IFMP – What’s in a name?

Recently at CFA, we held a workshop on IFMP. This workshop was well attended by a range of people from across the areas and regions and included representatives from VFBV and others with an interest. You may be wondering about the term IFMP; what are we trying to achieve and why is it so important that we get on and start implementing what has after all been a long time in the planning.

How well do we all understand Integrated Fire Management Planning? And how many of you know what that acronym really means?

I have discussed this issue with many people and a number of alarm bells repeatedly go off for me. Firstly, there is a tendency for people to think that IFMP is really fire prevention re-badged, and that it is a just different way of making fire prevention work at municipal and regional level.

Secondly, because it is new, it is perceived that IFMP will fix everything! Time and time again I hear….”but IFMP will fix that, or…that’s a problem for IFMP”. For some reason, we seem to be putting implicit faith in something that is not even operating yet. Clearly, from the wide variety of comments and points of view I get when I talk about IFMP, we do not have a really consistent view of the outcomes we can expect or of the way things will be done.

When confronted by such inconsistencies, it is wise to go back to first principles. The idea of IMFP resulted in two key recommendations in the Victorian Bushfire Inquiry in 2003.

These were that fire planning had to change from being separately perceived in the terms of prevention and response. In other words, fire planning needed to work across the full spectrum of prevention, preparedness, response and recovery (PPRR). The other key recommendation related to land tenure. Fire prevention planning has traditionally separated between land managed by DSE (the public estate) and by CFA (the private estate). Although currently some efforts are made to pull this together, generally this occurs at the end of the planning process, not at the beginning.

To be successful, IFMP must address these two inherent weaknesses in our current planning arrangements. IFMP is not just about wildfire, but inclusive of all other risks, seeking to treat the risks appropriately across the full PPRR spectrum. The result should be a usable plan for whoever needs to use it, not just the fire services. The very process of making the plan will improve our knowledge and appreciation of the issues as the focus of planning will be much broader and more holistic.

Over the next year or so, we will be working together to begin implementation across a range of municipalities in Victoria. We will not get it perfectly right first time, every time. However, if we understand what we are trying to do and the improvements we are trying to achieve, a real opportunity for innovation and a new way of doing things emerges.

So think again about that title:

• Integrated – across land tenure, and involving everybody;
• Fire – not just wildfire but all fire;
• Management – not just prevention, but managing across the full PPRR spectrum; and
• Planning – a process that we all learn from and a plan that we will all use.

IFMP will not be the panacea to all our problems, but it is a way forward towards a safer Victoria.

Russell Rees
Chief Officer