Managed Retreat- Adaption Plans- Privatised Infrastructure- Wealth and Asset Transfer

The Australian government is "transforming" private property ownership using catastrophic climate modelling

Whatever country is your home, disaster adaption is a global agenda channeled down through the United Nations. If your country signed the Sendai Framework 2015-2030, your country is bound to create climate adaption plans. The adaption plans are manufactured through the United Nations Environment Programme. These plans have serious implications for private property ownership, as well as for people to live where they wish in their own country. Infrastructure will be privatised, and assets will incrementally be owned by corporate entities.

This video highlights the government documents- from Federal to Local and how Councils will soon be implementing Disaster Adaption Plans. This video complements my research below- you can find links (plus more information) in the article.

I have unpacked a few of the NSW and Australian Federal government documents outlining the plans. The vast majority of Australian’s have no idea these plans are in motion, so I decided to document a few (there are many more) plans and highlight certain terms and phrases. This equates to hundreds of pages of documents, refined down to pull out the most relevant aspects. Please use this article as a resource to start unpacking your government plans- I explain below that these plans are being fielded down to Local Council.

In January 2024 I was listening to Reality Check Radio and heard a woman speaking about climate adaptation plans for the area of Kapiti in New Zealand. She mentioned certificates put on houses detailing modelled climate risks, costly adaption plans, and managed retreat.

I was concerned enough to look in to Australia (as all plans are global- and it’s only a matter of time), and I found extensive government and private body papers detailing uninsurable homes, housing certificates detailing climate risk, legislation allowing the government to take land based on climate change modelling, and plans afoot for managed retreat and disaster adaption.

Since that time the government has put their foot on the pedal and a flurry of policy papers have been released - Federal, State and Local. I have gone through a number of the plans and pulled out aspects I see as relevant (there is much more in the plans- and there is most likely information in there that I don’t yet comprehend- so please also read the plans in their entirety).

The plans are global down to local. They emanate from the corporate controlled United Nations. For this article I am focusing primarily on implications for private land ownership and who is going to own the disaster/ resilient infrastructure, which the government is opening up investment pathways for currently.

Before I give my brief synopsis on how I see the situation unfolding have a listen to this information on the stack and pack buildings going up all around us:

My synopsis is that the global housing crisis rolled out in lock step allows for planning density and living conditions which people would never have accepted before. And the cruelty of the plan is the people themselves call for it.

Incrementally the stacked and packed will have more warning systems and adaption infrastructure to keep "us safe". The infrastructure will be owned by the likes of Blackrock- the people will pay for it. Smaller towns will also need disaster infrastructure. The infrastructure companies i.e. Blackrock will state its too expensive- or there's not enough people to warrant it- or if you want to live there you must pay premium price for the infrastructure.

Insurance will keep going up if you live where there could be, may be (our models tell us so) some unmanageable risk i.e. anywhere close to nature, you will have to keep doing costly upgrades on your home and the yard stick will keep changing. Climate change is "unknowable", a "wicked problem" and what you will be forced to do to keep private property will progress with cruel ferocity. until we are pushed into the stack and packs.

If you're wealthy you may be able to buy into a resilient eco village. In the cities there will be small green spaces- where people get driven crazy with the amount of people occupying the space, people will complain about small children and dogs making noise. To have children and animals will be seen as selfish.

Increasingly people will live lives online, as it somehow will be more bearable. Additional layers of infrastructure will be added to keep "us safe" from cyberattacks, the dense urban living will create endless layers of rolling crises. And they will have successfully created a dystopian hell hole, which the people asked for.

“Climate Change” is the gift that keeps giving for those who want to own it all and control the minute movements of the populace.

That’s not a future I want! And to try to stop it, people are going to need to get involved. Particularly at the local Council level.

I don’t like to give my opinion on something so dire without having the documents to back myself up. So to show why I have reached this opinion, I have pulled out relevant snippets of information from the government plans, and I explain in bite sized pieces what is really being said. There are many plans I have not covered, but this is a start and I think gives an overview of the scope and breadth of what is being planned.

Local Council

As we speak the gears are in motion for Local Council to develop adaption plans i.e. how the towns they are responsible for are going to adapt to climate change in the future. The plans will rely on climate change modelling (how the government is using catastrophic climate change modelling is covered below). I am focusing on NSW, but this is happening all around Australia, just look for the plans in your State or Territory. It will be the same plan.

The draft NSW Disaster Adaptation Plan Guidelines is currently open for consultation. The deadline for the consultation is 23rd August and you can “have your say” here

I think it’s very worthwhile to put in a submission to the government telling them what you think about their plan to redirect infrastructure in to private entity hands, and how you feel about paying for this. You might also consider telling them you don’t have faith in their climate change modelling which relies on the most catastrophic scenarios, or how you’re not comfortable that they’re compounding risks to come up with disaster scores, or how they’re cherry picking different climate models to get the worst possible results for each category of disaster e.g.fire, flood, earthquake. If you do put in a submission- write it and upload it, do not fill this survey out.

This is classic government community consultation. Limiting your response so they can use it to justify their plans.

Back to the Adaption Plan Guidelines (which your local Council- Region will incorporate).

This will cover disaster prevention (based on modelling), preparedness and adaption.

This falls under the remit of the NSW Reconstruction Authority which was formed under the NSW Reconstruction Act 2022. The Act is discussed below (it allows the government to take your land and sell it):

The NSW State Disaster Mitigation Plan was released February 2024 (discussed below). The rationale is that acting early with expensive disaster mitigation infrastructure will save anticipated costs later. It will not save us, the home owners money, instead the disaster mitigation and adaption infrastructure is seen as a shared responsibility, and one we will pay dearly for:

“Place Based” means that the plans will be rolled out in your town, community centred means that there will be a couple of idiotic and simplified community consultation sessions, which people are going to have to work very hard to know are happening. Once you go in to the community consultation session you will be fielded through activities which back up the plan. Your ability to speak will be regulated (potentially through the use of smart tech- where you have to put answers to specific questions in to your phone- these answers are read out by the facilitator). Hint, if you leave your mobile phone at home they may have to hear your voice:

Under the Act the Reconstruction Authority will most likely write the Adaption Plans and they will be rolled out through Council:

The Disaster Adaption Plan will compel Council to follow certain processes and the prescribed partnerships which must be implemented:

Once the plan is written Council must consider this plan in every action they take:

This includes land planning/ zoning. It will drive their priorities and programs:

Regional and District plans will also incorporate the DAPs:

The Disaster Adaption framework comes straight down from the United Nations. Australia has been heavily involved with the United Nations regarding climate change and adaption planning for decades:

Councils across NSW are currently in process of amending their Coastal Management Plans. I went to my local “community consultation” meeting on the plan a few months ago. There were roughly 20 community members and ten staff present. Managed Retreat was on the board- no one asked about it and it was not discussed. The meeting was run through smart tech. I asked staff where they obtained their data regarding ocean rise. I was told Fort Denison which purportedly has shown a 3-4 mm increase per year over last 100 years:

Multiple hazard risks means risks are compounded and used to justify certain measures-note the phrasing “funding opportunities”. No matter where you sit on climate change and climate modelling- everyone should be concerned about the “funding opportunities” aspect to what is occurring.. i.e. who is making money off this and where will assets go (covered below):

The Disaster Adaption Plans will identify preferred pathways for adaption, including managed retreat- note it says this will depend on community support. In other documents outlined below the government talks about forming specific “chosen” community members for panels:

Disaster Philanthropists will be involved in adaption planning and the private sector is front and centre in “Innovative funding pathways”- again, we need to be alert to what the asset transfer will look like:

Living close to nature has inherent risks- it has always had inherent risks. Living in cities also has inherent risks (but this is not such an issue in the stacked and packed new urban agenda). If living near nature is only seen through a risk based lens with catastrophic modelling overlayed, with the stated objective to remove people from risk, does this mean we will be incrementally removed from nature?:

Find your region here:

The DAPs will ensure “early and effective” opportunities for the community to be involved. But, first people have to be aware this is in progress. Why are the representative politicians not letting “their” communities know about the plans in motion?

Members of the “community” will need to get very active shortly, to ensure their voices are heard at these engagement forums and that they are included. Note, that community reference panels will be created as a form of community engagement. Who will be on these panels representing the “community”? The chosen people will speak for you- most likely you will not be told who they are. The NSW State Disaster Plan was released with the grand total of 35 people consulted (who were not representing NGOs or corporate entities)….35 people over two online workshops- to inform a plan with enormous repercussions. The other stakeholders - banking, infrastructure and insurance companies, and the funding dependent NGOs will have a much larger voice than the people affected:

Note this process is top down- we are the last to be engaged with- and the most marginalised. We are fed down the information and our engagement leads nowhere:

The process is: climate change modelling and scenarios are fed in to standing government management plans, options are identified, these options are incorporated in to government plans:

Here are the options (note a trigger for managed retreat is population growth- the government is intentionally increasing population growth through enforced housing numbers:

They are going to incorporate new “innovative” accounting and costing models on our lives; such as incorporating costings on wellbeing, community cohesion etc (I will unpack this further in another article):

They are going to change the legislation:

Curent legislation

In 2022, unbeknown to the majority of NSW residents, The NSW Reconstruction Act 2022 was passed.

The Act allows for pre-emptive disaster measures as well as recovery and reconstruction:

Note water and soil hazards, the government is currently poisoning the environment extensively in Northern NSW and Southern Queensland, airplanes dumping chemicals which are banned in other countries, to kill a specific ant. Note also disaster can mean anything an authority requests assistance for:

The NSW Reconstruction Act 2022 enabled the formation of the Reconstruction NSW Authority to be the overarching body for disaster mitigation, adaption, restoration, rebuilding, community preparedness, housing and infrastructure renewal, rezoning and land use, funding and more. The Authority has to following powers:

The Authority can direct local Council:

The Authority can work with whoever they think is appropriate i.e. global private interests:

The Authority can receive money from private interests and “philanthropists”.. Philanthropists such as Rockefeller- who funded Resilient Sydney?:

A State Disaster Mitigation Plan must be created- The NSW State Disaster Mitigation Plan was released Feb 2024:

The Authority can review this plan, and change it whenever the Minister decrees - an endless shifting landscape:

The Minister can declare parts of NSW to be a disaster prevention area based on their assumption that the area will be directly or indirectly affected by a potential disaster:

Once the Authority has declared a town/ region a disaster prevention area because they are “satisfied” that there is a “likelihood” of a direct or indirect effect from a disaster, they can acquire your home without your permission. The Authority can also acquire your land for a declared project:

They can then do what they want with your land- subdivide, demolish buildings, make the land “fit for any purpose”:

They can then sell your land:

I am unsure what this means- hopefully someone will explain in comments:

NSW State Disaster Mitigation Plan

These two men are charged with transforming our lives to living within a risk averse landscape:

Changing our beautiful country to a land of threats:

Hazards are weather events which have a negative impact i.e. disruption of business, damage to homes, loss of life. Whilst the government can’t stop the weather- they can move people out of their homes, remove infrastructure, create adaption strategies and make everything more “resilient”:

They take all the potential risks (modelling) and the compile them all together to arrive at the most catastrophic risk scoring:

Population growth is blamed for the increase in risks- yet the government keeps fast tracking housing:

Mitigating risks is going to cost a lot of money and some creative accounting will need to take place to assure people that if they don’t pay more now they would definitely, assuredly, probably, possibly need to pay more in the future. One of the key tools for reducing risk is to move people out of their homes and in to more resilient housing and areas- the government gives lip service to the distress this will cause:

Nothing is guaranteed- the yard stick can constantly move. There will no longer be any certainty about our property rights and our ability to keep living in our homes and towns:

These are the risk reduction tools- all relevant tools to be considered for each place:

Insurance will become unaffordable for areas deemed as high risk through climate modelling. Lower and middle income earners will eventually find it too costly to insure their homes. I have covered this previously:

The plan links into a plethora of local, state and federal plans:

The government is working on 37 actions to be implemented in 2024-2025.

These actions cover embedding and upgrading infrastructure to include- evacuation capacity, mitigation, planning tools to assess when a risk becomes unmanageable, warning systems embedded, upgrading of building codes, ensuring people upgrade their homes (home modification), engaging with the community (eye roll!) creating social cohesion, exploring financing from the private sector (otherwise termed innovative funding pathways), and partnering with Aboriginal Land Councils and everyone else they can partner with… and Managed Retreat. The NSW Managed Retreat policy will be released mid 2025. Below are two of the 37 actions:

The government assures us they will CONTINUE to work with the community. Funny that! I don’t think the “community” is even aware of this plan. The government ran two online workshops with 35 community members (who are they? How were they chosen? WHO KNOWS!) to inform the State Disaster plan. What a joke!:

The modelling used for the Disaster Mitigation Plan is the IPCC highest emissions scenario. And even though the climate model may show an area is not at risk- the government is working hard on future models to amp up the risk:

The plan goes on to document every risk possible - combined with extreme modelling for what “might” happen in the future.

A prime example being earthquakes. Though the government states “As NSW is not located near plate boundaries, earthquakes are not as common as in other parts of the world and do not follow easily recognisable patterns” it doesn’t stop them listing all the risks and noting that the increase in population means more risk to life.

Population growth is continuously listed as the main risk for disasters. However, this doesn’t stop the government from relentlessly pushing out stack and pack policies.

Here is an interesting graph on Australia’s projected population:

The NSW plan outlines the 20 most at risk Local Government Areas (LGA) for the State. Interestingly 17 of these 20 LGAs are located in the recently created 6 mega city region- which is set to transform our towns into a Smart Global Mega City with industry specific precincts. The areas are identified due to potential hazards and the density of homes.

The Central Coast is number 1 on the list- the government is very busy building more dense housing in the area:

Here are the most at risk LGA’s in NSW:

Risk reduction is about costly infrastructure:

The winners and losers are discussed here. Based on the government’s track record no genuine collaboration occurs with the community. At best- if the people catch the whiff of a community consultation meeting, hidden as best the government can, and therefore attend- they are Delphi’d. Nudged and moved through a series of processes so the Council run event can walk away with statements from the community which endorse the government plan. When it comes to “communities” voices (real community- not the chosen by government community type) sitting side by side with industry- you’d have to be rather naive to believe there is any real voice for those affected by the plans- unless they endorse the proposed pathway:

Here they discuss relocating communities together. Under the justification of “keeping communities together” I foresee that managed retreat is large scale, and buy backs will be contingent on moving into resilient cities and compounds:

NSW Councils are in process of updating their Coastal Management Plans (get involved with yours- this includes managed retreat):

The government is working on policies to use private sector money to relocate us, once we have been forced out of our houses. The private sector will then get the land to develop. How convenient:

Mitigation is potentially too costly so other measures need to be considered (Managed Retreat). No measure can 100 percent assure that no hazard will ever disturb our homes and lives. We are on a slippery slope, the government can do whatever they want:

Government is going to privatise infrastructure (that which isn’t already privatised), and the infrastructure companies will have a big say in whether they keep servicing towns/ areas:

Nature Based Mitigation (let’s not forget Rockefeller is working out how to trade Eco System Services on the stock market):

What will the private sector receive in return for funding disaster risk reduction infrastructure? Who is going to pay? How will the ordinary Australian person afford to pay more on top of high mortgages, rising land tax, Council rates, food, energy bills?:

Insurance on homes has risen sharply and is increasingly unaffordable. As people are no longer able to pay insurance this will be used as justification (a trigger) for managed retreat:

The world’s population must accept that we are now in the era of rolling crises-the governments of the world are going to increasingly control the population under this narrative. It is referred to as the “Wicked Problem” otherwise called a Blank Cheque:

This is an excerpt from a recently released Australian government report- Strengthening Australian Democracy. Of relevance here is, rolling crises will be used as the justification to circumvent any veneer of democracy (just think of the brutality unleashed on the people during covid- I will cover this disturbing report in a future article):

As technological solutions are incorporated in to the adaptation plans, it opens up a whole other layer of global centralised plans:

Federal National Adaption Plan

Adaption plans will endlessly change. They will become increasingly cost prohibitive for the home owner. They can (and will) accelerate at any point with worst case scenario modelling:

Government as we know it must change- there will be more partnerships. Think corporate governance- as well as Aboriginal Land Council governance (this will have to be for another article- suffice to say there is heavy corporate influence embedded within Land Councils):

When they talk about place based, they are referring to honing down on your town to enforce specific climate modelling adaption plans and/or managed retreat strategies:

Managed retreat.. “deep consultation” ….I wonder what that will look like? Considering the government track record of ignoring the community and using community consultation as a tick box exercise and considering the community has to be diligent to even be aware there is a consultation planned- I don’t hold any hope that this will be genuinely consultative.

Modelling:

Climate change risk to be incorporated in to every plan- down to individual people living in houses:

To keep getting insurance you will have to do costly disaster mitigation upgrades to your house:

Private capital will be supported and there will be a financial opportunity, the people will pay:

Every house will have a climate risk notice upon it:

This will lead to house prices falling:

As documented here:

And here:

Enabling Resilient Investment approach:

The natural environment is considered infrastructure- green and blue (water):

Climate adaption policies are underway and the public are responsible for this, the government will create the legislation which we are bound by:

The government is privatising nature:

The Australian government is changing the way food is processed (i.e. synthetic interventions- see my synthetic food transformation video):

There is a lot more in the National plan, including State and Territory plans.

Infrastructure

Who owns the infrastructure, and who is going to be the winners in the government disaster mitigation plans? Let’s listen to BlackRock’s Larry Fink for a moment.

Fink states:

• The future of the private market is going to be infrastructure.

• Increasingly government funding deficits from their own balance sheets is going to become increasingly difficult. Fink is in conversation with many governments re public private transactions.

• The power grid is being recalibrated as they digitalise everything.

• Trillions of dollars of investment needed.

• The world’s capital markets are going to become a dominant component of economic activity amongst countries and across the world.

• Much heavier reliance on private capital to co invest with companies, governments and infrastructure.

Here is another video focusing on Blackrock and infrastructure:

With Larry Fink’s words in mind, lets look at the Australian governments Infrastructure Resilience framework:

In a disaster/ risk/ hazard landscape infrastructure is being reframed. It is now a shared responsibility:

Australian infrastructure is aging, it needs a reboot. Larry Fink’s is right- the government will no longer be able to pay for infrastructure. Marry this with the shocks and stresses- the rolling crises- era the narrative now asserts we live within. Note Resilient Sydney is referred to, this is a Rockefeller initiative:

Low to middle income private property owners and renters who enjoy a less dense environment will be those whose interests will be traded off by the government and their private partners:

This reads to me as: when lower and middle income people are forced to sell their homes for chips due to climate change modelling forecasts, the socio economic situation may change and there will be more ability for adaptive measures to be put in place. Is this because the “high net value” individuals and corporations will be the ones buying the coveted land, and they can afford the expensive adaption plans?:

Too many Australian’s still think Smart Cities are a conspiracy theory- even though the PM Malcolm Turnbull released a Smart Cities Plan in 2016. This plan allowed for the streamlining of the three levels of government to work together (sounds sensible on the surface), and in this context wide spread changes to private property will be enacted from local to federal:

The plan argues priorities need to shift- namely the traditional view that corporations and governments bear risks whilst individuals have the benefits of home ownership. This must be reconsidered in an era of rolling crises. What do you think is being implied here?:

Nature is now seen as infrastructure- this of course leads to private ownership, or overlays of ownership, on the land and water that is currently seen as the commons. This again needs future unpacking. Suffice to say it leads perfectly into Rockefeller plans to trade Eco-System services on the stock market:

And here is The Australian government (in process) Nature Repair Market:

Coming back to the privatising of infrastructure we see the following reports:

Financial Review outlines Larry Fink’s purchase of Global Infrastructure Partners, which owns Sydney airport, Brisbane and Melbourne Ports

Our public assets will be sold off, either outright or through deceptive public- private- partnership arrangements:

Australia is a member of the G20:

Related government plans (this is not exhaustive)

Federal National Climate Resilience and Adaption Strategy

More plans and frameworks:

The Second National Action Plan, released by the National Emergency Management Agency:

According to Murray Watt MP- we asked for it. The government can only deliver. Repeat after Murray “We are all in this together!”:

Regarding payouts for floods, in previous years the government was giving out money to people who claimed their house was affected by flooding. You didn’t have to show proof- I found this strange at the time but it now makes sense. What happens when the government gives away “free” money with no proof needed? A whole bunch of unaffected people applied for money and gave the government the justification to now state how unaffordable it is to allow people to live in risk areas.

Goobly gook to justify “resilient” - Smart Housing:

Every home is to have a hazard mitigation plan:

Investment strategies for the private sector:

What’s the bet this submission was written by an infrastructure company?:

Everyday working Australians (not the high asset class) are already going out backwards with pricing increases on everything (mortgage, rates, power, food etc.), at the same time the government is signing us up for extensive cost sharing initiatives, in a rapidly shifting (they can change the plans whenever they want) environment:

National Disaster Risk Reduction Framework

Again, funding pathways will be opened up for private infrastructure companies:

National Climate Risk Assessment

Note though risks may be implausible they will still be factored in. Risk is uncertain, therefore the worst case scenario must be used and acted upon:

People will be unable to pay for the ever increasing adaption strategies:

People will be fielded into mental health services as they lose their connection to their homes and access to (dangerous) nature due to adaption and managed retreat policies:

Climate change modelling is increasingly used as the justification for lab created food:

Rural and remote communities:

We are increasingly under a Biosecurity model- pests are now blamed on climate change. In Australia wide spread poisoning of the environment and culling of insects and animals is continuously rolling out. Australia alone in past two years has killed millions of bees, sprayed poisons on urban, farming land and forests to kill the red fire ant, and is now in process of killing chickens:

As the adaption plans roll out the vast majority of people’s capacity to afford to live in their homes will be decreased. The answer will be to move people into densely packed areas, away from the natural environment. This will lead to a breakdown in social cohesion, the conditions necessary for another layer of disaster infrastructure to be implemented:

The National Climate Risk Assessment is informed by the Australian Climate Service:

NSW Climate Change Adaption Strategy

The strategy has 4 priorities:

1. Develop robust and trusted metrics and information on climate change risk

2. Complete climate change risk and opportunity assessments

3. Develop and deliver adaptation action plans

4. Embed climate change adaptation in NSW Government decision-making:

The rationale:

They’re coming in early- using fear tactics to push ahead regardless of certainty that their projections are correct. Rather tellingly is the emphasis that NSW is a “preferred place to do business”:

People who live in NSW are considered Stakeholders, so reframe this sentence… “Building climate change resilience will take significant resources from the people who live in NSW over many decades”:

NSW Government will focus on compounding, cumulative and cascading risks- a blank cheque for calling anything they want to climate change:

It’s time to wrap up this article. In future articles I will cover- the climate modelling used and the Climate Risk Group which the Government is partnering with, Green Bonds, Democracy and creating a market on social cohesion and wellbeing.

For now, people of NSW it’s time to engage with the documents, form small groups (you only need 2 or 3 other people) in your local council area and start to get strategic regarding the Coastal Management Plans and the upcoming Disaster Adaption Plans.

The Global Commons

https://iaindavis.com/global-commons-part-1/

https://iaindavis.com/global-commons-part-2/

https://odysee.com/@InThisTogether:d/Seizing-The-Global-Commons:8

Resources (a place holder for documents which I haven’t covered):

https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp2223/Chronologies/climatechange2021

https://www.fnqroc.qld.gov.au/files/media/original/005/2d5/17d/ea9/COAG---roles-respsonsibilities-climate-change-adaptation.pdf

https://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/climate-change-adaptation/report/23-climate-change-adaptation-appendixb.pdf

https://interconnectedrisks.org/solutions

https://www.nsw.gov.au/grants-and-funding/infrastructure-betterment-fund

https://www.qra.qld.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-09/Betterment%20paper%202021.pdf

https://credconsulting.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Cred-Consulting_Social-Cohesion-Local-Government-Resource.pdf

https://www.centreforpublicimpact.org/insights/unlocking-public-wealth-cities

https://www.ipart.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/cm9_documents/Draft-Terms-of-Reference-for-NSW-council-financial-model-review-January-2024.PDF