Draft Sea Level Rise Policy Consultation                                          2nd April  2009
Urban and Coastal Water Reform Branch
Department of Environment and Climate Change NSW
PO Box A290
SYDNEY  SOUTH  NSW  1232

 andrew.baron@environment.nsw.gov.au 

Draft Sea Level Rise Policy Statement (draft Policy)

Our association welcomes the Department’s recognition that sea level rise must be taken into consideration in strategic planning and development decisions.  However, we believe the policy is too weak to be effective and must be given statutory effect.

We are asking that:

• The Sea Level Rise benchmark be made mandatory
  
• The Draft Policy be made a SEPP or included in planning legislation
  
• The precautionary principle and adequate buffers be applied
  
• The legislation include provisions to prevent developers from passing on costs associated with known risks to future owners and the public via insurance premiums or protective works. 
  
• The legislation should make it clear which Authorities are responsible for the necessary planning, protective works, land acquisition, etc. 

JUSTIFICATION FOR OUR REQUESTS

• Benchmarks - The benchmarks are a good start but predicted heights are probably conservative given the accelerated warming of polar seas that is being observed.
  
  
• Precautionary Principle – There is a high probability of tidal inundation of foreshore land around estuaries, bays and harbours impacting foreshore structures and reducing the ability to effectively drain low-lying coastal areas.  The precautionary principle should be the guiding principle to prohibit any development in locations known to be vulnerable to inundation and erosion and deemed high risk.
  
  
• No development zones - Rather than construction of an assortment of unsightly and environmentally unfriendly structures or works to protect private property, Coastwatchers recommends adequate no-development buffer zones based on contour lines be created to limit imprudent development in high-risk locations.  In the longer term this would be far less costly and more effective in preventing future damage from inundation and erosion.
  
  
• Lack of consistency –  the Policy aims for consistent consideration but this will not be achieved.  The benchmarks only have to be considered :
  There is no regulatory or statutory requirement for development to comply with this benchmark”.
  Councils do not have to adopt or apply the benchmarks – some will but some won’t so the resulting strategic planning and development assessment processes will lack certainty and consistency.
  
  
• Litigation more likely – There will be no legal framework to support refusals by Councils of development applications on the grounds of sea level rise so costly court actions are more likely.
  
  
• Insurance - Assisting the insurance industry to price risks from sea level rise in insurance policies would have a flow-on effect to every other policyholder in coastal locations.  Insurance premiums would become so costly they would be beyond the financial resources of many property owners.
  ”People should encourage governments to take urgent action to protect areas vulnerable to frequent damage from storms, fire and flooding.  Governments for example can introduce legislation not to build in areas prone to severe weather damage”  Heinrich Eder, Managing Director, Munich Reinsurance Australasia.
  
  
• Exclusion clauses in household insurance policies - Already insurance companies exclude cover for policyholders with property in vulnerable high-risk locations. “We do not cover damage caused by the actions or movements of the sea (for example high tide, rising sea  levels, large ocean waves) we do not cover damage to retaining walls”   (GIO Home and Contents Insurance).
  
  
• Who is responsible and who is liable -  The draft policy appears to leave every opportunity for buck-passing and confusion when it comes to determining who is responsible for planning, protective works, land acquisition and the like. Who would be liable when and if there is a major storm event that causes damage and loss of private property in known high-risk areas?

J Edwards

For the Secretary