I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Civil Defence and Emergency Management
Group Committee will be held on:
|
Date:
Time:
Meeting Room:
Venue:
|
Tuesday, 25
August 2015
10.00am
Room 1, Level
26
135 Albert Street
Auckland CBD
|
|
Civil Defence and Emergency Management
Group Committee
OPEN AGENDA
|
MEMBERSHIP
|
Chairperson
|
Sharon Stewart, QSM
|
|
|
Deputy Chairperson
|
Bill Cashmore
|
|
|
Members
|
Cr Alf Filipaina
|
|
|
|
Cr Denise Krum
|
|
|
|
Cr Calum Penrose
|
|
|
|
Member David Taipari
|
|
|
|
Cr Sir John Walker, KNZM, CBE
|
|
|
|
Member Karen Wilson
|
|
|
|
Cr George Wood, CNZM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ex-officio
|
Mayor Len Brown, JP
|
|
|
|
Deputy Mayor Penny Hulse
|
|
(Quorum 3 members)
|
|
|
Louis Dalzell
Democracy Advisor
19 August 2015
Contact Telephone: (09) 890 8135
Email: elaine.stephenson@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
|
The Civil Defence Emergency Management Group Committee will
be responsible for:
·
Being Auckland’s strategic forum for civil
defence and emergency management planning and policy;
·
Establishing an emergency management structure
for the Auckland region;
·
Develop, approve, implement and monitor the
Auckland Civil Defence Emergency Management Group Plan;
·
Performing the statutory functions of a civil
defence emergency management group;
·
Representing Auckland in the development of
national emergency management policy;
·
Developing policy for, and monitoring, the
Auckland Council’s civil defence, emergency management and natural hazards
functions; and
·
Engaging with Local Boards on civil defence and
emergency management issues.
The Civil Defence Emergency Management Group Committee will
exercise the statutory powers outlined in the Civil Defence Emergency
Management Act 2002 and the Auckland Civil Defence Emergency Management Group
Plan.
The Civil Defence Emergency Management Group Committee is
authorised to approve use of the established emergency funding facility
provided for emergency management.
Relevant legislation includes but is not
limited to:
Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002; and
Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996.
Exclusion of the public – who needs to
leave the meeting
Members of the public
All members of the public must leave the
meeting when the public are excluded unless a resolution is passed permitting a
person to remain because their knowledge will assist the meeting.
Those who are not members of the public
General principles
·
Access to confidential information is managed on a “need to know”
basis where access to the information is required in order for a person to
perform their role.
·
Those who are not members of the meeting (see list below) must
leave unless it is necessary for them to remain and hear the debate in order to
perform their role.
·
Those who need to be present for one confidential item can remain
only for that item and must leave the room for any other confidential items.
·
In any case of doubt, the ruling of the chairperson is final.
Members of the meeting
·
The members of the meeting remain (all Governing Body members if
the meeting is a Governing Body meeting; all members of the committee if the
meeting is a committee meeting).
·
However, standing orders require that a councillor who has a
pecuniary conflict of interest leave the room.
·
All councillors have the right to attend any meeting of a
committee and councillors who are not members of a committee may remain,
subject to any limitations in standing orders.
Independent Māori Statutory Board
·
Members of the Independent Māori
Statutory Board who are appointed members of the committee remain.
·
Independent Māori Statutory Board
members and staff remain if this is necessary in order for them to perform
their role.
Staff
·
All staff supporting the meeting (administrative, senior
management) remain.
·
Other staff who need to because of their role may remain.
Local Board members
·
Local Board members who need to hear the matter being discussed
in order to perform their role may remain. This will usually be if the matter
affects, or is relevant to, a particular Local Board area.
Council Controlled Organisations
·
Representatives of a Council Controlled Organisation can remain
only if required to for discussion of a matter relevant to the Council Controlled
Organisation.
|
Civil Defence
and Emergency Management Group Committee
25 August 2015
|
|
ITEM TABLE OF
CONTENTS PAGE
1 Apologies 7
2 Declaration of Interest 7
3 Confirmation of Minutes 7
4 Petitions 7
5 Public Input 7
6 Local Board Input 7
7 Extraordinary Business 7
8 Notices of Motion 8
9 Orewa Rotary Open Awareness Day & Survey 9
10 Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management National
Strategy 11
11 Auckland Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group Plan
Review Update 13
12 Localised Storm Event 15 July 2015 - Corrective Actions 23
13 Auckland Council Civil Defence and Emergency Management
Department Work Programme Update 27
14 Rural Fire Update 33
15 Community Driven Initiative: Connect Four 43
16 Public Alerting Systems Update 47
17 Amendments to the National Civil Defence and Emergency
Management Plan Order 2015 51
18 Consideration of Extraordinary Items
Apologies from
Cr DA Krum and Deputy Mayor PA Hulse have been received.
2 Declaration of Interest
Members are
reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision making when a
conflict arises between their role as a member and any private or other
external interest they might have.
3 Confirmation of Minutes
|
That the Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group Committee:
a)
confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting,
held on Tuesday, 16 June 2015, including the
confidential section, as a true and correct record.
|
4 Petitions
At the close of
the agenda no requests to present petitions had been received.
5 Public Input
Standing Order
7.7 provides for Public Input. Applications to speak must be made to the
Democracy Advisor, in writing, no later than one (1) clear working day
prior to the meeting and must include the subject matter. The meeting
Chairperson has the discretion to decline any application that does not meet
the requirements of Standing Orders. A maximum of thirty (30) minutes
is allocated to the period for public input with five (5) minutes
speaking time for each speaker.
At the close of
the agenda no requests for public input had been received.
6 Local Board Input
Standing Order
6.2 provides for Local Board Input. The Chairperson (or nominee of that
Chairperson) is entitled to speak for up to five (5) minutes during this
time. The Chairperson of the Local Board (or nominee of that Chairperson)
shall wherever practical, give one (1) day’s notice of their wish to
speak. The meeting Chairperson has the discretion to decline any application
that does not meet the requirements of Standing Orders.
This right is
in addition to the right under Standing Order 6.1 to speak to matters on the
agenda.
At the close of
the agenda no requests for local board input had been received.
7 Extraordinary Business
Section 46A(7)
of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended)
states:
“An item that is
not on the agenda for a meeting may be dealt with at that meeting if-
(a) The local authority by resolution so decides; and
(b) The presiding member explains at the meeting, at a time
when it is open to the public,-
(i) The
reason why the item is not on the agenda; and
(ii) The reason why the discussion of the item cannot be
delayed until a subsequent meeting.”
Section 46A(7A)
of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended)
states:
“Where an item
is not on the agenda for a meeting,-
(a) That item may be discussed at that meeting if-
(i) That item is a minor matter relating to the general
business of the local authority; and
(ii) the presiding member explains at the beginning of the
meeting, at a time when it is open to the public, that the item will be
discussed at the meeting; but
(b) no resolution, decision or recommendation may be made in
respect of that item except to refer that item to a subsequent meeting of the
local authority for further discussion.”
8 Notices of Motion
At the close of
the agenda no requests for notices of motion had been received.
|
Civil Defence
and Emergency Management Group Committee
25 August 2015
|
|
Orewa Rotary
Open Awareness Day & Survey
File No.: CP2015/17255
Purpose
1. The purpose of
this report is to update the committee on the Civil Defence Emergency
Management Rotary partnership and specifically describes an upcoming survey
that Rotary will run in the Orewa area to measure the preparedness of that
community in regards tsunami hazards.
Executive
Summary
2. Auckland
Council Civil Defence and the Auckland Rotary Club entered into a Memorandum of
Understanding in 2013 known as RAD “Rotary adding Depth.”
3. On Saturday 22
August 2015 Rotary are going to run an open awareness day on tsunami risk and
preparedness in Orewa with a pop-up information centre. There will be maps and
reports on the tsunami risk for Orewa and assistance on how to plan evacuation
for residents, neighbourhoods, schools and businesses. The volunteers are also
going to run a survey of residence in the Orewa area to gauge how prepared they
are should a tsunami hit the shores of Orewa.
4. CDEM Staff will
accompany Rotary so that awareness information can be provided to respondents
after the surveys are completed. The questions contained in the survey have
been formalised by Massey University and will provide valuable information as
to risk awareness, readiness and possible areas to improve on.
5. This initiative
is a good example of community partnership and engagement that will contribute
to the readiness of the Orewa community. This model could be employed in other
areas to ensure ready and resilient communities.
|
Recommendation
That the Civil Defence and
Emergency Management Group Committee:
a) endorse the
Rotary open awareness day and survey in Orewa on 22 August 2015
b) attend the
open awareness day if possible.
|
Comments
6. In 2013 a
Memorandum of Understanding was established between Civil Defence and the
Auckland Rotary Club known as RAD “Rotary adding Depth.”
7. The initial
focus was to set up a database which contained all the expertise that could be
available in the time of a disaster and was called CHIP-IN “Can help If
Possible – If needed”.
8. On Saturday 22
August 2015 Rotary are going to run an open awareness day on tsunami risk and
preparedness in Orewa with a pop-up information centre. There will be maps and
reports on the tsunami risk for Orewa and assistance on how to plan evacuation
for residents, neighbourhoods, schools and businesses. The volunteers are also
going to run a survey of residence in the Orewa area to gauge how prepared they
are should a tsunami hit the shores of Orewa.
9. CDEM Staff will
accompany Rotary so that awareness information can be provided to respondents
after the surveys are completed. The questions contained in the survey have
been formalised by Massey University and will provide valuable information as
to risk awareness, readiness and possible areas to improve on.
10. Tom Morton,
Executive Director of the CHIP-In Foundation will be attending the committee
meeting to give the committee a brief update on the event. A report back on the
survey findings will be provided to the committee in due course.
Consideration
Local
Board views and implications
11. For the purposes
of preparing this report no local board views or implications were sought. This
event will be forward to the Hibiscus and Bays local board so they may attend.
12. The results of
this Rotary Survey will be of significance to the local board and the results
will be communicated to the local board verbally and in writing.
Māori
impact statement
13. The views of
Māori were not considered by Rotary nor are impacts on Māori covered
in this report. The Rotary survey makes no distinction between Māori and
non- Māori but, rather, seeks to gain data on the age demographic on the
respondents of this survey.
Implementation
14. There are no
additional resourcing issues arising from this activity. Civil defence staff
time is resourced as part of our community preparedness work programme.
Attachments
There are no attachments for
this report.
Signatories
|
Authors
|
Craig Bosson, Senior Emergency
Management Advisor, Civil Defence & Emergency Management
|
|
Authorisers
|
John Dragicevich - Director Civil Defence and
Emergency Management
|
|
Civil Defence
and Emergency Management Group Committee
25 August 2015
|
|
Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management
National Strategy
File No.: CP2015/16560
Purpose
1. The purpose of this report is to update the committee on the planned
review of the National CDEM Strategy by the Ministry of Civil Defence and
Emergency Management and to detail Auckland Council’s proposed involvement in
this review.
Executive
Summary
2. The Ministry of Civil Defence
and Emergency Management are beginning a review of the National CDEM Strategy
as mandated by the Civil Defence and Emergency Act 2002.
3. The strategy document developed
through this review will shape how New Zealand’s CDEM functions will be
delivered into the future. The National Director CDEM has requested Auckland
CDEM’s involvement in the development of the strategy and this report updates
the committee on this planned review and the proposed Auckland Council
involvement in this process.
|
Recommendation/s
That the Civil Defence and
Emergency Management Group Committee:
a) note the
planned review of the National CDEM Strategy by the Ministry of Civil Defence
and Emergency Management
b) support the
involvement of the CDEM Director and appropriate CDEM staff in this review
|
Comments
4. Under the Civil Defence
Emergency Management Act 2002, the Minister of Civil Defence must complete a
National CDEM Strategy (the Strategy). The Strategy sits within New Zealand’s
wider emergency management framework, which includes the National CDEM Plan and
Guide, and supporting guidelines issued by the national Director CDEM.
5. The Strategy sets out the
overall direction for CDEM in New Zealand. It has a vision of a
‘resilient New Zealand: communities understanding and managing their hazards.’
It also sets out principles and national level goals and objectives.
Collectively, these define what New Zealanders want to achieve through our CDEM
arrangements.
6. Achievement of the vision
defined in the Strategy requires the participation and commitment of the whole
community including central government, local authorities, individual
departments, businesses, volunteer organizations, and individual families.
7. The Strategy was first developed
following introduction of the CDEM Act in 2002 and was revised in 2008. It is a
statutory requirement that it is to be revised and re-issued again before the
end of 2018. This revision will incorporate the lessons from the Christchurch
earthquakes and subsequent amendments to the National CDEM Plan.
8. The review of the Strategy is in
its early stages with terms of reference currently being developed for the
project. However, Sarah Stuart-Black, National Director Civil Defence Emergency
Management, has requested Auckland CDEM’s involvement in this review.
9. CDEM Director, John Dragicevich,
has kindly accepted the National Director’s offer of participation to help
shape the future of New Zealand CDEM through the development of the strategy
and this report seeks committee endorsement for ongoing Auckland Council
involvement in this review.
Consideration
Local
Board views and implications
10. For the purposes of preparing
this report no local board views or implications were sought. Local board views
are regularly sought in regards the functions of CDEM including local hazard
planning, community response planning and community engagement in civil defence
readiness.
11. Local Board views will be sought
through the Auckland CDEM Group Plan review process and will inform Auckland
Council’s involvement and input to this Strategy review, as and when
appropriate.
Māori
impact statement
12. This report seeks committee
approval to commit to input to a national level review the implications for Māori
of this commitment are not yet known. Future discussions on the review of this
Strategy that may have implications for Maori, and the Auckland Plan identified
Maori outcomes, will be considered as the Strategy review is developed.
13. Māori implications and views
that will be sought through the Auckland CDEM Group Plan review process will
inform Auckland Council’s involvement and input into this Strategy review.
Implementation
14. Auckland Council’s involvement in
this Strategy review will be met from within existing staff resources and
available budget.
15. Auckland Council’s involvement in
this review will be regularly reported to this committee as it develops.
Attachments
There are no attachments for
this report.
Signatories
|
Authors
|
Richard Woods - Head of Emergency Management Planning
|
|
Authorisers
|
John Dragicevich - Director Civil Defence and
Emergency Management
|
|
Civil Defence
and Emergency Management Group Committee
25 August 2015
|
|
Auckland Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group
Plan Review Update
File No.: CP2015/17145
Purpose
|
ü Reduction
|
ü Readiness
|
ü Response
|
ü Recovery
|
1. To provide the Auckland Civil
Defence and Emergency Management Group Committee (committee) with an update on
the development of the Auckland Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group
(CDEM) Plan (Group Plan) review and to seek committee endorsement for a
revision of the original proposed timeframes for endorsement.
2. In addition this report provides
an opportunity to update the committee on the upcoming Shaping a Resilient
Auckland symposium scheduled for Thursday 3 September 2015.
Executive
Summary
3. Since the last Group Plan update
to the committee, support has been given by Ministry of Civil Defence &
Emergency Management (MCDEM) to extend the approval date of the new Auckland
CDEM Group Plan (Group Plan) from 1 July 2016, to 31 August 2016.
4. The purpose of this report is to
update the committee on the revision of the original proposed timeframes for
endorsement.
5. In addition, the Auckland CDEM
Group are hosting a Shaping a Resilient Auckland symposium on Thursday 3
September 2015 to understand how we can practically build resilience and reduce
risk from potential shocks and stresses in Auckland over the next 5 years (life
of the Group Plan) and beyond. This symposium will inform the development of
the new Group Plan by applying the Sendai Disaster Risk Reduction framework to
generate high-level objectives for plan.
|
Recommendation
That the Civil Defence and
Emergency Management Group Committee:
a) endorse the extension of the
Auckland Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group Plan timeline, as
supported by MCDEM ,from 1 July 2016 to 31 August 2016.
|
Comments
Extension of the Group Plan timeline
6. At the June 2015 CDEM Group
committee meeting members approved the adjusted Group Plan and refreshed
timelines meaning the statutory consultation process will not begin until 19
January 2016, and will continue until 19 April 2016, the full three months.
This has meant that activities following the statutory consultation process;
formal hearings, development of final Group Plan, delivery to the Minister for
comment (allow twenty working days), and approval by CDEM Group, must take place
over two months in mid-2016.
7. Following the June CDEM Group
committee, Stephen Town, Coordinating Executive Group Chair, wrote to the
Director of MCDEM to clarify the intent to extend the date for approval of the
new Group Plan from 1 July 2016 to 31 August 2016. While a target of 1 July
2016 is feasible, the Auckland CDEM Group is committed to ensuring a more
thorough approach to community engagement is achieved and have sought a small
extension to the timeframes to allow for this to occur. This means that the
existing Group Plan remains in place until that date (CDEM Act 2002, section 55
(b)).
8. The draft Group Plan will be
socialised and endorsed by committee members through two additional
appointments prior to the end on 2015:
· NEW Monday 16 November (1:30pm –
3:30pm) workshop to discuss and agree draft Group Plan. It is proposed all
members receive the draft plan one week prior to the workshop.
· Tuesday 17 November (10am – 12pm)
committee meeting. This meeting is a set calendar meeting.
· NEW Wednesday 16 December
(12:30pm – 1pm) committee meeting to endorse draft Group Plan for statutory
consultation release.
9. This report seeks committee
endorsement for the extension of the Auckland Civil Defence and Emergency
Management Group Plan timeline, as supported by MCDEM, from 1 July 2016 to 31
August 2016.
Shaping a Resilient Auckland symposium
10. The Auckland CDEM Group are
hosting a ‘Shaping a Resilient Auckland’ symposium on Thursday 3 September 2015
to understand how we can practically build resilience and reduce risk from
potential shocks and stresses in Auckland over the next 5 years (life of the
Group Plan) and beyond. The agenda and key details for this symposium are
appended as attachment A to this report.
11. Under the Sendai Disaster Risk
Reduction framework the purpose of the symposium is to develop and agree
high-level objectives for the new Group Plan using the four Sendai framework
priorities:
· Priority 1: Understanding disaster risk.
· Priority 2: Strengthening disaster risk
governance to manage disaster risk.
· Priority 3: Investing in disaster risk
reduction for resilience
· Priority 4: Enhancing disaster
preparedness for effective response and to ‘build back better’ in recovery,
rehabilitation, and reconstruction
12. Representatives from across the
sector have been placed into one of the priorities above and will participate
in two sessions. The first session is a quick fire round where participants
will have an opportunity to explain their agencies role, responsibility and
future activities against that priority.
13. The following session will be a
group workshop where CDEM themes will be discussed and prioritised for Group
Plan objective development.
Consideration
Local
Board views and implications
14. For the purposes of preparing this report, no local board views
or implications were sought. Local board views are regularly sought across
functions of CDEM such as, local hazard and risk communication, community
response planning and community engagement in CDEM readiness.
15. Local Board views will be sought through the Group Plan review
process.
Māori
impact statement
16. This report seeks committee approval to
commit to an extension of the timeframes for the Group Plan. The implications
for Māori of this commitment are not yet known. Future discussions on the
review of this Group Plan may have implications for Maori. The Auckland Plan
identified Māori outcomes will be considered as the Group Plan review is
developed. Māori views will be sought through the Communications and
Engagement component of the Group Plan project.
Implementation
17. No specific additional
implementation issues have been identified.
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
aView
|
Shaping a Resilient Auckland - invitation and agenda -
3 Sep 2015
|
17
|
Signatories
|
Authors
|
Kiri Maxwell, Senior Advisor Readiness, Civil Defence
and Emergency Management
Richard Woods, Head of Emergency Management Planning,
Civil Defence and Emergency Management
|
|
Authorisers
|
John Dragicevich - Director Civil Defence and
Emergency Management
|
|
Civil Defence
and Emergency Management Group Committee
25 August 2015
|
|
|
Civil Defence and
Emergency Management Group Committee
25 August 2015
|
|
Localised Storm Event 15 July 2015 - Corrective
Actions
File No.: CP2015/17194
Purpose
1. To outline the key findings from
a review of council and emergency agencies’ response to a recent localised
rainfall event 15 July 2015 and to update the committee on planned corrective
actions.
Executive
Summary
2. On the evening of 15 July 2015,
a rainfall event affected localised areas of Auckland. The highest rainfall
intensities occurred in the west and south of the region, namely Henderson
Valley, Waitākere, Papatoetoe, Papakura and at Auckland Airport. In total
117 requests for service were received and responded to by emergency services,
Auckland Council staff and contractors.
3. Keeping our communities safe
from natural hazards such as flooding is paramount to our service delivery and
response in these events. This incident and our response have been reviewed as
a matter of priority and key findings have been identified, including:
§ A
need for removal of knowledge transfer barriers within all emergency agencies
§ Auckland
Transport Operational Centre (ATOC) to lower their threshold in regards to
emergency alerts to include flooding of main arterial roads
§ Need
to improve transfer of information between ATOC, all emergency services and
Auckland Council in emergencies
§ Need
to improve our systems for monitoring media and social media channels so that
we can capture live flooding data via public sources.
|
Recommendation
That the Civil Defence and
Emergency Management Group Committee:
a) receive the preliminary report
detailing the 15 July 2015 storm event and endorse the identified corrective
actions
b) support the independent review
of the incident and note that it will be reported back to the committee in
November 2015.
|
Comments
4. On the evening of 15 July 2015,
a rainfall event affected localised areas of Auckland. The highest rainfall
intensities occurred in the west and south of the region, namely Henderson
Valley, Waitakere, Papatoetoe, Papakura and at Auckland Airport. The event only
affected parts of urban Auckland due to the localised nature of the rainfall.
5. 117 emergency requests for
service including 17 habitable flooding incidents were reported, two by
Auckland Council and 15 by the New Zealand Fire Service. Post-event
verification concluded that of the 17 reported habitable instances reported
only 8 qualified as true habitable floor incidents. The Auckland Council
stormwater network responded as expected.
6. All flooding issues responded to
by emergency services were logged and followed up by council’s stormwater unit
including emergency investigations for damaged or blocked drains and culvert
pipe blockages.
7. CDEM staff received MetService
forecasts and these were analysed to identify any potential hazards and need
for public alerting. Forecasts for the evening of Wednesday 15 July 2015 did
not reach the warning criteria (more than 25mm per hour) with estimates of
between only 10-15mm/hr. The actual event reached greater than 30mm per hour
rainfall in some localised areas. MetService have advised that an investigation
into the forecasting for this event is underway.
8. Key findings from council’s
review include a number of corrective actions, these include:
§ The
threshold of public alerting has been confirmed. Where corrective action needs
to be applied is that there were knowledge transfer barriers within all
emergency agencies. This is being addressed as a matter of urgency.
§ Auckland
Transport Operations Centre (ATOC) only sends alerts when a main arterial road
is closed. Any other reporting is out-of-scope. ATOC reported the following
day to CDEM that on this occasion they received four specific flooding calls,
two calls from police and one from Auckland Airport relating to road flooding.
Three incident notification texts were sent out by ATOC advising management and
or stakeholders of the issues. It is recommended that ATOC lower their
threshold in regards to emergency alerts to include main arterial roads.
§ Auckland
Airport experienced significant rainfall and localised flooding and have
advised that the ‘flooding occurred due to both the network maintenance issues
and the volume of water inletting.
§ The
transfer of information between the Auckland Transport Operational Centre, all
emergency services and Auckland Council needs to improve and this will be part
of a corrective action plan to be developed in response to this event. All
services are supportive of this action plan.
§ In
some instances the media were ahead of our understanding of the situation due
to the social media providing media with access to real time information. It is
recommended that council reviews and enhances how we monitor and review media
and social media channels including how we can capture live flooding data via
public sources
9. An independent review of this
storm event has been commissioned to further capture the learnings and to
identify any additional corrective actions for consideration. This review will
be reported to the committee at its November 2015 meeting.
Consideration
Local
Board views and implications
10. The position adopted in this
report do not give rise to any issues for specific local boards.
Māori
impact statement
11. The position adopted in this
report do not give rise to any issues for Māori.
Implementation
12. There are no specific
implementation issues arising from this report.
Attachments
There are no attachments for this report.
Signatories
|
Authors
|
John Dragicevich - Director Civil Defence and Emergency
Management
|
|
Authorisers
|
John Dragicevich - Director Civil Defence and
Emergency Management
|
|
Civil Defence
and Emergency Management Group Committee
25 August 2015
|
|
Auckland Council Civil Defence and Emergency
Management Department Work Programme Update
File No.: CP2015/17211
Purpose
1. The purpose of this report is to
update members of the Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group (CDEMG)
Committee (CDEMG committee) on the progress of the Auckland CDEM team’s work
programme.
Executive
Summary
2. This is a regular report to keep
the Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group Committee up to date on the
CDEM department’s work programme.
3. At
the time of writing this report, the CDEM 2015/16 business plan and associated
work programme are near completion. All service delivery measures are
achieving key performance indicators with key highlights for this quarter
detailed below.
4. This report
introduces and recommends that the committee support a review of the community
response plans as detailed in the comments section of this report.
|
Recommendation
That the Civil Defence and
Emergency Management Group Committee:
a) receive the Civil Defence and
Emergency Management Department work programme update report
b) support the
review of the community response plan methodology to ensure it is both fit
for purpose and reflects current best practice, particularly in the area of
community engagement.
|
Comments
Queensland Fruit Fly
5. The Auckland Council response to
the Queensland Fruit Fly incident in Grey Lynn and surrounding areas has been
scaled back. We are currently providing a staff member for one day a week to
act as the Welfare Manager for the Ministry for Primary Industries. This role
is providing a single point of contact for affected residents and businesses
and is looking at compensation and relationship management with the local
community.
6. This role will continue through
to late November, allowing MPI to confirm the outbreak has been eradicated as
the warmer weather returns.
Auckland Council CDEM Top
Service Delivery Objectives
Understand and communicate, and where practical reduce
the risks of hazards to Auckland
7. A number of local board hazard
reports were completed in the 2014/15 financial year and are now available on
Council’s website. Limited hard copies are being printed and distributed to
schools, libraries and local board offices. The following schedule in Table
One indicates the reports to be completed in the 2015/16 and 2016/17 years.
Table One: Local board hazard reports to be completed in 2015/2016
and 2016/2017
|
2015/2016
|
2016/2017
|
|
Upper Harbour
|
Maungakiekie – Tāmaki
|
|
Kaipātiki
|
Māngere-Ōtāhuhu
|
|
Whau
|
Ōtara-Papatoetoe
|
|
Waitākere Ranges
|
Manurewa
|
|
Waitematā
|
Papakura
|
|
Albert-Eden
|
Henderson-Massey
|
|
Howick
|
Puketāpapa
|
8. Two reports detailing New
Zealand’s tsunami risk are expected to be released by the Earthquake Commission
in coming weeks. The reports build on the National Tsunami Hazard Review
undertaken by GNS Science in 2013.
9. A draft Operational Evacuation
Plan has been prepared by NZ Police and was considered at a workshop with the
Auckland Transport Response Group held on 12 May 2015. Members of this group
are considering the draft plan and will scenario test in August 2015.
10. In June 2015 staff attended a
national symposium on how the Sendai Framework on Disaster Risk Reduction,
signed in March, will be implemented in New Zealand. Staff are working closely
with MCDEM to understand how the framework can be operationalised in Auckland
through the Group Plan Review.
11. GeoNet has launched a beta
version of a new product called ShakeMap. Rather than interpreting the size of
earthquakes by magnitude and depth, this product provides a map showing the
expected intensity of shaking at any location. The beta version of the product
can be viewed here: http://shakemap.geonet.org.nz/
Build individual, community and business resilience
against the disruption caused by the impact of a hazard.
12. Work has continued on producing
new Community Response Plans and reviewing older plans. Otara has been
completed and Kawau Island and Whangaparaoa reviewed.
13. The Central Business District
Response Plan has been signed off by the Central Emergency Management
Committee, who will own the plan. This will be the template for other urban
areas where traditional community engagement has proved difficult to achieve.
14. Liaison with the local boards
continues and the production of local board hazard guides is generating active
discussion.
15. As community plans are being
created or reviewed we are looking at tsunami road signage, blue lines and
information boards. Kawau Island have requested seven information boards,
Whangaparaoa are enthusiastic about having blue lines and Auckland Regional
Parks are eager to implement these measures across the region and has put in
place a project team to support this piece of work.
16. The Director of
Auckland CDEM has requested that an urgent review be carried out on the
development of community response plans going forward. The review is to
significantly enhance the community engagement component of the community
response plan content. The review is also to recognize that “community” has
many contexts in the Auckland regional environment and there needs to be enough
flexibility in the template to reflect the diversity of
Auckland.
17. The regional
coordinator MCDEM has confirmed that although many of the objectives of the
current community response plans are sound, he has identified that the
community engagement component needs to be strengthened, and that the CRPs must
be fit for purpose in the context of the community they serve and reviewed at
each refresh to enhance the current state
18. This review will
be regularly reported to this committee as it is progressed.
Public Education
19. A trial community ambassador
programme has been initiated. This initiative ‘piggy-backs’ on the established
NZ Police ambassador programme. Shanti Niwas Charitable Trust is our partner in
the delivery of this.
20. The University of Auckland survey
of inner-city apartment buildings has commenced and is ongoing. Two apartment
buildings have been surveyed with good results. Surveys of other buildings are
expected to commence shortly.
Emergency Coordination Centre (ECC)
ECC Review
21. The information received and
monitored within the ECC is under review. Options are being assessed to utilise
duty officer staff to build relationships and develop processes with key
partner agencies. There is an opportunity to better utilise and access Auckland
Council resources through CDEM relationships and enhance response capability.
22. Work is continuing on retro
fitting some of the new technology into Bledisloe. There are real advantages in
running on a council system with the necessary back-up systems in place rather
than a stand-alone system.
Public Alerting Review
23. A report was approved at Civil
Defence and Emergency Management Group Committee 16 June 2015 to decommission
two legacy CDEM public alerting options, OPTN text alerting system and North
Shore fixed telephone warning systems. It was also approved to investigate
decommissioning the fixed tsunami sirens in Waitakere and Rodney.
24. A decommission message was sent
to members of the public registered on the North Shore fixed telephone system
21 June 2015. Messages were sent to OPTN recipients on the 22 July 2015 to
advise that the system was being decommissioned from 7 August 2015. People have
been encouraged to sign up to other available public alerting options including
SMS alerts, applications for Iphone or android phones and email notification.
Exercise Mayday
25. Exercise Mayday was held on 27
May 2015 in the Bledisloe Emergency Coordination Centre in partnership with the
Auckland Lifelines Group members. The exercise allowed members of the group to
practise their business continuity plans and procedures within a CDEM response
framework. Debriefs have been held and information collated into a corrective
action plan which is under review by the CDEM leadership team. Corrective
actions will be circulated and implemented once the review is complete.
Logistics
26. The installation of a water tank
for Motairehe Marae on Great Barrier Island has been completed. This was an
outcome of the June storms last year and was funded by a contribution by Te
Puni Kokiri to the Mayoral Response fund.
27. A new catalogue of CDEM suppliers
has gone live in SAP for use in emergencies. This will allow us to easily
create purchase orders and also map suppliers onto GIS.
28. A member of the working group is
developing advanced logistics training for the National Integrated Training
Framework. Logistics is the first in the advanced course and will provide the
footprint for the other disciplines.
Training and Development
29. The Integrated Training Framework
intermediate course is in its final stage of development, with a pilot course
held in Taranaki during May 2015. Auckland CDEM have provided technical
expertise and sit on the steering committee.
30. A two day induction led by MCDEM
and Auckland CDEM staff has been held for newly appointed alternate controllers.
Another two day induction is scheduled for September 2015.
Welfare
31. A welfare practical skills course
for staff working in Civil Defence Centres has been developed and delivered in
training. This will continue to include all our volunteers.
32. Feedback continues to be given to
MCDEM around the new Director’s Guidelines and changes to the National Welfare
Plan.
33. Current Recovery portfolio update
includes establishing chairs for the Built Environment Taskgroup, confirmed Don
Lyons, Managing Director Beca; Economic Environment, confirmed, Kim Campbell,
Chief Executive, Employers Manufacturers Association. Currently in discussions
to confirm chair for the Social Environment.
Recovery
34. Members of the Built Environment
and Economic Environment Taskgroups are being finalised after which the
respective Taskgroups will meet. At this meeting they will be presented with
the Terms of Reference and the expectations of their roles in the event of a
civil defence event.
35. Work continues to understand how
this area will work with the new Director’s Guidelines when they are produced.
Consideration
Local
Board views and implications
36. Local Boards continue to be
consulted in the community planning programme and with the provision of local
board hazard guides which are being delivered. CDEM staff attend local board
meetings and workshops where staff have presented on this work programme.
Māori
impact statement
37. The position adopted in this
report do not give rise to any issues for Maori.
38. This is a report for information
and the implications for Māori of the activities described in this report
are not known. Future discussions on these activities that may have
implications for Maori, and the Auckland Plan identified Maori outcomes, will
be considered as the work programme progresses.
Implementation
39. There are no specific
implementation issues arising from this report.
Attachments
There are no attachments for
this report.
Signatories
|
Authors
|
Richard Woods, Head of Emergency Management Planning,
Civil Defence and Emergency Management
|
|
Authorisers
|
John Dragicevich - Director Civil Defence and
Emergency Management
|
|
Civil Defence
and Emergency Management Group Committee
25 August 2015
|
|
Rural Fire Update
File No.: CP2015/17222
Purpose
|
ü Reduction
|
ü Readiness
|
ü Response
|
ü Recovery
|
1. The purpose of
this report is to update all members of the Civil Defence Emergency Management
(CDEM) Group Committee (committee) on current Rural Fire activities.
Executive
Summary
2. This is a brief report for
information on current rural fire activities, which may be of interest to the
committee and covers such areas as:
· an
update on the legislative review of Fire Service and Auckland Council’s
submission
· Auckland
Rural Fire support for the Canadian fire-fighting efforts.
|
Recommendation
That the Civil Defence and
Emergency Management Group Committee:
a) receive the rural fire update
report.
|
Comments
Review of Fire
Services update
3. At the previous meeting of this
committee the Principal Rural Fire Officer provided a report on the Review of
Fire Services along with the proposed consultation timelines. The Minister
released the Review of Fire Services Discussion Document on 28 May with a
consultation period closing date for submissions being 10 July 2015.
4. Some 234 submissions were
received on the review, there was a clear desire for change identified in the
submissions while the Discussion Document sought feedback on the three models
identified in the document many submitters identified a range of themes that
were important to be considered in any final model.
5. The Auckland Council as the
local fire authority supported Option 3 the “One National Fire Service” with a
community engagement model being established at a regional level, the authority
also identified a number of themes.
6. Currently the Department of
Internal Affairs is analyzing the submissions with an intention to present
these to the Sector Working group to determine the ongoing development of the
appropriate Fire Services model moving forward.
7. The Council’s Submission is
attached as attachment A to this report.
Auckland Rural
Fire supports Canadian fire-fighting efforts.
8. A 16 person vegetation fire
incident management team including Brandon Guttery from Auckland Rural Fire has
been deployed to assist in the containment of out of control forest wildfires
in Alberta Canada where 487,000 hectares have burnt to date this year.
9. The team was able to quickly
integrate with resources from Australia, USA, Mexico and Canada as these
countries all use the very similar incident management structures and
processes. The creditability of NZ Rural fire fighters obtained from previous
deployments is such that the current team has been given responsibility for
management of Type 1 incidents which is the highest classification level based
on size and complexity.
10. Their first assignment was
managing a complex of 5 fires and over 60 000 hectares threatening remote
communities in Northern Alberta. The deployment is for a duration of
approximately five weeks of which there will be two fourteen day shifts with
two days recovery between.
11. Providing much needed support to
Canada is not only good for international relations, but it is an excellent
opportunity to gain experience and share skills with experts from around the
world. A summary of the learnings from this deployment will advance Auckland
Rural Fire and the wider NZ fire sector.
Consideration
Local
Board views and implications
12. Local Board
views, have not been sought.
Māori
impact statement
13. The positions
adopted in this report do not give rise to any issues for Māori.
Implementation
14. There
are no implementation issues at this stage.
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
aView
|
Submission to Fire Services Review - 9 July 2015
|
35
|
Signatories
|
Authors
|
Thomas Harre, Principal Rural Fire Officer (Acting),
Principal Rural Fire Officer, Civil Defence and Emergency Management
|
|
Authorisers
|
John Dragicevich - Director Civil Defence and
Emergency Management
|
|
Civil Defence
and Emergency Management Group Committee
25 August 2015
|
|
|
Civil Defence and
Emergency Management Group Committee
25 August 2015
|
|
Community Driven Initiative: Connect Four
File No.: CP2015/17248
Purpose
1. To introduce the Auckland Civil
Defence and Emergency Management (CDEM) Group Committee (committee) to a
community driven initiative, Connect Four, which aims to better connect
neighbours and increase community readiness and resilience.
Executive
Summary
2. Connect Four is a community
driven concept that aims to better connect neighbours and increase community
readiness and resilience.
3. This purpose of this report is
to seek endorsement from the committee to adopt the Connect Four concept for
future development and use in alignment with council’s CDEM readiness
responsibilities.
|
Recommendations
That the Civil Defence and
Emergency Management Group Committee:
a) support the
adoption of the Connect Four concept into the suite of readiness tools
provided by Auckland Civil Defence and Emergency Management.
|
Comments
4. Connect Four is a concept
produced by Torbay resident Carole McMinn. The objective of this concept is to
promote readiness and connection between neighbours. The concept provides a
platform for readiness conversations between neighbours and provides a
mechanism for recording names and contact details for neighbours on a Connect Four
card. This tool can then be used by residents to check on their neighbours
during or after emergency events.
5. The Auckland CDEM Director
supports the adoption of this simple concept and believes it can become a
valuable tool to increase readiness and resilience in communities across the
Auckland region. This concept could also be employed in other areas to ensure
ready and resilient communities.
6. Auckland CDEM intends to work in
partnership with Mrs McMinn to further develop and rebrand the tool for use in
communities across Auckland.
7. On Wednesday 19 August 2015,
Auckland CDEM Director visited Mrs McMinn to present a gift and letter of
thanks from Auckland Council Chief Executive Stephen Town.
8. The creator of Connect Four has
agreed in writing to allow Auckland Council to use the concept with CDEM
branding and any other enhancements, relinquishing intellectual property
rights.
9. It is recommended that the
committee support the adoption of the Connect Four concept into the suite of
readiness tools provided by Auckland CDEM.
Consideration
Local
Board views and implications
10. For the purposes
of preparing this report no local board views or implications were sought.
Māori
impact statement
11. The views of
Māori were not considered nor are impacts on Māori covered in this
report.
Implementation
12. The further development of this community readiness tool will be
resourced through the CDEM work programme and costs recovered from within
existing CDEM budgets.
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
aView
|
Connect Four Brochure
|
45
|
Signatories
|
Authors
|
Nicky Tayler - Service Support Lead
|
|
Authorisers
|
Mara Bebich - Stakeholder Liasion Manager
John Dragicevich - Director Civil Defence and
Emergency Management
|
|
Civil Defence
and Emergency Management Group Committee
25 August 2015
|
|
|
Civil Defence and
Emergency Management Group Committee
25 August 2015
|
|
Public Alerting Systems Update
File No.: CP2015/17258
Purpose
1. To seek approval from the Civil
Defence and Emergency Management Group (CDEM) Committee for capital works to
maintain the tsunami sirens in Waitakere on the West Coast of Auckland.
2. To provide an update on the
investigations to decommission legacy systems and the ongoing review of the
public alerting systems.
Executive
Summary
3. Legacy public alerting options
such as the Rodney OPTN text alerting and the North Shore telephone tsunami
warning system were decommissioned following approval from the committee on 16
June 2015.
4. Investigations to ensure best
practice public alerting options and prudent investment in public alerting
systems continue. For example a number of factors are being considered in the
review of the public alerting systems including costs to maintain existing
systems, requirements to create a regional approach in public alerting, long
term maintenance and timeframes for national alerting options to be
implemented.
5. However in the course of this
review the current condition of the sirens on the west coast beaches of
Bethels, Piha, Whatipu and Huia has revealed significant corrosion present on
the existing sirens located in the Waitakere Region.
6. At a national level two national
public alerting options are being progressed, the Emergency Response system and
a business case by MCDEM to push messages via a cell phone based system.
7. This report notes progress
against these investigations and national level developments in this space. In
addition it recommends that the tsunami siren system in Waitakere is maintained
by replacing the corroding hardware on the west coast sirens in response to
high levels of corrosion.
|
Recommendation
That the Civil Defence and
Emergency Management Group Committee:
a) agree to maintain the fixed
tsunami sirens in Waitakere by replacing corroded hardware in response to
high levels of corrosion on a needs be basis.
|
Comments
Background
8. As detailed in a report to the
last CDEM Group Committee (committee) meeting (June 2015), the Auckland CDEM
Group currently has a number of legacy council public alerting systems.
Advances in technology, new international research and the increased cost of
maintaining old systems necessitated a review of our current operational
practices.
9. Effective and reliable public
alerting systems are essential for the effective management of emergency
scenarios. A number of factors were considered in the development of the
recommendations in that report including the development of new technology,
value for money, long term maintenance, the effectiveness of messaging alerts
and appropriate alternatives.
10. As part of the consideration of
that report the committee resolved to approve the decommissioning of the legacy
North Shore City Council telephone tsunami warning system and the legacy Rodney
District Council text messaging service. In addition the committee also agreed
that the decommissioning of the fixed sirens in Waitakere and Rodney should be
investigated.
Decommission of Legacy Alerting Options
11. Legacy public alerting options
Rodney OPTN text alerting and the North Shore telephone tsunami warning system
were decommissioned following approval from the committee on 16 June 2015.
12. Residents are being encouraged to
sign up to alternative options including mobile phone applications, SMS
messaging, to connect with vulnerable neighbours and to build resilience within
their community.
13. Options have been communicated
via media releases to local newspapers, a television interview, direct contact
through OPTN text alerting and the North Shore Tsunami Warning system.
14. All registered users on the OPTN
system were sent a message to advise them to move onto the existing text
messaging service through the public alerting platform.
15. Feedback received to date on this
decommission have been minimal.
Maintaining Waitakere
Tsunami Siren System
16. Significant corrosion is present
on the existing sirens located in the Waitakere Region on west coast beaches of
Bethels, Piha, Whatipu and Huia. Having an operational siren system in place
these areas is considered essential and it is recommended that the assets are
maintained pending the outcome of the review of all siren systems.
17. The Western Sirens need to be
maintained by replacing corroded brackets and horns..
National
Public Alerting Options
18. There are two national projects
for public alerting; the Emergency Response System which will enable the public
to select and call the emergency service required and provides the Emergency
Services with the location of the mobile device to enable assistance to be
dispatched rapidly.
19. The second national alerting
project is a business case put forward by MCDEM to provide a cellphone based
system with the ability to push messages to all public mobiles without an
application being downloaded.
20. Both national projects have the
potential to better resource our teams and mass communication methods in an
emergency response scenario.
Public Alerting System
Review Methodology
21. The review of the public alerting
system remains ongoing. As part of this review costs to maintain the current
tsunami siren system in the Rodney and Waitakere districts will be reviewed and
projected until 2020.
22. Investigations will also be
undertaken to outline the possible costs of installing tsunami sirens in other
at risk areas within the Auckland region. The aim is to identify the costs
attributed to continuing with tsunami sirens as a public alerting option and
outline what is required to regionalise the system.
23. The current sirens have three
separate tones: 1. Alert, 2. Evacuate, and 3. All Clear. The new tsunami siren
standard recommends voice messages to replace these fixed tones. To meet the
MCDEM Tsunami Warning Sirens Technical standard [03/14] significant upgrades to
the system are required. Costs to upgrade the current siren system to the MCDEM
Tsunami technical standard allowing single tones or voice messaging is being
investigated.
24. The review will consider the costs
and benefits of other current public alerting options including the, Helicopter
siren and the Tsunado system.
25. Costs and benefits of all options
will be incorporated into a review of the public warning strategy with the aim
of identifying a regional approach to public alerting for the Auckland Region
through to 2020. National options and timeframes will also be considered in
confirming a regional approach going forward.
26. The estimated completion date for
this review and options development is early 2016. Following receipt and
consideration of the review, the findings of the review will be brought to this
committee. Options will also be communicated to local boards for input.
Conclusion
27. An investigation into public
alerting systems for the Auckland region remains ongoing. Initiation findings
however have revealed a more urgent requirement to upgrade the corroding
hardware.
Consideration
Local
Board views and implications
28. This report is operational and
does not require Local Board input.
Māori
impact statement
29. This report is operational and
does not have any particular impact on Māori.
Implementation
30. There are no implementation
issues of note and the upgrade can be expended from within existing budgets.
Attachments
There are no attachments for
this report.
Signatories
|
Authors
|
Paul Clement, Manager Emergency Coordination Centre,
Civil Defence & Emergency Management
|
|
Authorisers
|
John Dragicevich - Director Civil Defence and
Emergency Management
|
|
Civil Defence
and Emergency Management Group Committee
25 August 2015
|
|
Amendments to the National Civil Defence and Emergency
Management Plan Order 2015
File No.: CP2015/17278
Purpose
1. The purpose of this report is to
update the Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group Committee on recent
changes to the National CDEM Plan Order and to seek approval for feedback on
the associated guidance document.
Executive
Summary
2. Recent amendments to the
National CDEM Plan Order were enacted into legislation in June 2015. These
changes incorporate recommendations from the Christchurch earthquake review and
extensive consultation with stakeholders to more comprehensively address risk
reduction.
3. This report recommends that the
Chair and Deputy Chair are authorised to endorse feedback on the guide to the
National Plan by 11 September 2015.
|
Recommendations
That the Civil Defence and
Emergency Management Group Committee:
a) receive the amendments to the
National Civil Defence and Emergency Management Plan Order report
b) approve the Chair and Deputy
Chair to approve feedback on the Guide to the National Plan by 11 September
2015
|
Comments
1. On 2 June 2015, recent
amendments to the National Civil Defence and Emergency Management Plan Order
(plan) were enacted into legislation. The revised plan is the result of years
of work and incorporates a number of recommendations of the Christchurch
Earthquake Response Review Report, as well as feedback from stakeholders on the
need to more comprehensively address risk reduction.
2. Minister Kaye announced the
significant milestone on our journey to learn from and incorporate lessons from
the Canterbury earthquakes, as well as other emergencies that have occurred
since the plan was first developed in 2005.
3. Key changes to the plan order
include:
§ Clarification
of lead agencies roles, to provide greater understanding of who is responsible
for planning the management of particular hazards during an emergency. These
include;
o Ministry
of Civil Defence and Emergency Management for natural hazards
o New
Zealand Police for terrorism
o Ministry
for Primary Industries for biosecurity, food safety and drought
§ Identifying
the important role the New Zealand Defence Force can play in an emergency.
Particularly identifying their role with evacuation, cordon management, aerial
reconnaissance and deploying goods and services to affected communities.
§ Implementing
new arrangements for building management, including building safety assessment
to protect land
§ Better
recognising the role of research and science organisations such as GNS Science
and MetService
§ Enhancing
welfare services arrangements to better meet the needs of affected communities
during emergencies.
4. A new version of the Guide to
the National Plan has also been developed to facilitate implementation with
calls for Group feedback due to MCDEM by 11 September 2015.
5. The proposed changes to the
guide have not yet been assessed. However as the CEG and CDEMG meet quarterly
the timeframes do not allow for analysis and recommendations to be brought to
the committee ahead of the feedback closing date.
6. It is recommended that once the
analysis and recommendations have been developed that the Chair and Deputy
Chair approve this submission on behalf of the Auckland Civil Defence and
Emergency Management Group.
Consideration
Local
Board views and implications
7. The position adopted in this
report do not give rise to any issues for specific local boards.
Māori
impact statement
8. The position adopted in this
report do not give rise to any issues for Māori
Implementation
9. There are no additional
implementation issues arising from this report.
Attachments
There are no attachments for
this report.
Signatories
|
Authors
|
Richard Woods, Head of
Emergency Management Planning, Civil Defence and Emergency Management
|
|
Authorisers
|
John Dragicevich - Director Civil Defence and
Emergency Management
|
