That, as with earthquake, SA Police be designated the Control Agency under the State Emergency Management Plan for black system events or other major power outages.

That SA Police, as the control agency for search and rescue, and State Emergency Service who have the responsibility for providing search and rescue services under the State Emergency Management Plan, develop a swiftwater rescue capability plan that describes key swiftwater risk locations, roles and responsibilities of emergency services, State swiftwater resources and dispatch arrangements.

That SA Police develop an evacuation plan for the Adelaide Central Business District (CBD) which includes:
a) a Traffic Management Plan to assist in the movement of persons and vehicles away from the CBD
b) protocols for the early placement of a SA Police liaison officer within the Traffic Management Centre.

Greater attention needs to be given to the recruitment and retention of volunteers in alignment with the National Emergency Management Volunteer Action Plan.
Consideration should also be given to measures including:
- Increased administrative support for volunteers
- Targeted recruitment of people with office skills
- Legislative protection from dismissal

That the Government consult broadly upon and review impediments to volunteering in the community and establish a taskforce to assist in removing barriers to volunteering, particularly with respect to: i harmonising the regime for reimbursement to community safety and emergency services volunteers for their out-of-pocket expenses; and ii reviewing the impact of work health and safety laws on the community safety and emergency service sector, particularly on the volunteer organisation.

That with regard to volunteer community safety and emergency service organisations that do not own land where their facilities exist: i. the Government audit all such land and consider gifting or providing at reduced or peppercorn rental Government-owned land to an organisation (and specifically the Select Committee recommends gifting the Adelaide Shores land to Surf Life Saving South Australia); and ii. the Government consider providing rebates to Councils that do not feel morally able to impose full commercial rent on community safety and emergency service volunteer occupied land.

That the Government work with the volunteer community safety and emergency service providers to organise a comprehensive advertising campaign to promote the community and personal benefits of volunteering in the sector.

That the Government work with the Local Government Association to resolve questions of liability by volunteers who work for Councils, as raised with the Select Committee.

That the Government work with the volunteer community safety and emergency service providers to organise a comprehensive advertising campaign to promote the community and personal benefits of volunteering in the sector.

That RFSQ review local SAP function and delegation to enable effective and timely support for volunteers.

That each District office establish and maintain a register of suitably qualified Australasian Inter-service Incident Management System trained volunteers who are prepared to undertake the management of operations and provide these to the District Fire Management Group.

That in recognition of their commitment to the community volunteers employed by the State Government should be released to assist as volunteers for up to five (5) days per year in appropriately identified emergency operations.

That corporate support, such as administration and finance, to volunteer services be shared to enable a closer working relationship between the services.

That the Queensland Police Service:
- identify policing matters that only a sworn officer can manage, or
- identify matters that can be handled more efficiently through the use of emerging technologies such as biometrics and scanners.

That the Queensland Police Service and the Department of Community Safety develop intuitive, easily accessible systems that reduce the administrative burden on volunteers and their time. Greater exploitation of technology to deliver intuitive, simple and practical systems is required.

That the Queensland Police Service considers adopting the broader use of ANPR in line with other Australian jurisdictions in consultation with the Privacy Commissioner.

That the current employer and family recognition practices be reviewed with a view to meet the needs of volunteers, their families and their employers.

That as the Queensland Police Service moves to a digital platform the strategy around effective targeting and alternative automated number plate recognition models should form part of the design architecture.

That training for volunteers be reviewed to determine which courses require national standardisation. Organisational training should then address the remaining training needs. The review should take into account the risk exposure to government agencies if changes are to be made.

That the Queensland Fire and Rescue Service examine alternative contractual arrangements with building owners which would reduce the need for physical attendance at alarm activations.

That the Queensland Fire and Rescue Service enters into discussion with the Queensland Police Service regarding the possibility for the Queensland Police Service to assist with prosecutions that may arise out of fire safety matters.

That the Queensland Police Service executive team reassesses its preparedness to collaborate with other agencies to deliver a whole of Government approach to delivering community safety.

That, where appropriate, the Commissioner of Police appoints appropriately trained and experienced public service officers to appropriate roles in the disaster management system to support District Disaster Coordinators in their vital roles.

That the roll-out of the Queensland Police Service digital technology should take into consideration adopting and facilitating new processes including the police response to domestic violence.

That volunteers should be engaged to assist in determining what constitutes ‘fit for task’ and how that should be implemented.

The Queensland Government should draft assessment criteria to be included in the model flood planning controls that require community infrastructure (including the types of community infrastructure which are identified in the Sustainable Planning Regulation 2009 and which the community needs to continue functioning, notwithstanding flood) to be located and designed to function effectively during and immediately after a flood of a specified level of risk.

The Queensland Government should draft a model planning scheme policy to be included in the model flood planning controls that sets out the information to be provided in development applications in relation to stormwater and flooding. The policy should specify: • the type of models and maps to be provided • the substantive information required to be shown in the development application • how the assumptions and methodologies used in preparing the models and maps should be presented • the form in which the information on stormwater and flooding is to be presented in the application.

If, as part of a state interest review process, the Department of Local Government and Planning decides that no condition should be imposed requiring a council’s proposed planning scheme to incorporate the effect of the Department of Community Safety’s comments about State Planning Policy 1/03: Mitigating the Adverse Impacts of Flood, Bushfire and Landslide, it should advise the Department of Community Safety of the reasons for its decision.

The Department of Environment and Resource Management should ensure that, when applications for a material change of use for an environmentally relevant activity are approved by the department, the details of those activities, including their nature and location, are provided to the council within whose area the activity will be conducted.

Authorities responsible for the construction of sewerage infrastructure should, when embarking on new works, undertake risk and cost/benefit assessments to determine the level at which electrical infrastructure that may be vulnerable to inundation should be placed.

The Queensland Government should consider amending the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 to require that consideration be given to the risk of flooding in the preparation or revision of a regional plan.

If the Queensland Government does not include such a policy in the model flood planning controls, councils should include in their planning schemes a planning scheme policy that: • for development proposed on land susceptible to flooding, outlines what additional information an applicant should provide to the assessment manager as a part of the development application, or • for development proposed on land where potential for flooding is unknown requires an applicant to provide: – as part of the development application, information to enable an assessment of whether the subject land is susceptible to flooding, and – upon a determination the subject land is susceptible to flooding, more detailed information to allow an assessment of the flood risk.

Levees should be regulated.

The Queensland Government should draft assessment criteria to be included in the model flood planning controls that require critical infrastructure in assessable substation developments is built to remain operational during and immediately after a flood of a particular magnitude. That magnitude should be determined by an appropriate risk assessment.

For urban areas or areas where development is expected to occur: a. councils with the requisite resources should develop a flood map which shows ‘zones of risk’ (at least three) derived from information about the likelihood and behaviour of flooding b. councils without the requisite resources to produce a flood behaviour map should develop a flood map which shows the extent of floods of a range of likelihoods (at least three).

The Queensland Government should consider extending the application of a state planning policy dealing with flood to the types of community infrastructure which are identified in the Sustainable Planning Regulation 2009 and which the community needs to continue functioning, notwithstanding flood.

The Queensland Government should draft assessment criteria to be included in the model flood planning controls that address: • the prospect of isolation or hindered evacuation • the impact of isolation or hindered evacuation.

The Queensland Government should: a. narrow the definition of ‘development commitment’ in State Planning Policy 1/03: Mitigating the Adverse Impacts of Flood, Bushfire and Landslide to ensure more development applications are assessed for compatibility with flood, and b. investigate whether the compensation provisions of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 act as a deterrent to the inclusion of flood controls in a planning scheme and consider whether they ought be amended.

The Department of Environment and Resource Management should amend the template assessment report used to assess applications for a material change of use for environmentally relevant activities so that it prompts departmental officers to give specific consideration, as part of the assessment process, to the risk of flooding at the site where the activity is proposed to occur.

The Queensland Government should consider including in the criteria in the Queensland Plumbing and Wastewater Code a requirement that the risk of leakage from private on-site sewerage systems during floods be minimised.

Councils should consider using the limited development (constrained land) zone in their planning schemes for areas that have a very high flood risk.

The Queensland Government should consider amending the Sustainable Planning Regulation 2009 so that operational work or plumbing or drainage work (including maintenance and repair work) carried out by or on behalf of a public sector entity authorised under a state law to carry out the work is not exempt development under the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 if the development has the potential to reduce floodplain storage.

In assessing and determining development applications for material change of use in areas susceptible to flood, councils should consider whether the new developments locate essential services infrastructure above basement level, or, alternatively, whether essential services infrastructure located at basement level can be constructed so that it can continue to function during a flood.

The Queensland Government should include in the model flood planning controls a model planning scheme policy that: • for development proposed on land susceptible to flooding, outlines what additional information an applicant should provide to the assessment manager as part of the development application, or • for development proposed on land where the potential for flooding is unknown, requires an applicant to provide: – as part of the development application, information to enable an assessment of whether the subject land is susceptible to flooding, and – upon a determination the subject land is susceptible to flooding, more detailed information, to allow an assessment of the flood risk.

The Coordinator-General should amend the guideline for preparing an ‘initial advice statement’ for a significant project under the State Development and Public Works Organisation Act 1971 so that it specifically requires an applicant to consider and provide information about the project’s flood risk.

There should be a common set of considerations in the decision whether to approve an application to build a levee, including: • the impacts of the proposed levee on the catchment as a whole • the benefits of the proposed levee to the individual or entity applying to build the levee and to any nearby community as a whole • any adverse impacts on other landholders, including the risk of levee failure • the implications of the proposed levee for land planning and emergency management procedures • whether any structural, land planning or emergency management measures can be taken to mitigate the adverse impacts of the proposed levee.

The Queensland Government should consider implementing a mechanism by which prospective purchasers of property are alerted to the issue of flood risk. To that end, the Queensland Government should consider consulting the Real Estate Institute of Queensland and the Law Society of Queensland as to the appropriateness of amending standard contract conditions so as to include a ‘subject to flood search’ condition, or other means of achieving the same objective.

The Department of Environment and Resource Management should amend its information sheet about applications for a material change of use for environmentally relevant activities so that applicants are prompted to include information (if any) about the risk of flooding at the site where the activity is proposed to occur.

The Queensland Government should consider amending the ‘Limitation’ section of the proposed new part of the Queensland Development Code, Mandatory Part 3.5 ‘Construction of buildings in flood hazard areas’, to allow for the possible application of ‘acceptable solution A1’ to a building located on a lot if: • it is reasonable to expect the part of the lot on which the building work is proposed to be subjected to a maximum velocity of less than 1.5 metres per second, or • the part of the lot on which the building work is proposed is located in an inactive flow or backwater area.

The Queensland Government should change Temporary State Planning Policy 2/11: Planning for stronger more resilient floodplains to remove the possibility of councils’ using the interim floodplain assessment overlay mapping and Model Code as part of a permanent amendment to their existing planning scheme or as part of a new planning scheme.

The Queensland Government should consider drafting assessment criteria to be included in the model flood planning controls which require that works in a floodplain: • do not reduce on-site flood storage capacity • counteract any changes the works will cause to flood behaviour of all floods up to and including the applicable defined flood event by measures taken within the subject site (for example, use of compensatory works, detention basins or other engineering mechanisms) • do not change the flood characteristics outside the subject site in ways that result in: – loss of flood storage – loss of/changes to flow paths – acceleration or retardation of flows, or – any reduction in flood warning times elsewhere on the floodplain.

Councils should consider amending their planning schemes to include provisions directed to consideration of the flood resilience of basements as a factor in determining the appropriateness of a material change of use.

The Queensland Government should include in the model flood planning controls a model flood overlay code that consolidates assessment criteria relating to flood.

The Queensland Government should consider amending the Urban Land Development Authority Act 2007, the South Bank Corporation Act 1989, the State Development and Public Works Organisation Act 1971 insofar as it governs state development areas, and other legislation which establishes alternative planning systems that operate independently of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009, to require that: • any planning scheme, interim or otherwise, appropriately reflects any state planning policy with respect to flood • flood risk be considered in the assessment of any development application.

There should be a consistent process for the determination of applications to build levees. That process should include: • consulting landholders who may be affected by the proposed levee • obtaining or commissioning appropriate hydrological and hydraulic studies to assess the impacts of the proposed levee.

Queensland Rail and QR National should continue to investigate opportunities for increasing the flood resilience of their networks, including raising the height of critical equipment.

Councils that do not currently do so should consider offering an online database which allows the public to conduct a search on a parcel of land to find development approvals relevant to that parcel of land.

The Queensland Government should ensure that the criteria under the Environmental Protection Act 1994 that apply to the assessment of development applications for material change of use for environmentally relevant activities include consideration of the risk of flooding at the site on which the activity is proposed to occur.

The proposed new part of the Queensland Development Code, Mandatory Part 3.5 ‘Construction of buildings in flood hazard areas’, should be amended so that the performance requirements about utilities and sanitary drains (Performance Requirement P2 and P3) for building on a lot will only be triggered where the council has: • designated part of its area as a natural hazard management area (flood) under section 13 of the Building Regulation 2006, and • either: – declared a height to be the expected flood level under section 13 of the Building Regulation 2006, or – adopted a highest recorded flood level for the lot.

The Queensland Government should ensure that the circumstances in which the Department of Community Safety is to consult the Department of Environment and Resource Management about a planning scheme’s flood modelling and flood mapping are clear.

The Queensland Government should review the code for development applications for prescribed tidal work in the Coastal Protection and Management Regulation 2003 to consider whether the design and construction standards should be made more stringent than the existing standards.

The Department of Environment and Resource Management should review the Queensland Urban Drainage Manual to determine whether it requires updating or improvement, in particular, to reflect the current law and to take into account insights gained from the 2010/2011 floods.

The Queensland Government should include in the model flood planning controls a requirement that councils have a flood overlay map in their planning schemes. The map should identify the areas of the council region: • that are known not to be affected by flood • that are affected by flood and on which councils impose planning controls (there may be subsets in each area to which different planning controls attach) • for which there is no flood information available to council.

The Queensland Government should consider allowing councils to amend a planning scheme to update existing flood mapping information by way of the minor amendment process, provided that adequate public consultation has occurred.

The Queensland Government should consult with councils to formulate a definition of ‘levee’ to identify what should be regulated.

The Queensland Government should consider whether there should be a legislative requirement that customer dedicated assets be built at or above the applicable defined flood level and if so, the Queensland Government should consider which legislation should contain such a requirement.

Councils should ensure that areas for which there has been no assessment of the likelihood of flooding are indicated on a map and that, as part of the development assessment process for these, there is at least some enquiry into whether a site proposed for development could be subject to flooding.

The Queensland Government should draft assessment criteria to be included in the model flood planning controls that require the impact of flood on commercial property to be minimised.

The proposed new part of the Queensland Development Code, Mandatory Part 3.5 ‘Construction of buildings in flood hazard areas’, should be amended so that the performance requirement relating to building design and construction (Performance Requirement P1) for building on a lot will only be triggered where the council has: • designated part of its area as a natural hazard management area (flood) under section 13 of the Building Regulation 2006, and • either: – declared a height to be the expected flood level under section 13 of the Building Regulation 2006, or – adopted a highest recorded flood level for the lot, and • either: – declared a velocity to be the expected maximum velocity of flood water for the area in which the lot is located, or – designated the area in which the lot is located an inactive flow or backwater area.

The Department of Community Safety should put in place administrative arrangements which ensure it can readily ascertain whether its comments are being reflected in council planning schemes. If the Department of Community Safety becomes aware that its comments are not being adequately addressed, it should take steps to follow this up with the Department of Local Government and Planning.

The Queensland Government should draft assessment criteria to be included in the model flood planning controls that require that: a. the manufacture or storage of bulk hazardous materials (as defined in State Planning Policy 1/03) take place above a certain flood level, determined following an appropriate risk based assessment, or b. structures on land susceptible to flooding and used for the manufacture or storage of bulk hazardous materials (as defined in State Planning Policy 1/03) be designed to prevent the intrusion of floodwaters.

Authorities responsible for the management of sewerage infrastructure should conduct a review of their existing infrastructure to identify electrical infrastructure that may be vulnerable to inundation and perform risk and cost/benefit assessments to determine if it should be relocated to a higher level.

The Queensland Government should draft model flood planning controls, using a similar format and structure to that in the Queensland Planning Provisions, that councils can adapt for local conditions. The Queensland Government should require these controls to be reflected in new planning schemes. This may be achieved by including the controls in either: • a state planning policy dealing with flood, with an accompanying amendment to the Sustainable Planning Act 2009, or • the Queensland Planning Provisions. The Queensland Government should consult councils to determine which of the two state planning instruments is the more appropriate to include the model flood planning controls.

The Queensland Government should consider amending the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 to expressly provide either a power to remake or a power to extend a temporary local planning instrument containing interim flood regulation for a further limited period. The power to remake or extend should: a. permit the modification of the temporary local planning instrument to the extent required to ensure its provisions remain relevant, having regard to any requirement that may have been introduced or any information that may have become available while the original temporary local planning instrument was in force b. be contingent on the Minister’s being satisfied that the circumstances listed in section 105 of the Sustainable Planning Act continue to exist and that there are proper grounds for the failure to make a permanent scheme amendment while the original temporary local planning instrument was in force.

The Queensland Government should consult with councils to determine an effective method for the regulation of the construction of levees in Queensland. In particular, the Queensland Government should consider: • requiring a development permit for the construction of a levee by designating levees as assessable development in the Sustainable Planning Regulation 2009, or • requiring, by way of a state planning policy or mandatory provision in the Queensland Planning Provisions, that councils nominate the construction of a levee as assessable development in their planning schemes.

If the Queensland Government does not include such assessment criteria in the model flood planning controls, councils should include assessment criteria in their planning schemes that require critical infrastructure in assessable substation developments is built to remain operational during and immediately after a flood of a particular magnitude. That magnitude should be determined by an appropriate risk assessment.

For non-urban areas or areas where limited development is expected to occur councils should consider, on a risk basis, what level of information about flood risk is required for the area, and undertake the highest ranked of the following options which is appropriate to that need and within the capacities (financial and technical) of the council: a. a map showing ‘zones of risk’ (at least three) derived from information about the likelihood and behaviour of flooding b. a map showing the extent of floods of a range of likelihoods (at least three) c. a flood map based on historic flood levels that have been subjected to a flood frequency analysis to estimate the annual exceedance probability of the selected historical flood d. a historic flood map without flood frequency analysis e. the Queensland Reconstruction Authority Interim Floodplain Assessment Overlay as a way to determine those areas for which further flood studies are required, or f. the Queensland Reconstruction Authority Interim Floodplain Assessment Overlay (preferably refined using local flood information) as a trigger for development assessment.

The Commissioner of Police, through a dedicated Assistant Commissioner (supported by a cohort of Assistant Commissioners to ensure adequate coverage), be assigned responsibility for overall control of each natural Disaster Management event in Queensland as the preferred arrangement.

As a matter of priority, SAFECOM examine what further measures can be taken to provide support and protection for volunteers as potential witnesses in public enquiries. 

Liability and immunity as these provisions apply in Section 127 be reassessed in terms of burden of proof so as to ensure the best protection for volunteers. 

The Committee recommends that native vegetation, excluding road reserves be fenced.