Sid Maher, The Australian 6 Mar 10;
AUSTRALIA'S six state governments have four different figures for predicted sea-level rise caused by climate change, leaving developers and councils confused and sparking calls for a federal takeover of coastal climate change planning.
While Kevin Rudd pushes to cut red tape and boost housing construction, the property industry says the different state plans, which dictate where houses can be built or renovated near the coast, are creating a new layer of bureaucracy and risk holding back developments in some of the nation's fastest-growing areas.
Victoria's and Queensland's draft coastal plans have nominated 80cm as the expected sea-level rise by 2100 that developers must allow for, which is broadly in line with the predictions of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
NSW cites CSIRO research that sea levels will be 10cm higher at 90cm.
In South Australia, preparations are being made for a 1m rise, and the West Australian government is working on 38cm, although that is under review.
Tasmania makes vulnerability assessments based on peak storm values but will have in-depth research on the rise of the sea level completed by the end of the year.
This all compares with a federal government report released last year on the climate change risks to Australia's coasts, which found that up to 247,600 existing residential buildings worth up to $63 billion would be at risk from sea inundation by 2100, under a sea-level rise of 1.1m.
The Australian Local Government Association has called a summit of council leaders next month to discuss the inconsistencies, in the wake of confusion over differing standards, public furore in Greens-dominated Byron Bay, simmering tensions in Wyong in NSW and a raft of planning disputes in Victoria, including the borough of Queenscliffe, where councils have faced public protests over a plan that could have limited development and renovations on hundreds of homes.
Peter Russell, who lived in one of the affected houses, said the original council decision would have left residents unable to renovate existing houses or build new homes, a move that could have been financially devastating.
"Big government can have all these plans about climate change, but now that it is down to our level, there needs to be some sensitivity and understanding of communities that have been in place for 100 years," Mr Russell said.
Borough of Queenscliffe Mayor Bob Merriman said the council had been acting in line with state government amendments to its town plan and directions on how to deal with rising sea levels. Mr Merriman said the Victorian government needed to provide a clear way forward.
ALGA president Geoff Lake said the different state plans were creating confusion and a lack of direction for councils and developers. There was no central direction and no adequate collaboration between the states.
"What we have is confusion for developers, confusion for communities and a lack of scientific rigour going into solving a problem that is a national problem rather than being confined to one or two states," Mr Lake said.
He said that although the issue was on the Council of Australian Governments agenda, a national authority was needed to provide greater direction to councils and to people who owned property on the coast, or who aspired to do so.
Property Council of Australia chief executive Peter Verwer backed calls for national co-ordination of sea-level-rise responses, describing the current system as "piecemeal" and nonsensical.
"We've got a non-evidence-based approach that assumes sea-level rises will be different above and below the Tweed," he said.
Residential Development Council executive director Caryn Kakas said part of the problem was that state governments were using different applications of the science of climate change, and this was causing development delays.
Climate Change Minister Penny Wong this week announced $6.5 million for research into the potential risks from climate change, including vulnerable coastal communities.
A spokesperson for Senator Wong said responsibility for land-use planning and development approval rested with state and local governments.
The federal government's role was to lead national reform and provide information for decision-makers.
Opposition regional development spokesman Warren Truss said the inconsistent state climate change allowances reflected the imprecision of the science.
He said the inconsistencies showed that a national approach was needed.
