The Commonwealth should require state and territory governments to complete complementary disaster risk assessments to inform the Risk Profile and guide priority areas for Commonwealth investment and support. Where they exist, climate risk or adaptation profiles developed at local, state and Commonwealth levels should be used to inform the Risk Profile.

The Commonwealth should develop an agreed methodology to underpin the Risk Profile that would identify at-risk communities, capabilities, and assets.

The Commonwealth should use the results of the Risk Profile to work with state and territory governments to identify and prioritise disaster funding.
- The outcome of the Risk Profile should inform decision making elements in response to requests for Commonwealth funding, either directly or via co-contribution. Specifically, the results of the Risk Profile should also form a core consideration for future DRFA, and DRF decision making, as well as any other future programs.
- The Risk Profile should inform other Commonwealth programs, such as infrastructure investment, National Construction Code enhancements, climate change initiatives and the like.
- Understanding the Risk Profile will also allow the Commonwealth to place conditions or requirements on funding approvals that are consistent with a more strategically aligned approach to risk reduction and resilience.
-The Risk Profile should be used in concert with the Outcomes Policy to direct funding towards projects that advance risk reduction priorities, and which contribute to the outcomes the Commonwealth is seeking to achieve with its disaster funding.

The Commonwealth should lead the development of a Nation-wide Natural Disaster Risk Profile (Risk Profile) to enable the Commonwealth to identify risk reduction and resilience priorities and allow the Commonwealth, states, and territories to address agreed risk. The Risk Profile should:
- Be reviewed (including methodology) every five years but updated annually.
-Be led by NEMA and supported by PM&C.
- Encompass all components of natural disaster risk (hazard, exposure, vulnerability and response) with consideration of risk across all domains (natural, social, economic and built).
- Include consideration of the capacity and capabilities that exist to mitigate risks along with consideration of the capability to embed resilience.

In compiling the Risk Profile, the Commonwealth should draw upon existing activities including, but not limited to, the National Climate Risk Assessment and the High-Risk Weather Season Outlook.
- The Risk Profile should incorporate national perspectives on risks and opportunities across the natural, social, economic and built domains, in the context of current and anticipated natural disasters.

The Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (PM&C), jointly with the CoordinatorGeneral of National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA), should co-chair a coordination mechanism between Commonwealth departments and agencies to promote natural disaster risk reduction and resilience.
- This mechanism should ensure Commonwealth decision makers understand the role of relevant programs, with a view to avoiding duplication and ensuring better program information sharing and alignment.
- In establishing this mechanism, PM&C and NEMA should consider all current Commonwealth emergency and disaster management forums to ensure alignment. This includes reviewing respective terms of reference, frequency at which they meet and the appropriate balance between emergency response coordination and a wider Commonwealth focus on disaster risk reduction and resilience coordination.

The Commonwealth should mandate regular capability assessments of local governments by state and territory governments.
- Where possible, these assessments should form part of the local or regional Disaster Management Plans.
- Priority should be placed on assessing capability, capacity and investment requirements, as well as assessing any barriers to enabling locally led action, including disadvantaged, or disproportionately impacted communities.
- These assessments should help inform broader capability needs considered as part of Recommendation 6.
- Consideration should be given to complementing these local government capability assessments with data held by Regional Development Australia, managed by the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development, Communications and the Arts (DITRDCA).

To support a comprehensive risk-based approach, the Commonwealth should require state and territory governments to develop local or regional Disaster Management Plans. These Disaster Management Plans should:
- Identify the readiness of a region to handle a disaster event (including considerations of prevention, preparedness, response and recovery).
- Include risks and strengths that are specific to that area in the natural, social, economic and built domains.
- Contain information that can be used to inform state and territory risk assessments, inform response activities in advance of disaster events, or help inform resource and funding requirements for recovery, disaster risk reduction, and resilience.
- Recognise and accommodate the lived experience, increased cost, risk and complexity of delivering disaster management services to remote communities, and to First Nations communities.

That the Queensland Reconstruction Authority leads state-level hazard and risk functions, including the design and delivery of a risk assessment tool that is locally appropriate, costeffective and fit for purpose.

The Inspector-General of Emergency Management recommends the following changes to the ways that ‘resilience’ is reflected in Queensland’s Disaster Management Arrangements:
a. That the Disaster Management Act 2003 be amended to include a definition of ‘resilience’ that reflects the Queensland Government’s endorsed definition within the Queensland Strategy for Disaster Resilience, clarifying that Resilience functions incorporate activities related to the phases of Prevention, Preparedness, Response and Recovery.

Each NEMMM agenda should have a standing item on disaster risk reduction/resilience and at least one full meeting each year should be devoted to Disaster Resilience and Recovery. Some jurisdictions have established separate ministers responsible for recovery and resilience, and they should be invited to attend these recovery and resilience meetings.

NEMMM’s leading role in the wider national resilience effort should focus on disaster risk reduction, and it should engage as a core stakeholder in a wider range of other resilience issues. It should further elaborate this focus with respect to:
- Prospective risk management (higher infrastructure standards, environmental protection, etc.),
- Corrective risk management (retrofitting, reinforcing, and remedial measures),
- Compensatory risk management (risk financing and transfer), and
- Reactive risk management (early warning systems and effective response and recovery).

The state’s arrangements for disaster management, including recovery, are articulated in the Disaster Management Act (2003), the Queensland Reconstruction Authority Act (2011), the State Disaster Management Plan and the Queensland Recovery Plan. To enable state-level arrangements to better support community-led recovery and to improve Queensland’s recovery governance
arrangements:
a. State-level roles and responsibilities of:
i. the Leadership Board Sub-committee (Recovery)
ii. the State Recovery Policy and Planning Coordinator
iii. the State Recovery Coordinator
iv. the Queensland Reconstruction Authority
v. functional recovery groups
for coordinating and reporting on recovery should be made more distinct from each other, and any overlap between them removed for greater clarity. Roles and responsibilities should be published on relevant websites.
b. A capability that delivers the effectiveness of the State Disaster Coordination Group and its supporting apparatus for response should exist for recovery. The capability should support coordination and reporting, and improve communication arrangements and sharing of operational information between functional recovery groups and agencies. Such a capability may be established by revising the State Disaster Coordination Group terms of reference and membership, or investigating the capacity for Queensland Reconstruction Authority to deliver it.

Assess options for managed coastal retreat.

Review environmental risks associated with hazardous uses within flood prone areas.

Engage with industry bodies to explore opportunities to better understand and manage risks.

Improve understanding of the allocation of ownership across government, business and individuals.

Actively manage riparian vegetation to manage flood dynamics.

Advocate for an National Notifiable Diseases Database.

Improve the understanding of the vulnerability of critical infrastructure.

Identify and anlalyse the location of critical infrastructure within defined flood areas.

Review Ambulance Tasmania surge capacity.

Utilise coastal mapping to assess need for coastal defences.

Develop enablers and capacity for Tasmanian earthquake risk owners.

Pro-actively manage landslide areas.

Assess vulnerability of ecosystems and species to coastal inundation.

Review all hazards response and recovery plans to ensure they address likely earthquake consequences.

Improve maintenance of flood mitigation infrastructure.

Identify and analyse statewide storm hazard risk.

A thorough consultative process be developed and implemented between the CFS and local government. This will determine how bushfire management planning can enable improved process and practice to mitigate bushfire risk, and ensure that fire permits are issued and complied with.

Those final determinations of disaster management districts include consultation with the Local Government Association Queensland, the Queensland Fire and Rescue Service and other Government departments.

That the Inspector General Emergency Management be empowered to provide an assurance to Government that the disaster management system is both appropriate and capable of dealing with complex events.

That the Queensland Police Service Disaster Management Unit is to be permanently located at the State Disaster Coordination Centre to work on a day to day basis with the proposed new Department of Fire and Emergency Services.

That the Commissioners of Police and the Queensland Fire and Rescue Service review the current district disaster boundaries as a matter of urgency in-line with the findings and recommendations of the Auditor–General’s report into the Queensland disaster management system.

The committee recommends relevant authorities work with community service organisations in both planning responses to and responding to extreme weather events, in particular those organisations that provide vital services to vulnerable groups.

Review disaster recovery and business continuity plans.

To improve Centrelink’s preparedness for responding to future disasters, the ANAO recommends that Centrelink include disasters that impact on multiple Areas in its emergency and business continuity test exercise program.

The Committee recommends that the Department of Climate Change, in collaboration with the Queensland Government, CSIRO and Indigenous communities in the Torres Strait, undertake a major study into the vulnerability of the Torres Strait to the impacts of climate change and provide assistance in the development of an adaptation plan.

The Committee notes that major initiatives relating to climate change adaptation risk assessment and infrastructure are currently in progress. Given that much of Australia’s infrastructure is in the coastal zone and the particular threats facing the coastal zone from climate change, involving significant socioeconomic costs, the Committee recommends that the Australian Government ensure there is a comprehensive national assessment of coastal infrastructure vulnerability to inundation from sea level rise and extreme sea level events.

The Committee recommends that:
- the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government undertake a study into the human and resourcing needs of local governments to effectively plan for and adapt to the impacts of climate change
- this study be carried out in conjunction with the Australian Local Government Association and the National Sea Change Taskforce

The Committee recommends that coastal based Natural Resource Management bodies seeking funding under the Caring for our Country program have coastal and marine priorities, as well as coastal zone management principles integrated in their management plans.

The Working Group recommends that the Australian Government and the States/Territories use the survey templates compiled in each of their jurisdictions during the capability review workshops, and the scenarios to consider their current and future capabilities, to respond to and recover from large scale disasters. 

The working group recommends that a similar project to the Review of Australia's Ability to Respond to and Recover from Catastrophic Disasters be established to consider the longer term consequences of catastrophic disasters and their resulting recovery implications. Key aspects of such a review would include:
• Researching the likely longer term consequences of catastrophic disasters/emergencies,
• Consideration of Australia's capacity from all perspectives to address the long term recovery consequences of a catastrophic disaster/emergency.

The Working Group recommends that in addition to existing disease control and pandemic management plans, States/Territories should consider developing a pandemic emergency management plan that considers the impact of pandemic disease broadly, encompasses all government and private sector agencies and addresses:
• Continuity of government
• Continuity of essential services and lifelines
• Maintenance of community functions
• Continuity of business and commerce.
Where possible, pandemic emergency management planning elements should be built into existing ‘all hazards’ plans and these should also consider those specific elements identified above.

That the State Disaster Management Group supported by the Department of Emergency Services ensures that State-wide a robust disaster risk management process is established that includes the aggregation of relevant information from local, district, functional and threat specific plans to develop a hazard risk profile for Queensland.

To enhance disaster risk management planning processes, it is recommended that the State Disaster Management Group supported by the Department of Emergency Services develop a suitable performance management system to ensure local, district, functional and threat specific Disaster Management Plans are —
• current, accurate and operationally adequate;
• based on appropriate risk identification, analysis and treatment;
• subject to appropriate review, testing, evaluation, and reporting; and
• linked to overall State-wide strategies for Disaster Management.