Not enough new funding
Critics argued the bill mostly renamed an existing fund instead of delivering substantial new disaster mitigation money, so it risked looking like a title change rather than a major policy expansion.
This bill became law on Nov 29th, 2022.
Government & democracy
Australia keeps the old Emergency Response FundThe former name of the fund, which the bill keeps in place but repurposes. but renames it the Disaster Ready FundThe renamed fund that sets aside money for disaster preparedness, resilience and risk reduction instead of mainly paying for recovery., so the same fund continues under a new name focused on future disaster readiness.
The old Emergency Response FundThe former name of the fund, which the bill keeps in place but repurposes. could fund recovery, resilience and mitigation measures. This bill renames it the Disaster Ready FundThe renamed fund that sets aside money for disaster preparedness, resilience and risk reduction instead of mainly paying for recovery. and, from 2023-24, focuses up to $200 million a year on disaster resilience and risk reduction, with reporting and review requirements.
Australia already had the Emergency Response FundThe former name of the fund, which the bill keeps in place but repurposes. from 2019, with capped annual funding for recovery and resilience or mitigation projects. Ministers argued after Black Summer and the 2022 floods in South-East Queensland and New South Wales that the fund had not delivered enough preparedness work. The bill kept the fund, renamed it the Disaster Ready FundThe renamed fund that sets aside money for disaster preparedness, resilience and risk reduction instead of mainly paying for recovery., and from 2023-24 focused up to $200 million a year on resilience and mitigation before Parliament passed it in November 2022.
The main criticism was that the bill mostly rebadged an existing fund, did not add much genuinely new money, and could shift attention or funding away from disaster recovery while communities were still rebuilding. That case was raised most strongly by the Greens and by some Coalition speakers, but Coalition support largely remained conditional rather than outright opposition.
Clare O'neil MP introduced this bill. It passed on the voices.
Did it become law?
Yes
Became law 29 Nov 2022
Final passage
Passed without a counted vote
2 recorded amendment or procedural votes were found, but no counted vote on the bill itself was recorded.
Passage speed
83 days
From introduction to the latest recorded parliamentary step
Meaning
Australia keeps the old Emergency Response FundThe former name of the fund, which the bill keeps in place but repurposes. but renames it the Disaster Ready FundThe renamed fund that sets aside money for disaster preparedness, resilience and risk reduction instead of mainly paying for recovery., so the same fund continues under a new name focused on future disaster readiness.
From 2023-24, the Disaster Ready FundThe renamed fund that sets aside money for disaster preparedness, resilience and risk reduction instead of mainly paying for recovery. is set aside for disaster resilience and risk reduction, with up to $200 million a year available instead of ongoing recovery spending.
The Treasurer and Finance Minister must review the yearly funding cap at least every 5 years, so the amount can be reconsidered over time.
The Emergency Management MinisterThe minister who must publish the yearly report on the fund and is involved in some fund decisions. must publish a yearly report on Disaster Ready FundThe renamed fund that sets aside money for disaster preparedness, resilience and risk reduction instead of mainly paying for recovery. grants and funding deals, so Parliament can see how decisions were used each year.
An independent reviewA separate review required within five years to examine how the fund is working, including transparency and whether more law changes are needed. must be done within 5 years to check Disaster Ready FundThe renamed fund that sets aside money for disaster preparedness, resilience and risk reduction instead of mainly paying for recovery. grants, decision-making and transparency, and whether more legal changes are needed.
(1) The Emergency Response Fund is continued in existence with the new name the Disaster Ready Fund.Emergency Response Fund Amendment (Disaster Ready Fund) Act 2022 final Act text
New Division 5 would reflect the Government’s decision to dedicate the Disaster Ready Fund solely for natural disaster resilience and risk reduction initiatives from 2023-24 onwards. The changes by this item would provide for an annual limit of $200 million for debits relating to natural disaster resilience and risk reduction initiatives. The Disaster Ready Fund would not be available to fund natural disaster recovery after 2022-23.Emergency Response Fund Amendment (Disaster Ready Fund) explanatory memorandum
(8) At least once every 5 years, the responsible Ministers must conduct a review of the operation of paragraphs (1)(c) and (d).Emergency Response Fund Amendment (Disaster Ready Fund) Act 2022 final Act text
(1) The Emergency Management Minister must cause to be prepared, as soon as practicable after the end of each financial year, an annual report on the exercise of the Minister’s functions and powers under section 20 (which deals with arrangements and grants) during the year.Emergency Response Fund Amendment (Disaster Ready Fund) Act 2022 final Act text
(1) The Emergency Management Minister must cause an independent review of the following matters to be undertaken before the fifth anniversary of the commencement of this section:Emergency Response Fund Amendment (Disaster Ready Fund) Act 2022 final Act text
Context
Australia already had the Emergency Response FundThe former name of the fund, which the bill keeps in place but repurposes. from 2019, with capped annual funding for recovery and resilience or mitigation projects. Ministers argued after Black Summer and the 2022 floods in South-East Queensland and New South Wales that the fund had not delivered enough preparedness work. The bill kept the fund, renamed it the Disaster Ready FundThe renamed fund that sets aside money for disaster preparedness, resilience and risk reduction instead of mainly paying for recovery., and from 2023-24 focused up to $200 million a year on resilience and mitigation before Parliament passed it in November 2022.
Black Summer bushfires expose the cost of poor preparedness
Ministers cited Black Summer as a major example of the devastation and long recovery that followed when communities were not adequately prepared for extreme disasters.
Hansard ↗Parliament creates the Emergency Response FundThe former name of the fund, which the bill keeps in place but repurposes.
The Commonwealth set up the Emergency Response FundThe former name of the fund, which the bill keeps in place but repurposes. as a standing source of disaster financing, including capped annual funding for recovery and resilience or mitigation measures.
Hansard ↗South-East Queensland and New South Wales floods renew pressure for resilience spending
Speakers pointed to the 2022 floods, including severe impacts in Brisbane and Lismore, as proof that worsening disaster seasons required more money to be spent before disasters struck.
Hansard ↗Government introduces the Disaster Ready FundThe renamed fund that sets aside money for disaster preparedness, resilience and risk reduction instead of mainly paying for recovery. bill
The government introduced legislation to rename the fund and focus it on disaster resilience and risk reduction from 2023-24.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Parliament passes the bill
Both houses agreed on the final text, clearing the way for the old fund to continue under a new name and purpose.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Disaster Ready FundThe renamed fund that sets aside money for disaster preparedness, resilience and risk reduction instead of mainly paying for recovery. changes become law
Royal AssentThe final step that turns a bill passed by Parliament into an Act of Parliament. turned the bill into an Act, locking in the renamed fund and its new reporting and review requirements.
Parliamentary timeline ↗Annual resilience funding begins under the Disaster Ready FundThe renamed fund that sets aside money for disaster preparedness, resilience and risk reduction instead of mainly paying for recovery.
From 2023-24, up to $200 million a year was to be available for disaster preparedness, resilience and risk reduction, and the fund would no longer be available for disaster recovery after 2022-23.
Australian Parliament House ↗Legislative route
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
Referred to Committee (08/09/2022): Senate Finance and Public Administration Legislation Committee; Committee report (16/11/2022)
Referred to committee
APH bill page notesThe bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Referred to Federation Chamber
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Reported from Federation Chamber
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Second reading agreed to
The chamber considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.
Consideration in detail debate
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber. Later message exchanges with the other chamber were still recorded afterwards.
Third reading agreed to
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Introduced and read a first time
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Second reading moved
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Second reading agreed to
The chamber considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.
Committee of the Whole debate
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Third reading agreed to
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
The House dealt with Senate amendments or requests so both chambers could settle the bill in the same form.
Consideration of Senate message
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.
Finally passed both Houses
The Governor-General gave Royal AssentThe final step that turns a bill passed by Parliament into an Act of Parliament., turning the bill into an Act.
Key criticism
The main criticism was that the bill mostly rebadged an existing fund, did not add much genuinely new money, and could shift attention or funding away from disaster recovery while communities were still rebuilding. That case was raised most strongly by the Greens and by some Coalition speakers, but Coalition support largely remained conditional rather than outright opposition.
Criticism focused more on funding design and safeguards than on the goal of disaster resilience itself.
Not enough new funding
Critics argued the bill mostly renamed an existing fund instead of delivering substantial new disaster mitigation money, so it risked looking like a title change rather than a major policy expansion.
Recovery funding could be weakened
Opponents warned that moving the fund toward resilience spending could reduce the pool available for disaster recovery at a time when flood-hit communities still needed large-scale clean-up and rebuilding support.
Too much discretion and too little detail
Some supporters wanted tighter rules on how money would be allocated, which projects would qualify, and how changes to the spending cap would be made, warning that transparency and accountability were not strong enough in the original design.
Further sources
Votes
The bill passed both chambers on the voices. The counted divisions below were about amendments or procedure, not final passage.
House agreed to the bill's third reading on the voices, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes for final passage in that chamber.
Passed on the voices
In a voice vote, members call out Aye or No and the presiding officer judges which side has it. Individual names are only recorded if a formal division is called.
Senate agreed to the bill's third reading on the voices, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes for final passage in that chamber.
Passed on the voices
In a voice vote, members call out Aye or No and the presiding officer judges which side has it. Individual names are only recorded if a formal division is called.
Amendments grouped by chamber. These cards include amendment outcomes recorded without a counted division.
House
Passed 89 to 54. Support came from Labor, Greens, Centre Alliance, Katter's Australian Party, and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Liberal Party and Nationals. Minor-party and independent votes were split.
The unresolved division was on the second-reading question in the Federation Chamber report, and defeating the amendment allowed the bill's second reading to proceed.
The APH progress record says 3 Government amendments were agreed without a counted division being collected by this run.
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
The House agreed to the amendments made by the Senate, so the bill could pass both chambers in the same form.
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
Senate
Defeated 13 to 32. Support came from Greens and minor parties and independents. Opposition came from Labor, Liberal Party, Jacqui Lambie Network, Nationals, and minor parties and independents.
The amendment was defeated 32 to 13, so the bill kept no fossil-fuel investment ban and continued unchanged on that point.
The APH progress record says 1 Opposition amendment was agreed without a counted division being collected by this run.
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
The APH progress record says 1 Independent amendment was agreed without a counted division being collected by this run.
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
The Senate agreed on voices to require the Future Fund BoardThe expert board that gives advice on the fund’s investment arrangements and any proposed changes to the spending cap.’s advice to be tabled in each House of Parliament with the related determination.
Carried on voices
The chamber decided this amendment without a counted division, so there is no list of individual Aye and No votes.
These are amendment votes, not the final passage vote on the bill itself. The bill passed both chambers on the voices.
The parliamentary record also shows 3 Government amendments, 1 Opposition amendment, and 1 Independent amendment agreed without a counted division.
Parliamentary debate
Start here — lead voices
O'Neil supports the bill, saying it turns the old emergency response fundThe former name of the fund, which the bill keeps in place but repurposes. into a proper Disaster Ready FundThe renamed fund that sets aside money for disaster preparedness, resilience and risk reduction instead of mainly paying for recovery. that will invest up to $200 million a year in resilience and risk reduction.
Read in Hansard ↗McCormack opposes the bill as drafted because he says it mostly renames an existing fund without adding new money or meaningful action.
Read in Hansard ↗Violi says the coalition will support the bill because it keeps funding disaster resilience and recovery, but he argues it does not add new money and presses the government to treat real disaster action as bipartisan.
Read in Hansard ↗Pocock supports the bill as a step toward shifting disaster funding from recovery to preparedness, but says it is only a start and wants stronger transparency and more investment in resilience.
Read in Hansard ↗All speeches by bloc
15 speakers · 15 support
“The Disaster Ready Fund Bill makes good on this commitment. The Bill will transform the former Government's failed Emergency Response Fund into a dedicated ongoing source of funding for natural disaster resilience and risk reduction initiatives.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The amendments in this bill change the name of the former government's emergency response fund to the Disaster Ready Fund, allow $200 million to be debited from the DRF for natural disaster resilience and risk reduction, and allow the minister to adjust that maximum disbursement amount by a disallowable legislative instrument. I think that's a sensible move, to be honest with you. It will facilitate the transfer of responsibility for fund expenditure to the new National Emergency Management Agency, NEMA, and streamline administrative arrangements in this space.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I absolutely welcome that, finally, we're going to get to see this significant fund being used, and put to good use, rather than having it sit languishing as it has done for years. I remember that when we first voted for this fund we supported the government on this fund even though they took money away from university assets to do it. But we said, 'This is needed and it's needed now.' That was years ago and not a cent has been spent. It has earnt interest but that has not helped my community. I am very pleased to see tangible action from the Albanese government.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“In summary, this bill makes important amendments to ensure that Australia is appropriately funded for natural disaster resilience and risk reduction initiatives. Investing up to $200 million per year on resilience projects was recommended by the Productivity Commission in its report into natural disasters, and it is supported by insurers, local government and disaster relief bodies. The bill provides the flexibility to change this limit, if appropriate, while promoting the long-term sustainability of the Disaster Ready Fund. The amendments made by the Disaster Ready Fund bill will improve Australia's disaster readiness into the future.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“That's why I will be supporting this bill and commend it to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The Albanese Labor government accepts that climate change is occurring. We accept the advice of climate scientists and economists who say that the costs associated with climate change are going to grow unless we invest in mitigation infrastructure, and that is exactly what this bill does. It ensures that the government establishes the Disaster Ready Fund, investing up to $200 million a year, matched by the states and territories, in disaster risk reduction and mitigation. The CSIRO has found that, for every dollar spent reducing disaster risk, it will save between $2 and $11 on disaster recovery and reconstruction.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I'm relieved this bill, the Emergency Response Fund Amendment (Disaster Ready Fund) Bill 2022, will transform the former government's Emergency Response Fund into a dedicated, ongoing source of funding for natural disaster resilience and risk reduction initiatives. This government, through the Disaster Ready Fund, will provide up to $200 million per year to invest in mitigation projects like firebreaks, flood levees, cyclone shelters and evacuation centres around the country. When I travel through my communities across Eden-Monaro—from Batlow to Cobargo, from Braidwood to Kiah—I know from listening to locals who are still struggling with the hurdles and the mental toll of recovery that an ongoing funding source for disaster resilience and risk reduction is going to be much appreciated.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“These are the things that this Disaster Ready Fund can do—the difference that we can make now as the Albanese government. This is a $1 billion fund to mitigate potential disaster loss and damage. It is critical. It will save lives. It will make sure that our devastating experience during the bushfires hasn't all been in vain.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill is about ensuring that as a country we have a fund that allows us to do preventative things rather than just respond to these events. I think every Australian will welcome the government putting in place these measures.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“So I'm delighted that this Disaster Ready Fund bill will lead to real action in terms of both mitigation and support for those who will inevitably be affected by worsening weather events. This fund will provide up to $200 million per year to invest in mitigation projects like flood levees, which are really needed in places like Katherine; cyclone shelters, which are needed throughout the north; and fire breaks and evacuation centres in the Northern Territory and around Australia.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“We are committed to better protecting towns—like all of us here—like Eugowra, for people like Greg, Sandra and Mark. We support the bill.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill will implement our election commitment and will replace the former government's failed Emergency Response Fund. In the three years since that fund was established in 2019, with what ended up being $4.8 billion in it, the fund did not build a single disaster mitigation project or release a cent in recovery funding. All it did was earn the former coalition government over $800 million in interest. This legislation will replace this failed fund with a dedicated ongoing natural disaster resilience and risk reduction fund, the Disaster Ready Fund. The Disaster Ready Fund will provide up to $200 million a year, matched where possible by state, territory and local governments, to mitigate the devastating impacts of natural disasters by providing funding for disaster resilience and mitigation activities. Now we are finalising this commitment and delivering on it by writing the Disaster Ready Fund into law.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“In contrast, the Albanese government is getting on with the job of building a better Australia, building a country that's ready to face the future. This bill will ensure that Australia is better prepared for future disasters. It will provide up to $200 million per year to invest in mitigation projects, like flood levees, cyclone shelters, firebreaks and evacuation centres around Australia as well as building natural disaster resilience.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The nature of climate change and where we live means that we face incredible and real risks of natural disasters. Be they floods on the east coast or fires on the west coast, these are matters that we absolutely have to focus on because there is no greater threat to our people, our property and our environment. I'm extremely proud to be part of a government that is now unlocking taxpayer funds that rightfully should be made available to mitigate those risks and to protect our communities.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The bill will implement the government's election commitment to replace the Emergency Response Fund with a dedicating ongoing natural disaster resilience and risk reduction fund, the Disaster Ready Fund. The Disaster Ready Fund will provide up to $200 million a year to mitigate the devastating impacts of natural disasters by providing funding for disaster resilience and mitigation initiatives.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
6 speakers · 5 support · 1 oppose
“Just to be clear: this bill doesn't provide additional money. I'll always support additional money for natural disaster events, and I hope that the government continue to recognise the urgency and importance of real action, because that is something that needs to be bipartisan. I look forward to supporting this bill and continuing to support the residents of Casey and the nation as we continue to struggle with these natural disasters.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The member for Page has genuine concerns. He's made an amendment. I concur with what he has put forward. We need to be disaster ready—yes, we do need to be ready. We were, as the coalition government. We put in place plans for funding and priorities. Does this build on those? Not really. It just changes the name. It doesn't provide any new funding. We need genuine action. We need legislation that's going to have meaningful actions so that people who are sandbagging their homes and those genuine heroes, such as those in the SES and other first-responder organisations, the volunteers, don't get too cynical about politics and politicians.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The opposition will support this bill. We will be moving an amendment to make it more transparent. We cannot underestimate the current fragility of our rural and regional communities. We pride ourselves on our toughness and our ability to get on with the job, but large parts of Australia are at present struggling and they need to know that we are going to stand by them in both recovery and future mitigation efforts. I implore the government to make sure that, while moving this funding from recovery to mitigation projects, they don't turn their back on the funding that will be required following these floods. In this latest disaster the road infrastructure that needs to be repaired is going to require a significant commitment from the government, so I implore the government not to forget this hard task at hand. We will support the bill with an amendment for this Emergency Response Fund.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I rise to speak in support of this amendment to the Emergency Response Fund Amendment (Disaster Ready Fund) Bill 2022, but I also bring to the debate the personal experience of the past fortnight as my electorate of Nicholls has been ravaged by an unprecedented flood emergency. The Emergency Response Fund was set up by the coalition government in 2019. It was funded by the uncommitted balance of the Education Investment Fund, which was then closed. It was an investment fund intended to grow over time and maximise the Commonwealth's capacity to support states and territories to respond to major natural disasters into the future.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This is an area that we should be working together in. I'm pleased that the coalition is supporting this bill. I respect and support the member for Page's second reading amendment, for the reasons I outlined at the beginning of my contribution. Nonetheless, I think that when it comes to supporting our communities to deal with these significant events that they are going to face in the future we should be doing it with a sense of unity. I anticipate that this will be supported through the parliament without dissent. With those comments I commend the bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“While the opposition will be supporting this bill today, we are concerned about the responsible minister's power to increase the maximum disbursement amount by instrument, pushing aside the legislated cap.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
5 speakers · 2 support · 2 oppose · 1 mixed
“This bill does propose to repurpose the existing Emergency Response Fund to focus on disaster mitigation and risk reduction, on building resilience and on preparing for future natural disasters. This is welcome. But there is one problem: there's no more money in the fund. It's just shifting the same amount of money from before, from disaster recovery to disaster preparedness.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The Australian Greens support the principle of recalibrating the Emergency Response Fund's allocations to pre-disaster preparedness, and I do acknowledge the genuineness of Senator Sheldon and his work in trying to turn the beast around and get preparedness, mitigation and adaptation as public policy and get the funding we need. I acknowledge that; it's genuine work and it's hard work. But this bill does not come close to what is needed to prevent the coal and gas field natural disasters.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“We support the principle of this bill. The government has a duty to keep citizens and communities safe. We should be investing to develop climate disaster resilience and preparedness but this fund does not go far enough. Climate disasters are forecast to increase, and we can see them around us and around the planet. We need to ensure that we have the capacity to support communities by lifting the spending cap from $200 million to 300 million. We also need to require that the disaster fund does not invest in fossil fuels. We cannot have a fund invested in the companies that are responsible for causing the very same climate disasters that the fund is set up to protect against.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill is simply a rebranding of the Emergency Response Fund. This bill shifts $150 million set aside for disaster recovery to instead sit with the $50 million spent on public works to minimise the impacts of natural disasters before they hit. There's no new money. Even the Insurance Council of Australia, as my colleague the member for Ryan quoted—and I will quote it again—has stated that we need to spend $30 billion over the next 50 years on large-scale coastal mitigation to protect communities against increasing storm surges, erosion and rising sea levels. That is around $600 million a year. The $200 million a year the government is proposing is not enough, and our communities deserve better. This bill is not spending any new money while it is relying on stock market returns to ensure the fund stays topped up.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“The frustrating thing is that this bill provides no new money for dealing with natural disasters. It simply shuffles a little bit of extra cash into disaster preparations at the cost of funding for recovery. When the next flood, bushfire or cyclone hits, that clean-up money will have to come from somewhere else.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
7 speakers · 7 support
“This bill is a step in the right direction. I commend the government and, in particular, Minister Watt for the change. This starts to shift the focus to preparedness, and I commend Senator Sheldon for the work that he's been doing with flood affected communities in how they prepare for the next flood—because we know that the next flood will come; it's simply a matter of time. Earlier we heard Senator Walsh blame the coalition for not doing enough. That may well be the case, but both major parties have failed us when it comes to climate change. This has been something we've been warned about for decades, and we're now seeing the results of inaction. I urge people in this place to stop the finger-pointing and begin to work on this issue.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I welcome this bill and the government's commitment to proactive measures of mitigation and adaptation to natural disasters. The impacts of climate change are already baked into our environment, and we need to assess what the risks are, adapt to them and mitigate them as best as possible. Australians know that this is true. We are seeing this on a daily basis with the floods that have been running across the east coast of the country for the past year. I welcome the changes in this legislation, but I urge the government: (1) to develop a plan to conduct regular national climate risk assessments; (2) to develop regular mitigation and adaptation plans in response to those national climate risk assessments; and (3) to consider broadening the definition of natural disasters to include pandemics to provide a shovel-ready tool to distribute funds in the event of future events such as COVID-19.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This bill is a good development, but we do need more. I'd like to see the inclusion of emergency services precincts or emergency operations precincts in eligible projects. These would coordinate emergency and volunteer services efforts and help recruit the much-needed volunteers. Everywhere I go across my electorate, most particularly in the last couple of weeks with the floods, when I speak the SES and the CFA, they tell me that their volunteer numbers are down and those who are left are exhausted. When we talk about resilience funding, we need to make sure that the guidelines enable us to address that as a key problem and to address the fact that multiservice precincts are a great way to go to capitalise on the volunteers that we have got—share resources, share information. I believe those things fit squarely within the resilience aspect of these funds. I know right now Mansfield and Myrtleford are two places that could benefit so greatly from emergency services precincts.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“I hope that by passing this bill we provide them with the support they need and deserve. I commend this bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“In conclusion, I support this bill, given that it addresses the specific need to fund disaster resilience efforts, but I strongly urge the government to, firstly, include coastal hazard management in the funding allocated to the Disaster Ready Fund; secondly, review the quantum of the Disaster Ready Fund, given that it represents only 0.5 per cent of the annual cost to the country of natural disasters; and, thirdly, commit to transparency in relation to the allocation of the Disaster Ready Fund, on both the definition of disaster mitigation and the criteria that will be used to prioritise projects.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“It's unclear from the bill how the $200 million per annum will be allocated for natural disaster resilience and risk reduction. I'm pleased that the government has moved from a reactionary to a preparatory footing. This bill is a start. Of course, I support it. I say to members who are experiencing flooding in their electorate now that the hearts of those in my community go out to your communities. I have the end of the River Murray in my electorate and I know that many in South Australia are beginning to hold their breath as we see the River Murray waters continue further downstream. I commend this bill to the House.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
“This legislation is a step in the right direction, but the money versus the cost of the damage is just a drop in the warming ocean. It's a reminder, too, of how much more there is to be done.”Read the full speech in Hansard ↗
Record
House · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
House · Second reading moved
Second reading opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Referred to Federation Chamber
Referred to Federation Chamber
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Reported from Federation Chamber
Reported from Federation Chamber
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Second reading agreed to
Second reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
House · Consideration in detail: amendments considered
Amendment packages agreed
The chamber considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.
House · Third reading agreed to
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
Senate · Introduced and read a first time
Introduced
The bill was formally presented to the chamber and read a first time, which starts its parliamentary journey.
Senate · Second reading moved
Second reading opened
A minister or sponsoring member moved the second reading, opening the main debate on the bill's purpose and principles.
Senate · Second reading debate
Second reading debate
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
Senate · Second reading agreed to
Second reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at second reading, meaning it accepted the bill in principle and allowed it to continue.
Senate · Committee of the whole: amendments considered
Amendment packages agreed
The chamber considered amendments before the bill moved to the next stage.
Senate · Third reading agreed to
Third reading agreed
The chamber agreed to the bill at third reading, which completed passage through that chamber.
House · Message from Senate reported
Message from Senate reported
The bill reached this recorded parliamentary step.
House · Consideration of Senate message
House agreed to Senate amendments
The House dealt with Senate amendments or requests so both chambers could settle the bill in the same form.
Parliament · Finally passed both Houses
Passed both houses
Both houses passed the bill in the same form, completing parliamentary passage.
Assent · Assent
Assent
The Governor-General gave Royal AssentThe final step that turns a bill passed by Parliament into an Act of Parliament., turning the bill into an Act.
Senate Finance and Public Administration Legislation Committee; Committee report (16/11/2022)
Referred to committee
Referred to Committee (8 Sept 2022): Senate Finance and Public Administration Legislation Committee; Committee report (16 Nov 2022)
APH bill page notes