moneypenny20

I don't think there will be anyone who gets nothing, insured or not. The government are not making any distinctions about what they are giving out now. Everyone is being treated the same at the moment, let's hope it continues.

renth

If the uninsured are going to get their houses rebuilt from donated cash then the insured should have the choice of whether to claim on their insurance or take the handout and protect their no claims and excess, a bit like with medical insurance.

NKSK version 2

Good point - but I'm still not happy about my cash being used for this purpose.

quoll

I was talking about the recovery of the community as a whole - the differential treatment of one group over another has been a huge barrier in past disasters - one of the major cleavage planes in fact. When the aim is to restore the "community" then assistance has to be targeted so that it benefits the whole community and not just some parts of it. It's a very difficult process and lots of good intentions can have very bad unintended consequences unfortunately. When people differentiate is when you get the problems for the whole community. Often the best way is for the community to make the decisions about how the resources can best be used to help them all.

I would also like people to remember that there are other victims in this as well - those who are left in the communities which have been largely decimated. We often forget them because they still have their homes. Sure they do but they are probably living without power or water, scared witless that some d*ckhead looter will come and clear up their stuff if they leave their homes, their view from every window being of charred ruins and the constant smell of burn. Then they will have to bear living in a perpetual building site of dirt and noise while everything is cleared away and new buildings eventually erected. They are victims too and often ones with huge levels of survivor guilt which can be emotionally crippling. I hope that they also get the support and arent sidelined.

Wendy

I agree M.

I would (and do) have buildings insurance, but if mine and my neighbours house both burned to the ground and she didn't have any insurance I wouldn't care if they got more of a handout than me.

I gave to the appeal freely, knowing that there would be a 'task force' who would distribute the cash as they saw fit. I trust that they will try to be fair to all of the victims of this tragedy and if my money goes to someone who wasn't insured, I would be just as glad that I could help them than I would if they had been insured.

Evelin

Strangely that fire insurance for properties in this country is not compulsory. If everybody had to have it, it would be cheap.

Where I come from fire insurance was compulsory when purchasing a property however it has changed now.

sj oldfield

I voted 'dont know'...............I am not in that situation...Thank God

Sherpa

Well all houses insured will be rebuilt and paid from insurance money and its the peoples donations and they have already decided that they want to donate to all those who have suffered from this natural disaster so give the money out and show the world we are a civilized nation !

renth

I wouldn't have donated cash if I thought it was to rebuild uninsured houses.

Sherpa

Much much more has been lost than a few uninsured houses like many many lives which is a good enough reason for your donation and good for you that you did donate because you showed compasion to others so dont let the idle gossip of the media spoil your gift enjoy the good deed you have done and oneday when your in needs of compasion it will come to you .

Cheers

quoll

Unfortunately it doesnt work like that in real life. When you are stressed to the max all rational thought seems to go out the window - often because about that time in your bereavement cycle you would be looking for someone to blame and going through the anger phase. It would be lovely if we could all be happy and rational, a whole lot more could be done, but it's far more complex sadly.

The Bloke

I don't know, but since 9/11, insurance premiums seem to have gone up quite abit, and if predictions are to be believed, after the floods and fires, it maybe nearly financially impossible to insure in rural areas. http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/s...51-953,00.html

sjo

I don't know about in Victoria, but in NSW if you are not insured and a low income earner and your home is lost/damaged through disaster, then DoCS Disaster Relief Scheme will pay to rebuild it/repair it and replace basic contents. http://www.community.nsw.gov.au/DOCS...ments/cdrf.pdf

MartinLuther

I put no because the CFA is part funded out of insurance so if you encourage people not to have insurance then there's less money for the CFA leading to less capability to fight fires, etc.... a potentially vicious circle.

On the other hand I would be happy to see the money used to assist people to build fire-proof/resistant homes or improve their existing homes or anything else that would reduce or eliminate the death toll of these events.

The Bloke

For major disasters, the Feds pick up the tab for things like that under NDRA (National Disaster Relief Arrangement), plus costs incurred by state authorities in disaster relief, when the bill exceeds the amount covered at state level.