA to date, there is no reason why the organisation won't continue to build its influence and importance.
About the author: Leigh Funston is a former editor of Australian Security Magazine.