Green paper Part A: Context

1. Victoria's current legislative and policy framework

The foundations of Victoria's emergency management arrangements are in the Emergency Management Act 1986 (the Act), which was enacted following the Ash Wednesday bushfires in 1983 to provide for the management and organisation of the prevention of, response to and recovery from emergencies in Victoria.

The arrangements created by the legislation were intended "...to provide an integrated framework within which we can seek to manage any event which threatens the life and property of the people of this State". In this way, the Act provides Victoria with the legislative basis for an 'all hazards, all agencies' approach to emergency management.

The key features of the Act include:

• the allocation of responsibility at the State level to a single Minister, historically the Minister for Police and Emergency Services;
• the introduction of the emergency response coordination role, assigned to Victoria Police;
• the concentration of policy advice at the State level in a representative peak council, the Victoria Emergency Management Council (VEMC);
• a requirement to have a State Emergency Response Plan (or DISPLAN) and a State Emergency Recovery Plan;
• the allocation of control of emergency response based on statutory function and/or expertise;
• formalising the role of local government in emergency management planning; and
• the creation in 2000 of the statutory position of Emergency Services Commissioner to set and monitor standards and review and advise the Minister on emergency management.

The Act is supported by the Emergency Management Manual Victoria (EMMV), which contains policy and planning documents for emergency management in Victoria. It also provides details about the roles different organisations play in the emergency management arrangements, including identifying control agencies and key support agencies for response and recovery.

Need more information?

A detailed description of Victoria's current emergency management arrangements and the Emergency Management Manual Victoria can be found at the Office of the Emergency Services Commissioner's website: www.oesc.vic.gov.au

What is an 'all hazards, all agencies' approach?

The principle underpinning the 'all hazards, all agencies' approach is that effective emergency management requires a whole-of-government approach.

The 'all hazards' approach assumes that all emergencies create similar problems and that many of the measures required to deal with emergencies are generic, such as early warning, evacuation, medical services and community recovery. At the same time, the approach acknowledges that many emergencies will require specific prevention, response and recovery measures.

The 'all agencies' approach assumes that all agencies have some role to play in emergency management. While the nature of emergency management will vary from agency to agency, common tasks are likely to include ensuring the continuity of services, protecting the agency's own assets, interests and personnel, and protecting the community and environment from risks.

1.1 Recent developments

In response to the 67 recommendations of the Final Report of the 2009 Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission, the Victorian Government has made – and is continuing to make – changes to Victoria's legislative and policy framework for emergency management. Two key changes so far can be summarised as:

• appointing a Fire Services Commissioner responsible for promoting and leading reform in the fire services to deliver improved operational performance and the capacity for the three fire services (the MFB, the CFA and DSE) to operate as one integrated force to prepare for and manage major fires; and
• publishing the Victorian Bushfire Safety Policy Framework in December 2010.

The Framework aims to:

• develop a shared responsibility for bushfire safety between State and local government, fire services and emergency management agencies, communities households and individuals;
• improve public awareness of bushfire risk;
• support and improve local bushfire safety planning; and
• provide a range of options for individuals to choose from to maximise their chances of survival in a bushfire.

In his Progress Report, the Bushfires Royal Commission Implementation Monitor was critical of some aspects of the Framework. The Fire Services Commissioner will take these observations into account in his first annual review of the Framework.

Need more information?

The Victorian Bushfire Safety Policy Framework can be downloaded from the Fire Services Commissioner's website: www.firecommissioner.vic.gov.au

1.2 Interim measures

The Government also plans to introduce legislation later this year to:

• remove the title of 'Coordinator in Chief' from the Minister for Police and Emergency Services in recognition of the fact that he or she does not have an operational role, and designate responsibility for coordination of emergency response to the Chief Commissioner of Police. This will be achieved by expanding the Commissioner's role as the State Emergency Response Coordinator in accordance with the Royal Commission's final recommendation 11;
• enable the Chief Officer of the CFA to delegate his or her power to issue fire prevention notices in circumstances where a municipal fire prevention officer refuses or fails to do so after being requested by the Chief Officer in accordance with the Royal Commission's recommendation 54;
• amend the Victoria State Emergency Services Act 2005 and Emergency Management Act 1986 to facilitate VicSES' performance of its functions when it is the control agency for the response to an emergency (including simplifying the arrangements for members of other agencies to perform control functions); and
• incorporate a general emergency response responsibility into emergency service organisations (ESOs) legislation to recognise their broader responsibilities in the response to large scale emergencies, in addition to the hazard-specific obligations they are currently assigned.

The Government also intends to take or examine a series of administrative measures in the short term to address some of the identified shortcomings in the current arrangements including:

• the composition and focus of the Victorian Emergency Management Council and its associated planning committees (Option 2 on page 16);
• the potential to develop Incident Management Teams for all hazards responses drawing on people with the necessary skills from across agencies and informed by specialists in specific hazards;
• adapting Level 3 incident control centres and management systems for use in response to natural hazard emergencies other than fires (focusing on those in flood risk zones as a priority); and
• adding a mandatory field in Cabinet submissions on any emergency management impacts of legislation or policies.

2. Trends and models in emergency management

World-wide developments such as climate change are altering the patterns of natural disasters. Developments in information and communications technology provide greater ability to forecast, prevent and mitigate the effects of disasters. Other global changes, such as economic downturns, have flow-on effects on investment decisions and the emergency management workforce, particularly volunteer availability. Adverse economic conditions may have a negative effect on community cohesion, challenging the disaster resilience of communities. While many of these challenges are global, responses need to be developed locally to suit Victorian conditions.

2.1 Trends in emergency management approaches

Over the past 30 years there has been a substantial increase in the number of and severity of natural and human-induced disasters occurring around the world – more than half of the reported disasters since 1900 occurred after 1998. Disasters are causing greater economic impact and disrupting the livelihoods of unprecedented numbers of people.

Even with the increasing number of disasters, the number of lives reported lost as a result has been steadily decreasing, suggesting a growth in community resilience and capacity to manage hazards. Undoubtedly, this has been supported by changes in approaches to emergency management that increasingly seek to identify vulnerabilities, mitigate risks and empower communities to take responsibility for decisions that affect their lifestyles and livelihoods.

Around the world, approaches to emergency management have evolved to reflect changing threats, community needs and expectations. Post-World War II, the practice was heavily focused on 'command-and-control', delivered top-down by civil defence organisations.

Figure 1: People affected by disasters worldwide since 1900

Comprehensive emergency management emerged in the late 1970s and identified the need for all agencies to focus on managing all hazards. The comprehensive approach is synonymous with 'PPRR' the prevention, preparedness, response and recovery model. This approach is reflected in Victoria's Emergency Management Act 1986 as prevention, response and recovery, with planning, preparation, operational coordination and community participation running across all three of these activities. While PPRR has been widely adopted, in practice these phases are not mutually exclusive and do not occur sequentially, and the model does not reflect the growing expectation by communities to be engaged in issues that affect them.

Integrated emergency management is built on the comprehensive approach and seeks to include all stakeholders – vertically and horizontally – in anticipating all types of hazards, assessing and managing capabilities, and undertaking planning, response and recovery activities. This recognises the need to engage with people and organisations at the local level, who are closest to and most affected by hazards. This emphasis on including actors at all levels highlights the need to involve non-government organisations and the private sector.

The focus in Australia, particularly since the 1990s, has moved to risk management and sharing responsibility for community safety. The need to identify, analyse, evaluate, treat and monitor risks is a key feature of the Australian/New Zealand Risk Management Standard (AS/NZS 180 31000:2009). This approach recognises that some hazards cannot be completely eliminated, so they need to be managed to mitigate their potential impact.

Understanding, managing and reducing risks increases a community's ability to withstand and recover from emergencies, thereby strengthening its disaster resilience. In 2011, the Council of Australian Governments endorsed the National Disaster Resilience Strategy. The Strategy highlights that disaster resilience is a shared responsibility and that achieving community and organisational resilience will require sustained behavioural change.

The notion of a shared responsibility requires individuals, communities, the private sector, emergency management and support agencies, and all levels of government, to contribute to the management of risk and promoting community safety. It is increasingly recognised that emergency management is a whole-of-government responsibility and not just within the remit of emergency services. In some cases, emergency management is also a function undertaken by industry on behalf of and in partnership with government agencies, particularly in sectors with privatised essential services.

This shared approach goes beyond vesting responsibility in government or emergency service organisations to protect communities, and ensures individuals recognise they are also responsible for making certain decisions that affect their own resilience and wellbeing. The 2009 Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission emphasised the need for all parties to assume greater responsibility in preventing and managing emergencies. While this review was focused on bushfires, the Commission's observations and findings extend to all hazards.

Need more information?

The National Disaster Resilience Strategy can be viewed at the Victorian Department of Premier and Cabinet's website: www.dpc.vic.gov.au.

Gippsland's critical infrastructure partnership

With its vast natural resources of coal, oil and gas, the Latrobe Valley is a major source of energy for Victoria. The privatisation of the Victorian electricity industry in 1995 was the catalyst for the creation of a network of private and government stakeholders to come together to address emergency management needs relating to critical infrastructure in the Latrobe Valley. This network, the Central Gippsland Essential Industry Group (CGEIG), includes the Department of Primary Industries, Victoria Police, CFA and VicSES, as well as providers of essential services such as Loy Yang Power, SP Ausnet, ExxonMobil and Gippsland Water.

The CGEIG is a forum where industry, emergency service organisations and government liaise and cooperate on common emergency management and security issues. It provides a framework of shared responsibility to enhance strategic emergency management arrangements and support for the continuity of essential industries. The CGEIG membership covers a breadth of industry and agency expertise that contributes to emergency management planning at municipal and State levels.

The CGEIG has fostered close relationships between emergency services, industry and government, where information is shared to better understand dependencies. Members support each other and work closely together to plan and respond to emergencies such as coal mine fires, floods and industrial incidents that may occur in the Latrobe Valley.

2.2 Other emergency management frameworks

Emergency management frameworks in Australia are built on comprehensive and integrated emergency management models. These emphasise the need for locally-led management of hazards.

There is no international emergency management standard; each country adopts the most appropriate operating structure and model to suit its individual needs:

• New Zealand is recognised as a world leader in its risk management approach to increasing the capability of communities and individuals to prepare for, respond to and recover from disasters.
• The United Kingdom's integrated emergency management model focuses on the six steps of anticipation, assessment, prevention, preparation, response and recovery. This model focuses on the consequences and wider impacts of events rather than their causes.
• Canada uses a comprehensive 'all hazards' system with an integrated risk management framework.
• The United States also adopts the comprehensive 'all hazards' approach.

The experiences of other jurisdictions offer insight into how other models of emergency management operate in different contexts. Traditional models of emergency management that were heavily response oriented no longer meet the level or nature of demands. Around the world, emergency management now involves a shared responsibility to identify and manage risks, to minimise the consequences of hazards and to enable communities to be more disaster resilient. Victoria's approach should draw on these experiences while ensuring that the State's unique circumstances, risks and demands are recognised.

Question for the reader:

Are there other models of emergency management, or features of other models, that could be adopted and adapted to strengthen Victoria's current arrangements?

Need more information?

More information about the emergency management frameworks of the countries discussed in section 2.2 can be accessed from the following websites:

New Zealand www.civildefence.govt.nz

United Kingdom www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/ukresilience

Canada www.publicsafety.gc.ca

United States www.fema.gov

Last updated on Monday, 12 September 2011