Risk-based approach to calculating flood planning: That, to take account of greater knowledge of climate change, Government reinforce its adoption of a risk-based approach to calculating the flood planning level for planning purposes and, through the NSWRA, immediately start a process of revising all flood planning level calculations in the state’s high-risk catchments. Flood planning level re-determinations for all high-risk catchments should be completed within 3 years. These revised flood planning levels will need to be factored into all development applications (in-progress and new) in those high-risk catchments. The risk profile of high-risk catchments should be revisited at appropriate time intervals to check that levels are current. A review should take place if there has been a significant trigger event (i.e. changed rainfall, development) or at least every 5 years. As well as reviewing the flood planning level, this 5-yearly review should include reviewing any floodplain lease conditions and adjusting them as necessary in the light of better knowledge of climate change impacts. In working out a tolerable, risk-based flood planning level, consideration should be given to the PMF, 1% AEP, 0.02% AEP, existing development, approved but not yet constructed developments, and existing and approved but not yet constructed evacuation routes.
In coordinating this flood planning level re-determination process, NSWRA should work closely with local councils, DPE, communities, state water authorities and state and national engineering and research organisations. In doing so, the NSWRA should also:
• extend and then maintain the DPE state-wide flood database and associated visualisation interface. This database, which should link to LandiQ, would support:
— monitoring of the flood warning and sensing environment
— monitoring of trends in rainfall activity and impacts, including timing, cause, extent and intensity
— tracking trends and identifying patterns in associated weather and climate signals that contribute to severe floods
— evaluation of the cost and effectiveness of risk mitigation efforts, including land preparation, planning use and management, to enable a better understanding of what works
— simulation of extreme rainfall events and resultant flooding
— identification of ‘at risk’ river and catchment systems for flash flooding
— rapid and effective deployment of resources during a flash flood event
• act as the main coordination point for all NSW hydrological modelling, working with local government, other state agencies, universities, professional bodies (e.g. Engineers Australia) and the Australian Government (especially the Bureau of Meteorology and CSIRO) to improve future NSW flood risk assessment (and hence accuracy and timeliness of flood prediction) by building more formal connections between the extensive existing physical hydrological modelling (done by various NSW agencies) with the Bureau’s meteorological and climatological research and riverine flood models
• support local councils to improve modelling of and ensure adequate and appropriate alarm systems for flash flooding.

Cost benefit framework:That, to enable a more systematic prioritisation of investment options in risk mitigation before, during and immediately following a natural disaster event, Government adopt and utilise a Disaster Cost Benefit Framework. This Framework will enable Government to estimate the investment required for any given disaster, starting with flood events, and will enable the fast allocation of funding based on detailed and rapid analysis of flood and property modification, mitigation, preparation, response and finance related options including:
• flood modification measures/flood defence (including dams/ water management; levees; waterway or floodplain modifications; etc)
• property modification measures/flood risk mitigation (including land filling; flood proofing; house raising; optimum zoning; removal of development (buy back schemes/relocation))
• response modification measures/flood preparation (including flood warnings; upgrading evacuation routes; evacuation planning; emergency response and education programs; flood data collection and sharing; etc)
• finance related options (including building standard reforms; restructure and reduction of stamp duty; direct subsidies; government reinsurance pools; etc)
The Framework should build on the preliminary version developed by NSW Treasury and provided to this Inquiry. To support this Framework, Government should also use the NSW Adaptation Fund that can be drawn on during or immediately following a flood event.

Flood education: That, to build disaster resilience in future generations as floods and other natural disasters are a fact of Australian life, the Department of Education should design, implement and deliver an evidence-based, targeted education campaign (like sun exposure) in schools (new disaster curriculum).

Task Force Hawk: That, to ensure disaster readiness, Government establish a high-level Government standing committee, Task Force ‘Hawk’, comprising key Cabinet Ministers, Secretaries and Commissioners that meets, trains and exercises to ensure Government is prepared to respond to any emergency. Task Force ‘Hawk’ should resonate with the community in difficult times to ensure the highest level of confidence in Government’s response.
Further, to improve the preparation for and timely response to disasters, and to ensure the emergency management systems and plans are fit for purpose, effective and appropriate, within 12 months Government, via the SEOCON, ensure all emergency management processes and plans have been updated and implemented.

That the NSW Government invest in the required personnel, training and vessels to ensure that all agencies involved in flood rescue can be mobilised to their fullest potential.

That the NSW Government significantly increase its investment in flood mitigation and preparation, including its support of local governments to do the same, by: • increasing ongoing, long term funding and access to technical guidance and assistance for local councils • ensuring that land-use planning and development takes a risk-based approach. 

Undertake, coordinate and evaluate community education programs on flood risk and response.

Ensure the SES has the long-term capacity to plan and exercise for the full range of flood events in the Hawkesbury-Nepean Valley

Develop mechanisms and arrangements to promote and provide greater access to flood risk information.

Monitor, investigate and address community response to flood warnings

SERCon consider development of an education program for other government and non-government agencies (with
particular reference to those within the emergency services portfolio) on flood recovery arrangements,
assistance, duties and responsibilities.

SERCon consider a review of existing community-based educational programs, with a view to informing the community
on flood recovery.

We recommend that NSW Health continue with its good work and apply the lessons learnt from Exercise Cumpston to further improve preparedness for major infectious disease emergencies.

We recommend that NSW Health continue with its good work and consider building on influenza pandemic preparedness planning to develop broader contingency plans to address the emergence of other new, highly transmissible and/or severe infectious diseases.

We recommend that NSW Health continue with its good work and continue to develop and test the capability of its contact tracing system to deal with a public health emergency.

We recommend that NSW Health continue with its good work and continue to develop and test its surveillance systems for early detection of infectious diseases.

We recommend that NSW Health continue with its good work and consider a more structured and systematic approach to the planning and risk assessment of major infectious diseases to assist transparency and decision making.

We recommend that NSW Health continue with its good work and formally establish and oversight a comprehensive program of training, testing and evaluation of plans at the state, area and facility level.

That the Department of Primary Industries should continue efforts to develop the skills of private sector veterinarians to increase the level of resources available in emergency responses.

That the Department of Primary Industries should continue to raise awareness among producers of OJD risks and the operation of Sheep Health Statements.
On the basis of the evidence before it the Committee finds there is a high level of acceptance by producers of the exclusion zone system. However, despite major improvements to the management of OJD since the completion of the original program, it is clear from evidence presented during this inquiry that considerable resentment remains among producers. The Committee emphasises the importance of the Government continuing to build levels of trust with producers and to improve communication to maximise the effectiveness of the new Program and, indirectly, the effectiveness of other disease programs.

That the Department of Primary Industries and Rural Lands Protection Boards employ outreach activities to alert these small producers to their responsibilities and improve their awareness of animal and plant pests and diseases.

That the Department of Primary Industries be conscious of its responsibilities in maintaining the continued enthusiasm of Industry Liaison Officers and offer training and refresher training as required.

That emergency animal health training be included in induction programs for newly recruited District Veterinarians and all District Veterinarians be encouraged to maintain their skills by attending regular refresher training as appropriate.
The Committee commends the Department for its efforts in recruiting Industry Liaison Officers as contact points for industry during emergency disease outbreaks. It considers that it is of vital importance to ensure that these Officers are trained appropriately and that regular contact with them is maintained to support them and to ensure their continued participation.