|
Resolution number OR/2016/32
MOVED
by Chairperson DEC Simpson, seconded by Member CRJ Davis:
That the Ōrākei
Local Board:
a)
forward the following comments to the Civil Defence Emergency
Management staff as part of the Ōrākei Local Board’s feedback on
the Draft Civil Defence Emergency Management Group Plan:
Draft
Civil Defence and Emergency Group Plan 2016-2021
Feedback
from the Ōrākei Local Board
The accompanying report to the Ōrākei
Local Board states that the Draft Civil Defence and Emergency Group Plan
2016-2021 (“Group Plan) “is primarily centred on community empowerment and
resilience across all environments (social, economic, environmental and
infrastructure)”, and the Board has been asked to provide feedback especially
in relation to Local Board championing “development of local emergency
management plans, and the role of elected members in a civil emergency” and
“local priorities for emergency management.”
Feedback
There are aspects of the Draft that
are unclear. In some areas, wording and terminology needs to be more
accurate. The Ōrākei Local Board has a number of questions as to
how the work expected from local boards will be resourced and whether elected
members will be trained in order to fulfil the role expected of them under
the Group Plan.
Below are some more specific questions:
1. Role of Local Boards
Para 8 of the agenda item states
“Local boards are well placed to help with leadership, championing resilience
and engagement in their respective communities. The Draft Group Plan proposes
that this role be formalised through the development of local CDEM plans.”
Feedback: How do the 21 local board
plans fit into the over-arching Group Plan and how do they relate to
Community Response Plans that were developed recently? How will a Local Board
CDEM Plan for, say Ōrākei, relate to Maungakiekie-Tamaki’s Local
Board CDEM Plan? We suggest a diagram to show the relationship of these
plans.
What additional budget will be
allocated to each Local Board to deliver and administer its Local Board Plan?
Will there be the opportunity to
engage professionals to help prepare the Local CDEM plan?
What is intended to be reported at
the Local Board meeting each month on CDEM?
2. Part C Our leaders
Page 37 of the Draft Group Plan
Page 37, third para: “Cross-city
collaboration” is intended and Local Boards are mentioned as a resource to
enable this, but on Page 38, Local Boards (or representatives from the Local
Board Chairs’ Forum)) are not included in either the Auckland Civil Defence
and Emergency Management Group Membership, or in the Auckland Co-ordinating
Executive Group Membership.
Page 38 refers to 7 Governing Body
councillors, ex-officio Mayor and Deputy Mayor, 2 IMSB and two co-opted
observers.
Page 37 Our action points in box 2
• It should be noted that local
boards ARE elected representatives – this wording needs to be more accurate.
• Will training be provided to
Local Board members to raise their competency in civil defence matters?
• What does “champion
resilience” mean?
3. Part D Our framework
for action
Page 52 Leadership and governance
Action point 1 – what is the role of Local Boards here?
Action point 2 – Local board ARE
elected representatives. What training will be provided?
Action point 3 – what is the
“council’s advisory panel” mentioned? Also note: Local Boards were also set
up by the Local Government Commission to represent “communities of interest”.
Wording needs to be more precise.
Page 53 Delivery support (2nd to
last box) Auckland Council – Mayoral office and local boards – what about the
Governing Body? Note: Auckland Council is made up of the Governing Body and
21 Local Boards. Or does Auckland Council in this context mean Auckland
Council staff?
4. Appendices
Pages 56-58, 60-61 and Final
“Group Plan Process” are all illegible in the agenda report.
CARRIED
|
