There have been many reports in the media regarding property mitigation for cyclones, and someone has asked me exactly what mitigation is. In this case mitigation means doing work on a property in order to reduce any damage that may happen during a cyclone. It can be as simple as taking down any outside sails, bringing in outside furniture and toys, or as complicated as replacing old rooves with new rooves and joists, and tie down points to prevent damage. The good thing about mitigation is that proper risk assessment has to take place in order to identify anything that can be done to reduce damage. Currently risk is assumed and not assessed!! The bad things about mitigation are: the cost; and there’s no proof at the moment it has any affect what-so-ever on premiums – ask the Townsville man who replaced his roof and joists, added tie downs, and had absolutely no reduction in premium!! I believe mitigation procedures in the long term may only reduce premiums by about 10-15%, that’s $400 on a premium of $4,000. It still comes down to whether $3,600 is justifiable or affordable. Spending $20,000 - $30,000 on a new roof in order to save 10% on your premium and to save a “possible” claim of $50,000 for an insurance company is an impossible sale. Mitigation has been pushed hard by the Insurance Council of Australia, who totally believe this is the one and only solution. I believe the only way mitigation can be a major feature considered for reducing insurance premiums is if the cost is paid for by the insurance companies themselves. After all it is their money we’re supposedly saving. I do not believe under any circumstances either the State or Federal Governments should be subsidising mitigation projects in order to save insurance companies money. Insurance companies make enough profits to pay for the mitigation they deem required. Government money can be better spent elsewhere.