Should the Government buy-out flood-prone properties to resolve the flooding problems?

Property buy-backs could be a way to fix past development mistakes as per SMH

With 100s of thousands of properties located on floodplains, the cost of buying them all out could easily run in billions (if not trillions). SMH in above article is asking the Government to consider mandatory buying back a small fraction of vulnerable houses each year and keep doing it for a few decades.

Considering that catchment maps have existed for decades and land contour data being freely available at Geoscience Australia. The councils could have prevented these disaster-bound developments. End-users possibly had a vested interest in buying cheap land on a per-acre basis and thus ended up committing to these properties in major towns in Outer Sydney suburbs (and other regional towns like Lismore), possibly hoping for a subdivision to be allowed in years subsequent to their purchase. Why else would a young couple (shown on TV last night) buy an acreage in Richmond when smaller suburban homes have been constructed in thousands per year in the vicinity in relatively safer areas.

If you're living in a flood plain you know you'll be affected by flooding sooner or later - it's not a matter of if but when! So I personally can't see why people fail to move to safer areas. Remembering in AU you are supposed to pay for an ambulance in case of a medical emergency (if you are not covered by an appropriate cover) however, flood rescue are paid for by tax payer.

My property is not in a flood affected area but my home insurance premium is rising 3-folds from next year due to underwriting insurance costs skyrocketing because of increased number of disaster related claims.

Long story short - do OzBargainers think that the Government should buy-out flood-prone properties using tax payer's dollars to resolve the flooding problems once and for all?

Poll Options expired

  • 67
    Yes
  • 833
    No

Comments

  • Money should not be involved. Just offer them same sqm somewhere else.

  • -1

    I bought some almond yoghurt and ate half of it but I am allergic to almonds. Should the government buy out my yoghurt from me to solve my pre existing allergy issue?

    • If there is enough allergic people voting you'll get a pay out. You live by the rules to your own detriment.

  • Yes. Everyone should have at least one bail out in their life time. Problem is government just needs to find enough people to add a few percentage in tax to pay for it.

  • +1

    One thing I do think is important to understand is that many (not all) that buy on flood prone land do so because that is all they can afford. It’s a stark choice between being stuck in the rental market or owning your own home. Especially in Lismore, many people who have been flooded time and time again there say that they have nowhere else to go. They can not afford to move anywhere else. Every flood beats them back down again making it more difficult to leave. There was an article not many months ago about a family who had built a multistory flood proof property in Lismore with a staged evacuation plan to retreat to upper levels, only to be caught out by the flooding this year. They knew the risks and prepared as best they could. They still lost everything. Some floods are that rapid and that unprecedented that people are caught unaware. Where a flood exceeds the known limits and zone maps I think it’s fair that some government assistance is offered. For others living on a flood zone surely as a society we can work out a better way to move them somewhere safer?

  • +3

    Government has $1 trillion in debt, how do you expect them to afford it? Can’t keep inflating money supply for bailouts, then people complain about inflation and rising housing costs. We have become an economy of entitlement.

  • +1

    No. Absolutely not. I grew up in the Hawkesbury area right near the river, went to school in north Richmond.

    It’s well known that the river floods, it’s well known that a lot of that area flood. If someone doesn’t do their research it’s their fault.

    People look at things like crime rates, schools, they get building inspections, etc etc etc before buying a house. Surely you’d find out if it’s in a flood prone area.

    It’s like saying people in bushfire prone areas should have their houses bought out by the government. They buy those houses knowing the risks and if they don’t know the risks they have no one to blame but themselves

  • wait for everyones insurance to skyrocket

    • The best outcome would be making the affected areas uninsurable.

      • They are already uninsurable… thats the issue… And people still live there…

        Best outcome would be to have them zoned Not Inhabitable…

  • absolutely not. if you bought in a flood zone, which you DEFINITELY know when you're buying, that's your problem.

  • Whenever I see " government" mentioned, I wonder why the thread author doesn't indicate which government, we have two governments - Federal and State. The Nations Constitution establishes housing provision to be state government responsibility while the basic funding for the states is to come from the Federal treasury.

  • No, the owners must have been told by their solicitors about the land before buying it.
    I suggest the owners sell to farmers and move on.

Login or Join to leave a comment