Bushfire Royal commission recs

While the Commission fails to get the disaster paradigm of February Fires into perspective, many of the interim recommendations are welcome ( see below )eg Support strongly1-4,16,17,38,39,44.
Point is, if the Commission can't say that "we have a problem because we are not allowed to say to people "you are living in an impossible risk situation" we will still have the problem. What do you expect the police to do now that the emergency commisioner esplin has ruled out of order any discussion on what he didn't organise ?
That a BIG paradigm problem remains is also evident in the very patchwork and very weak nature of the recommendations noted in the warning chapters; the unnecessary lack of clarity and confusion over what constitutes “good information”.Such confusion is totally uneccesary !
The failure of the commission to tackle intractable Command and control sensibilities up the line could be addressed by Subpoena -ing more outsiders to talk to practical realities. Otherwise, more of the same "bottleneck" problems for incident controllers can be expected .
The commission need to focus much more clearly on what constitutes good information (Far more important than warning issue )
For example, just the knowledge of local fire origins and changing local wind MUST be broadcast on Radio - this is not expensive or difficult if someone is authorised to do it ( rather than rely on the controller SEE BELOW ). Remember if you wait for "the situation people" to publish ALL the details of fire "where and where its headed to " it can take too long .Besides let the people make their own decisions 4:61:4;62. on the basis of limited but verifiable info - leave the speculation to later or the truly local .
The web , for example is seen in the report as a monitoring mechanism ( a good one -has spatial advantage over radio but not as reliable or accountable or nearly as quick as a dedicated radio service in your area on TFB days ) Loss of mains power is normal and websites reliance on confirmed “situation “reports means it will always be slow. Info on local wind changes is also critical to good information ( but not easy to give out) and some other source can feed the dedicated radio reporter who should be set up in your area ( Recommendation 26 under 4:23 in warnings report )
Alternatively the high cost benefit of broadcast fire reports is not highlighted even though local radios can be heard for all those on relocation and with external information sources- wind changes (BOM site). When you warn is another matter.
( RADIO reports: they can be got immediately in car ,shelter through all radio mediums esp if no other reports are broadcast on a loop without interruption )
My suggestions for change for this season (for a start) - make for some improvement easily and effectively.
1. Make sure Fire controllers authorise the "immediate" publication of fire locations on days of TFB .( a report issued to media within 15 minutes of site being located )
2. Make sure RA review whether "situation reports" are processed fast enough with a view to making sure something goes out within 15 minutes.
3. RA must be given authority/ responsibility to issue media reports on a very frequent basis and not focused so much on the web / or any other medium as the answer.
4. Legislate if necessary to make sure one truly local radio broadcaster or broadcasters are required to run fulltime reports if there is a fire or extensive smoke on days of TFB. Recommendation 26 under 4:23 in warnings report see comments below on the role of community radio-esp as a practical and reliable dedicated service provider. Tell the public about all the options for them and not just the ABC !!!!
5. Give the police and other RA’s the authority to give (without fear or favour independent )evacuation advice – both early (Rec 15) and late