Somewhat like the greenies trying to introduce container deposit legislation, every time a government tries to do something about improving building standards the usual suspects jump up and down screaming "Think about the extra cost for working families"

Back in 2007 the then state Labour government had drafted legislation requiring all new housing to be designed so that rainwater tanks or grey water recycling systems could be easily retrofitted. Something like the internal piping had to be set up during the building process and all houses with 3 or more bathrooms or a swimming pool had to actually instal the water tanks or recycling system. This was due to come into effect by 2009. And guess who scrapped the whole lot of these excellent rules when they got elected in 2008?
It is more than likely that the same fate would have awaited any attempt to change the building standards to make houses more fire proof when in such high fire risk areas. But it would have added $20,000 plus to the price of a new house. Here's guessing that $20,000 is looking like a good investment now. Of course there are no guarantees when there's lots of highly flammable trees, winds and a sizzling summer day. Hilly areas are especially vulnerable even in places that get nowhere near as hot as Perth

So now even if people can rebuild to a safer standard, there's still the fear of the next fire always lurking, the worry that the supply of potential buyers will dry up but worst of all the probability that insurance premiums will increase enormously and be unaffordable but essential like flood cover in Queensland

Heard the tennis players saying the other day that playing at 40 something in Melbourne is much preferable to 30 something in Brisbane thanks to that awful humidity. Izzie can so so relate to that