April 2011 - Centre for Civil Society - University of KwaZulu-Natal

the clean up
Socialist Party (CWI Australia) 22 February 2011
Millions of ordinary Australians have been touched by the heart-wrenching
scenes from Queensland and have responded with great generosity. The
devastating floods have killed at least 20 people and destroyed the homes
of tens of thousands more.
The economic damage caused by the floods is expected to be huge with
some economists estimating that 1% could be wiped off GDP. Billions more
will be lost through reductions in revenue with the mining sector alone
losing an estimated $100 million a day. All this will cost jobs.
Julia Gillard (Labour Party Prime Minister) has said that that paying for the
clean up and bringing the budget back to surplus will entail some “tough
choices”. This means that workers will be forced to pay for the clean-up as
the government will make cuts to jobs and services elsewhere.
While the politicians would like us to believe that this disaster is entirely
the fault of nature, the government’s preparation and reaction to these
floods must also be called into question. The Australian has revealed that
as far back as a decade ago government reports called for “radical changes
in planning strategy, emergency plans and transparency about the true
flood levels for Brisbane”.
This advice was rejected and covered up by state officials in order to allow
development in flood prone areas. The Brisbane River Flood Study
undertaken in 1999 correctly predicted that tens of thousands of low lying
properties would be devastated by floods if adequate preventative
measures were not taken. While knowing the risks, councils told residents
who purchased land in low lying areas that they would not be at risk in the
event of a 1974 scale flood. This shows just how illogical the capitalist
system is when people’s lives are put at risk so that a few property
developers and speculators can profit.
Barnaby Joyce has called for more dams to be built as a solution to
flooding. However as hydrological expert Tony Weber pointed out the rains
equalled 7.5 billion tonnes of water, equal to 15 Sydney Harbours. “We
would have to create a dam five or ten times larger than (current dams) to
have a sizeable impact on that, if we did, there would be far more water
being lost to evaporation with the larger surface area.”
Dams were mismanaged in the absence of workers’ control. Hydrologist
Aron Gingis, criticised dam operators for maintaining maximum capacity
leaving no room to absorb the rains. “There is no doubt in my professional
opinion that most the flooding in Brisbane should have been avoided”, he
claimed.
Disappointingly the rebuilding of flood-affected areas will also be
dominated by the profit motive. Greedy insurance companies are already
rejecting claims despite record takings in recent years. The consumer
group Choice has warned that many insurers are attempting to reject
claims on the basis of confusing policies which give multiple definitions of
flood coverage. Choice spokeswoman Ingrid Just stated “There is not one
standard definition for floods and that makes it very difficult for people to
understand what they’re covered for.”
Construction companies from as far afield as Victoria are circling like
vultures to get a piece of the lucrative reconstruction dollar. For them the
devastation is like a second stimulus package that will drive up their share