How politics contributed to the January 2011 Brisbane floods

Fast forward to 2009/ 2010: the new pricing regime for water in South-East Queensland begins and the cost of water begins to rise. Bulk water prices, now set by the State Government authority but levied by council-owned retailers begins to bite and George Street starts to feel the political pain as “costs of living pressures” start showing up on their polling.

So Treasurer Andrew Fraser makes the call that whatever can be done to “ease the burden” (read: save our skin) of cost pressures must be done.

The announcements which followed indicated the Government's preference for the use of more rain-fed supplies over desalinated or manufactured water.

The Tugan desalination plant is placed into “standby mode” to save costs. The recycled water plant is switched off and the Government starts announcing that it has done everything it can to stop increasing costs. Never mind that the reason costs where rising in the first place was because of the poorly planned infrastructure spending they started in 2006.

So with manufactured water being on the nose due to its price, a decision is taken in George Street to give Wivenhoe Dam a de facto re-tasking.

Instead of predominately being a flood mitigation dam, its normal storage levels would be allowed to increase to hold more water for drinking. This was at the cost of the space for flood mitigation. However, the Government to its credit, did not entirely discount the need for Wivenhoe to act as a flood-mitigation measure. But a review was undertaken with a view to increasing the drinking supplies.

It is highly doubtful that the report's findings will ever see the light of day.

In effect, the Government indicated their preference for operations of Wivenhoe Dam toward storage for drinking supplies. In doing so, their political desire to avoid heat from tax-payers for increasing water costs has jeopardised the safety of Brisbane residents.

It’s a classic case of short-term management plus political convenience culminating with an extraordinary series of events that has led Brisbane to the 1/11 flooding.

The best thing for Queensland is a commission of inquiry to delve into these issues and examine the evidence. The recommendations of the commissioners should include new operating procedures for Wivenhoe Dam, but should also examine the broader issues of water-supply in South-East Queensland discussed here that led to this situation.

To be clear, I'm not blaming the Government or the water authorities entirely for the flooding. Obviously there was extraordinary rainfall. But it is clear that the actions of the Government were complicit in allowing the destruction of Brisbane. It's a sin of omission, rather than commission.