"One Off" disaster levies reflect poor policy.

This morning, Australians woke to page one headlines "PM Flags one-off flood tax".
This raises questions beyond those driven by party politics. It raises issues around how we, as a community, operate strategically. To what degree we operate sustainably.

Inundated floodplain development, Queensland, 2011

As a community, (in this case the "shared association" is as a nation) our constitution clearly nests the responsibility for the protection of life and property with State governments. Founded as a colony, we have a legacy of ports and hinterlands which have competed to attract development. A key discount lever used to attract development in the past has been "discounting". Sometimes with cheap flat land served with transport infrastructure and subsidised migrant labor. Sometimes with "light" requirements around standards. This has been so from flood plains to industrial zones. The outcome has been "hazard havens" where some States have imposed risks on citizens more severly than other States. Further, the benefits from such ventures do not generally go to those living near to the risky sites.

All of this is contextual to the challenges of the future.
Now - at a national level - we need to agree approaches to some fundamental questions.
By what country wide, consistently applied criteria will we address risks?

A systematic risk management framework

The risk management record of this national government has been characterised by a series of policy failures (from pink batts to school funding). Central to all of these failures has been the inability to bring the right questions to the table. The current knee jerk looks like the trend is embedded in their culture. One off fixes applied indiscriminately and an ignorance of insurance are indications of a government struggling to develop and apply a comprehensive and integrated approach. Unless a systematic and thoughtful approach is undertaken, we are likely to see further grounds for challenging the integrity of the current government.

New Business Continuity Standard for Australia's financial sector

The Private Sector is increasingly held accountable for quality risk management. In many cases this takes the form of mandated performance standards. The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority has recently released the draft of their proposed Business Continuity Management Standard. The proposed standard aligns with international best practices. It makes Boards accountable for very specific Business Continuity Management capabilities - summarised in Clause 21 - to include (at a minimum):
1. Business Continuity Management Policy;
2. Business Impact Analysis including Risk Assessment;
3. Recovery Objectives and Strategies;
4. Business Continuity Plan including Crisis Management and Recovery; and
5. Programs for Review and Testing of the Business Continuity Plan; and Training and Awareness of staff in relation to Business Continuity Management.

APRA's draft Business Continuity Management Standard (PDF)