Melbourne Water’s new flood risk register is a timely attempt to confront the escalating threats posed by climate change, but its fairness and implementation will determine whether it protects communities or penalises them.
The plan to assign every property a hazard rating from 1 to 6, underpinned by street-by-street analysis and drain mapping, is a useful planning tool. Yet technical precision alone does not resolve the practical and social consequences of labelling homes as high risk.
For many homeowners, being placed in a higher category is not an abstract statistic; it can translate into higher insurance premiums, depressed property values, and limits on future development. Insurers historically applied broad-brush assessments to entire suburbs. These new maps promise to distinguish lower-risk pockets — potentially speeding approvals for safe development — but they also risk creating winners and losers within the same community.
The devastating Maribyrnong floods of 2022 exposed how failures in stormwater networks and deferred maintenance can amplify harm. Melbourne Water’s suggestion to nearly double the stormwater maintenance budget is welcome, yet insufficient on its own. Substantial investment is required: upgrades to drains and pumping infrastructure, targeted flood mitigation works, and ongoing systematic maintenance to ensure drainage systems perform under extreme events.
Government must pair mapping with financial supports. Grants should be available for household retrofits such as elevating electrical systems, flood proofing doors and installing barriers. Insurance subsidies or risk-pooling mechanisms would prevent vulnerable households from bearing disproportionate costs. A dedicated resilience fund, to which state and local governments contribute alongside private partners, could finance both community-scale infrastructure and individual assistance programs.
Transparency and due process are essential. Residents must have access to the data underpinning their ratings, clear explanations of what each category means in practical terms, and a credible appeals process to correct errors. Local councils such as Darebin and Yarra need guidance and resources to embed these assessments into planning frameworks without producing arbitrary development bans that hurt ordinary families.
Ultimately, climate adaptation policy should be judged by its capacity to distribute costs fairly and to build resilience in the places that need it most. The register could become an invaluable tool if paired with investment, social protections and community engagement. Without those measures, it risks becoming another instrument that stigmatizes vulnerable areas and shifts responsibility from public authorities to individual homeowners.
Clear timetables, measurable targets and independent oversight should accompany the register to ensure accountability and tangible reductions in flood exposure for every Melbourne community. If policymakers truly aim to protect lives and livelihoods, they must move beyond colour-coded maps and commit to concrete funding, robust infrastructure, and social solidarity. Anything less would be a failure of governance at a moment when leadership matters most.
