PRESENTATION AT THE LAUNCH OF THE ITALIAN IDRL REPORT, BOLGONA, 15 JUNE 2015.

The Australian Experience in the Cooperation on Disaster Management

3

Australia

• Has a long history of cooperating in international disaster assistance, particularly in our region.

• But has few binding legal agreements on the issue.

• Is not party to the ASEAN Agreement on Disaster Management and Emergency Response (2005).

4

ASEAN Agreement

• Key regional agreement. • Is credited with playing a significant role in

opening up Myanmar to international assistance following cyclone Nargis in 2007.

5

Key features

• Aims to promote regional co-operation.• Gives effect to earlier declarations and

conventions.• Commits States to action to reduce

disaster risk.• But also deals with practical issues in

relation to responding to particular disaters.

6

The treaty

• Establishes the ASEAN Co-ordinating Centre for Humanitarian Assistance on Disaster Management.

• Deals with issues of entry, the use of military assets, protection of personnel, indemnity and quality of relief goods, registration, tax exemption

7

The FRANZ agreement (1992)

• FRance, Australia and New Zealand.• A one page agreement.• The countries agreed to “exchange

information to ensure the best use of their assets and other resources for relief operations after cyclones and other natural disasters in the region” and to develop meteorological services in the region.

8

Capacity building

• Emergency Management Australia works with Pacific Island states to develop EM capacity including:– Training;– Participation in regional for a; and – other technical and equipment support.

9

Response

• Managed under AUSASSISTPLAN.• Nearly always involves the Australian

Defence Force; but• There is a standing force – the Australian

Civilian Corps; and• National Critical Care and Trauma

Response Centre, Australian Medical Assistance Teams (AUSMAT).

10

NGOs

• Were directly funded by AUSAID, now DFAT.

• A condition of funding was that they had appropriate quality assurance procedures.

• Australia continues to finance aid through NGOs, the Red Cross/Red Crescent movement and the UN.

11

The State agencies are leading the way

• Queensland and NSW Fire Services maintain INSARAG endorsed Urban Search and Rescue Teams ready for international deployment. They have deployed to:– Japan 2011;– Christchurch 2014;– Banda Aceh, the Maldives & Sri Lanka 2004.

12

International cooperation for wildfire

• There are standing cooperation agreements with respect to bush or wildfire fire fighting arrangements with New Zealand, Canada and the USA.

• It is now a regular occurrence with fire fighters moving between the 4 countries.

• Arranged at agency level – at least in Australia.

13

Developing capacity in the Pacific

• Pacific Island states, along with Australia and New Zealand, are working together to develop resilience and emergency management capacity.

• Cooperative work managed at agency level.

14

Pacific disaster risk management partnership network• Began in 2004 as an MOU between

SOPAC and AFAC.• Aim to take the fire service from a reactive

fire suppression service to ‘A Proactive ‘All Hazards’ Fire and Emergency Service’.

15

PIEMA - Pacific Islands Emergency Management Alliance between:• Pacific Islands National Disaster

Management Offices (NDMOs), • Pacific Islands Fire and Emergency

Services Association (PIFESA), • Members of the Australasian Fire and

Emergency Service Authorities Council (AFAC) and

• the Pacific Islands Chiefs of Police.

16

Today ‘twinning’ with the fire services continues

AFAC PIFSA

Queensland Fire and Emergency Services PNG

NSW Fire and Rescue Solomon Islands and Vanuatu

ACT Rural Fire Service Kiribati

Victoria Country Fire Authority Tuvalu and Fiji

Victoria Metropolitan Fire and Emergency Service Board Samoa

Tasmania Fire Service Nauru

South Australia Metropolitan Fire Service Tonga

New Zealand Fire Service Cook Islands and Niue

17

18

One key objective:

• Strengthen Pacific intra-regional mechanism for emergency response– PICTs have the capability to support each

other during and after disaster events.– Strengthen networks and relationships across

PICTs.

19

And a measure of success is

• Events are managed with little or no international assistance. National EM resources are available for rapid deployment to assist neighbours in the region.

20

Conclusion

• Australia has extensive experience in EM cooperation; but largely as the sender of expertise.

• Interestingly the ongoing relationships are largely at less-than-national level. They are being led by state agencies.

• Australia’s EM arrangements are largely unsupported by federal legislation.

21

Thank you for your attention

Dr Michael EburnAustralian National UniversityCollege of Law5 Fellows RoadACTON ACT 2601AUSTRALIA

P: + 61 2 6125 6424E: michael.eburn@anu.edu.au