SECTION FOUR, PART FOUR

You Wonder, Why? Likely to get controversial with this one, but sometimes metaphors are not understood. I had the need to travel along one of the major roads through the Blue Mountains on Wednesday. Why any significance? Well the Blue Mountains , while not of a high altitude by global standards, they are particularly rugged with significantly sharp valleys which fall away very quickly from the ridge line that the road largely follows. But they are also heavily wooded, with Australian eucalypts being the main variety. For anyone who knows or appreciates, the Australian bush burns with particular intensity, and a bushfire started in the region on the previous Thursday, and was still moving up and down some valleys on Wednesday. Worse still, Wednesday as slated as being a particularly nasty day, with expected wind gusts of 100 kms per hour, likely to fan the flames, and most persons were warned not to travel, and residents were told to get out. All dreadfully sensible. I have been in, and fought, Australian brush and bush fires a number of times over the years, and i do know what happens. More importantly, there seems to have been a "sea-change" a number of years ago in the policy by which fires are fought. I can understand why there was a change in policy......a number of volunteer bush fire fighters got caught on the wrong side of a flare up, and were unfortunately killed. From then on policy became let the fires burn until they get close to property ( defined as houses, and real estate), and then try to fight them at that point. In the meantime, if opportunities exist for back burning, then carry those out. Firefighters work extremely hard, in dangerous conditions, and deserve our full support. Most however, are sent to watch and aid locations, and do no real work, but receive strong local community support. Good luck to them, they are following orders, and have good equipment at their disposal. So where the controversy? Well, one of the fires has since been disclosed as being initiated by poor ordnance practice at a Federal Army base. How tragic that those employed to protect, actually cause the danger to the population. Provided the guilt is acknowledged, and compensation paid, then some recognition is publicly disclosed. I witnessed a koala getting bowled over by a semi-trailer, because it was so distracted it wandered across the main road. The army can't apologise to it, and compensation of a few gum leaves will not bring it back to life. But these things happen....there is no public announcement in relation to this at this stage. So we wait No...this will be the controversy. As indicated, we did the drive on Wednesday, prior to Midday. The wind was beginning to gust, but everyone knows that in Australia, the wind builds more momentum in the afternoon. We went through areas were it would be possible to see all of the firezones, by the chimneys of smoke which indicate burning, or smoking locations. nothing on the east of the mountains. Nothing. No significant fire spots. Doesn't mean it is under control, but it is semi-quiesant. Only one patch on the Western side, and that was being closely monitored by helicopter. Put that one out, and you do a fair amount to control further difficulties. but that wasn't done, and the fire later flared up, and burnt more forests, more houses, etc. we drove through again this morning, and ow smoking piles everywhere, and hazardous smoke everywhere. I will argue on what i saw, that cap off the wednesday smoker, and we would not have been dealing with the last two days of further distress. So to me, a change of policy was required. Flexibility. So who will be responsible for the damage for the last few days, when it should have been capped on tuesday/wednesday. Herein lies the social contract dilemma. Everyone is equal, and entitled to community efforts. If someone is in charge of an emergency situation, it is almost always with the communities full support. But that doesn't mean that decisions should not be challenged. If poor decisions stop decisive action from circumventing damage, then should those who suffer the damage be able to accuse those in authority, that their authority has not been exercised correctly. If judgements are poor, then those who exercise those judgements need to be replaced. Old operating policies need to be constantly challenged, and challengeable, to ensure that the BEST possible effort is expended at all times. If it isn't bushfires, but financial markets we are talking about, does not the same principles apply. All regulators need replacing. All authorities have exercised too many arbitrary powers, and not been responsible for their impact. Nothing should be beyond being examinable, because even that koala deserved an answer as to WHY?