A ‘state of disaster’ is not symbolism. It is what happens when climate risks are ignored. Climate emergency declarations were about prevention, preparation and responsibility, whereas the ‘disaster declarations’ we see now are about damage control because prevention has failed.
“A state of emergency has been declared across 18 local councils, and the state government has made disaster relief grants available to the thousands of people affected by the fires.”
~ The Age on 10 Januar 2026
You may have seen reports that 18 councils in Victoria are now under a “state of emergency”. What has actually happened is this: the Victorian State Government has declared a ‘state of disaster’ across 18 local government areas due to severe and fast-moving bushfires. However, to the journalists this is all a bit of a blur, so apparently they can’t be bothered to double-check whether they are using the correct wording.
This state of disaster declaration was made by Premier Jacinta Allan under Victoria’s emergency management laws, and it applies to whole regions, not because individual councils chose to act, but because the scale of danger to life and property required state-level powers.
A State of Disaster is a legal tool used when an emergency is actively unfolding. It allows the state to order evacuations, restrict movement in and out of dangerous areas, coordinate police, fire and health services under a single command, and temporarily override rules that would otherwise slow down emergency response. In practical terms, this can mean roads being closed, people being directed to leave their homes, emergency resources being rapidly redirected, and councils effectively stepping back from normal business while the focus is entirely on protecting lives.
A concrete example is what is happening right now in bushfire-affected shires. Residents are being told when to leave, where they can and cannot travel, and emergency services are operating with expanded authority to manage a crisis that is already destroying homes and threatening communities. This is an acknowledgement that the normal systems are no longer sufficient.
How Climate Emergency Declarations differ
This is very different from the climate emergency declarations many councils were asked to make during the 2016–2026 “Declare a climate emergency” campaign. Those declarations were not about immediate evacuation powers or disaster law. They were about recognising climate change as a real and escalating risk, and committing councils to plan, prepare and reduce harm through mitigation and adaptation.
Australia’s first council to do so was Darebin City Council in 2016. Many others refused, arguing that climate change was too abstract, too political, or not relevant to their local area. “We know it’s an emergency, but does it help to say so?”, people asked at the time.
What we are seeing now, ten years further down the track, is the lived reality of that argument collapsing. The emergency powers now in force exist because climate-intensified disasters are no longer theoretical. Bushfires are larger, hotter and harder to control. Communities are being displaced. Emergency services are stretched to their limits.
The uncomfortable truth is that a State of Disaster is what happens when long-term risks are not taken seriously early enough. Since we started the call for local climate emergency declarations in 2016, the declarations have been accused of being symbolism, greenwashing, and virtue-signalling. For instance, in Port Macquarie-Hastings Council, the declaration was rescinded after a councillor argued it was a misuse of council resources. Similar moves have been made by councils in the United Kingdom.
In reality, climate emergency declarations have always been about prevention, preparation and responsibility, where as the ‘disaster declarations’ of 2026 are about damage control because the prevention has failed.
For those councils that once voted against declaring a climate emergency, this moment should prompt honest reflection. Declaring a climate emergency was never about words on a page, or disguised support for The Greens. It was about acknowledging reality before reality forces the issue.
If your community is now covered by a state-declared disaster zone, it is not too late to admit past mistakes and correct course. Planning for climate risk is not ideology or virtue-signalling. Using the correct wording is an essential responsibility for any authority or media person. It is basic duty of care.
For a start, it would make a big difference if authorities had the guts to call this what it is: a ‘state of climate diaster’.
“In fact, it is astonishing that we have so little imagination and such a poorly developed emotional life that we are not constantly filled with horror at the thought that our abundance may very well have been bought at the cost of our grandchildren’s and great-grandchildren’s chances of a decent life.”
~ Ole Jensen (1937–2021)
Sunrise’s report on 10 Januar 2026
→ The Age – 10 January 2025:
Devastation as 130 buildings destroyed, crops razed and livestock lost
“Fierce winds and hot weather have sparked more than 200 fires in every corner of the state, leaving a trail of destruction and dozens on towns on high alert.”
