Agenda of Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group Committee

Terms of Reference

Responsibilities and powers

The Civil Defence Emergency Management Group Committee is a statutory committee required under S12(1) of the Civil Defence and Emergency Management Act 2002 (CDEM Act) and is 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

· developing, approving, implementing and monitoring the Auckland Civil Defence Emergency Management Group Plan

· developing, approving, implementing and monitoring other relevant strategies and policies relevant to the powers and functions of the Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group as identified in the CDEM Act

· performing the statutory functions of a civil defence emergency management group

· representing Auckland in the development of national emergency management policy including approving relevant policy and legislative submissions to external bodies

· engaging with Local Boards and local board portfolio holders 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.

1 Apologies

An apology from Cr Clow has 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 Wednesday, 29 November 2017, 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 Governance 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

There were no notices of motion.

Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group Committee

28 February 2018

Better Responses to Natural Disasters and Other Emergencies (TAG review)

File No.: CP2018/01953

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To provide an update on the recommendations of the Technical Advisory Group (TAG) on civil defence and other related matters. This report also seeks agreement to receive an update on the Government’s response to the TAG’s recommendations at the 30 May 2018 meeting.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. On 7 July 2017 Auckland Council’s submission to the Minister of Civil Defence’s Technical Advisory Group on civil defence and other related matters was finalised and sent to the TAG for consideration. The Government released the TAG’s recommendations to the Minister on 18 January.

3. Most of the recommendations made by the TAG are in-line with Auckland Council’s submission. There are, however, a number of important recommendations that require to be considered in greater detail and a number that, based on Auckland Council’s previous submission on these matters, are unlikely to be supported. The timing and process for public submissions to the Government’s response to the TAG recommendations is yet to be confirmed. It is recommended that an update be provided at the 30 May 2018 meeting.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group Committee:

a) receive the report and presentation on the Technical Advisory Group’s recommendations to the Minister of Civil Defence; and

b) agree to receive an update on the Government’s response to the Technical Advisory Group’s recommendations at the 30 May 2018 meeting noting that the timelines and process for public submissions on this matter are yet to be confirmed.

Horopaki / Context

4. On 23 April 2017 the Hon Gerry Brownlee, then Minister of Civil Defence, announced the establishment of a Technical Advisory Group (TAG) to “identify where improvements in New Zealand’s Civil Defence structure could be made”. The Minister stated that this process was initiated in response to “shortcomings highlighted by recent emergencies such as the Kaikoura earthquake and Port Hills fires”.

5. The Terms of Reference of the TAG, which were released in June 2017, allowed for advice to be prepared on the “most appropriate operational and legislative mechanisms to support effective responses to natural disasters and other emergencies”. The focus, therefore, of the TAG has been on the Response to CDEM events rather than the 4R’s framework which also includes Readiness, Recovery, Reduction and, in Auckland’s case under the 5R’s framework, Resilience.

6. On 24 May 2017 the committee agreed (CP2017/09028 refers) to delegate authority to the Chair and Deputy Chair to finalise and approve the committee’s submission to the TAG. The committee’s submission (Attachment A) was finalised and sent to the TAG on 7 July 2017. In addition to the written submission, members of the TAG visited Auckland and held discussions with the Mayor of Auckland and Coordinating Executive Group (CEG) Chair and Director of Auckland Emergency Management. An oral submission was also delivered to the TAG which provided additional feedback on Auckland’s submission.

7. On 18 January 2018 the TAG’s recommendations to the Minister of Civil Defence (Attachment B) were publicly released.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

8. On-the-whole, most of the recommendations made by the TAG are in line with Auckland Council’s submission. That said, there are a number of recommendations that are being considered in greater detail by the CEG. Many of the recommendations would also, if accepted by the Government, have little impact on Auckland given Auckland Council’s unitary status. That said, there are a number of recommendations which, if accepted, would, based on Auckland Council’s previous submission on these matters, be unlikely to be supported and, indeed, would not succeed in bringing about the much-needed culture change across some parts of the sector.

9. A summary of the key recommendations made by the TAG as well as some initial commentary considered and refined by the CEG is provided in the table below.

10. As stated above, most of the recommendations are in line with Auckland Council’s previous submission on these matters. A number of the recommendations, however, would effectively, if accepted by the Government, introduce a ‘one-size-fit-all’ approach to emergency management in New Zealand based on greater command and control. It is unlikely that, for example, national standards for emergency management would be helpful given Auckland Emergency Management’s drive for continuous innovation and best practice. In addition, and as the TAG recommendations are silent on the importance of community engagement, it is likely that moves to ensure greater command and control over local and regional emergency management delivery would erode Auckland Council’s approach to emergency management which places community at the centre.

Chapter	Summary of Key Recommendations	Commentary
1. National Level functions and structure	Agree to establish a new National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA) as a departmental agency hosted by DPMC, to replace MCDEM. Agree that NEMA will be the national authority for support and coordination in states of local emergency and control in national emergencies and that it will take more proactive leadership and an assertive, and when required, directive stance. Agree that the responsibility for assessing, monitoring, and alerting the hazard risk in relation to geological and meteorological risks (earthquake, tsunami, flood, other weather) is clarified. Agree to ensure that NEMA has the resources and the capability to do the job expected of it.	These recommendations are broadly in-line with the significant changes advocated for to both the role and function of MCDEM by Auckland Council. That said, caution would have to be applied to ensure that changes within the emergency management sector allow for innovation and differences across the sector given the diverse nature, challenges and opportunities of civil defence groups across the country. This recommendation is in-line with Auckland Council’s submission which stated support for agencies with particular expertise taking the lead but cautioned against public alerting sitting with those agencies in order to avoid public confusion. This recommendation is in-line with Auckland Council’s submission which called for significant changes to both the role and function of MCDEM. The recommendation is also in-line with Auckland’s stated support for the Auckland-based MCDEM Regional Emergency Management Advisors.
2. Regional Structure	Require CDEM Groups to take a regional approach consistent with the intent of the CDEM Act. Require CDEM Groups to provide for adequate funding and resourcing for effective CDEM activities. Strengthen national standards over minimum requirements (for example, capability, operating practice)	N/A to Auckland given Auckland Council’s unitary status. When measured on a per capita basis Auckland Emergency Management is the smallest CDEM team across New Zealand. That said, the model in Auckland is, however, appropriate as the department is able to call upon significant resource from across the Auckland Council family. This is unlikely to be the case in the majority of councils across the country and so clarification on what is meant by ‘adequate funding and resourcing’ is required. As above, caution needs to be applied to ensure that national standards allow for innovation and do not apply a one-size-fits-all approach across the country.
3. Declarations	Clarify that elected representatives (the mayors) have primary authority to declare states of local emergency for their respective districts. Provide the option of the mayor declaring a ‘major incident’.	N/A to Auckland given Auckland Council’s unitary status. Auckland Council delegations allow for all Governing Body members to declare an emergency subject to availability. While this may be a useful tool if applied appropriately clear guidance would need to be provided on the rationale and thresholds for this option.
4. Role of Iwi	Require the appointment of appropriate iwi representatives to be part of CEG and the Group Joint Committee for all CDEM Groups.	The elevated role of iwi in emergency management reflects current Auckland Council practice. However, thought needs to be given to consider what this would mean for Auckland given the Independent Maori Statutory Board’s statutory role in Auckland and membership of Auckland Council committees.
5. Capability and Capacity	Require all Controllers (Group and National) to meet one mandatory national standard of technical and personal competency, prior to their being accredited as a CDEM Controller and permitted to act as Controllers during any declared state of emergency. Establish national ‘Fly-in’ Teams, consisting of professional CDEM Controllers and other essential roles (such as CIMS functions, strategic communications, science) that can be immediately deployed (either on request of the Group Controller, or on the discretion of the Director). Ensure a consistent high standard of volunteer competence and Response Teams by appointing FENZ as the lead agency for NZRTs.	The push for national standards is supported but it is recommended that there is more than one provider for the course to allow for innovation and best practice such as the University of Auckland’s Leadership and Controllers Programme. For the proposed “Fly-in’ Teams, it is important that members of these teams are, as well as being subject matter experts, able to work with and for communities. Auckland Council has significant expertise to support this fly-in team. It is also important that NEMA, in line with Auckland Council’s submission, is supported to understand the local government operating environment. Auckland Council supports three NZRTs and is able to provide for these critical roles. Having FENZ as the lead agency for these teams in emergency response situations would allow for a greater level of control relevant to FENZ roles and responsibilities.
6. Authority for Command, Control and Coordination	Enable the Director (NEMA) to direct Group Controller(s) during an emergency under the CDEM Act when there are matters of national interest Require clear command authority at Group level and clear control authority for Group Controllers. Require the use of CIMS (2^nd edition)	Seek clarification on the mechanism for this as well as the definition of what constitutes ‘national interest’. This is critically important but we would require clarification on the mechanism. Support the use of CIMS but note that CIMS needs to be reviewed and enhanced to reflect best practice in project and programme management.
7. Intelligence	Establish a new national emergency management facility (replacing the Bunker) with a fit-for–future physical layout and technological functionality, allowing for a national emergency to be controlled from managed from the new facility Establish an integrated 24/7 operation for the monitoring, alerting and warning of emergencies.	Auckland Emergency Management has significant ECC resource in its primary ECC in Auckland CBD and in its purpose-built facility in west Auckland. In Auckland Council’s submission the point was made to restate Auckland’s offer of the use of these facilities for coordinating the response to national or otherwise significant emergency events. Auckland’s facilities have the potential to be used for this purpose.
8. Information and Communication	Confirm local Mayor as primary spokesperson	Note Auckland’s unique media landscape and Auckland Emergency Management’s Public Information Management function and range of spokespersons.

Chapter

Summary of Key Recommendations

Commentary

1. National Level functions and structure

Agree to establish a new National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA) as a departmental agency hosted by DPMC, to replace MCDEM.

Agree that NEMA will be the national authority for support and coordination in states of local emergency and control in national emergencies and that it will take more proactive leadership and an assertive, and when required, directive stance.

Agree that the responsibility for assessing, monitoring, and alerting the hazard risk in relation to geological and meteorological risks (earthquake, tsunami, flood, other weather) is clarified.

Agree to ensure that NEMA has the resources and the capability to do the job expected of it.

These recommendations are broadly in-line with the significant changes advocated for to both the role and function of MCDEM by Auckland Council. That said, caution would have to be applied to ensure that changes within the emergency management sector allow for innovation and differences across the sector given the diverse nature, challenges and opportunities of civil defence groups across the country.

This recommendation is in-line with Auckland Council’s submission which stated support for agencies with particular expertise taking the lead but cautioned against public alerting sitting with those agencies in order to avoid public confusion.

This recommendation is in-line with Auckland Council’s submission which called for significant changes to both the role and function of MCDEM. The recommendation is also in-line with Auckland’s stated support for the Auckland-based MCDEM Regional Emergency Management Advisors.

2. Regional Structure

Require CDEM Groups to take a regional approach consistent with the intent of the CDEM Act.

Require CDEM Groups to provide for adequate funding and resourcing for effective CDEM activities.

Strengthen national standards over minimum requirements (for example, capability, operating practice)

N/A to Auckland given Auckland Council’s unitary status.

When measured on a per capita basis Auckland Emergency Management is the smallest CDEM team across New Zealand. That said, the model in Auckland is, however, appropriate as the department is able to call upon significant resource from across the Auckland Council family. This is unlikely to be the case in the majority of councils across the country and so clarification on what is meant by ‘adequate funding and resourcing’ is required.

As above, caution needs to be applied to ensure that national standards allow for innovation and do not apply a one-size-fits-all approach across the country.

3. Declarations

Clarify that elected representatives (the mayors) have primary authority to declare states of local emergency for their respective districts.

Provide the option of the mayor declaring a ‘major incident’.

N/A to Auckland given Auckland Council’s unitary status.

Auckland Council delegations allow for all Governing Body members to declare an emergency subject to availability.

While this may be a useful tool if applied appropriately clear guidance would need to be provided on the rationale and thresholds for this option.

4. Role of Iwi

Require the appointment of appropriate iwi representatives to be part of CEG and the Group Joint Committee for all CDEM Groups.

The elevated role of iwi in emergency management reflects current Auckland Council practice. However, thought needs to be given to consider what this would mean for Auckland given the Independent Maori Statutory Board’s statutory role in Auckland and membership of Auckland Council committees.

5. Capability and Capacity

Require all Controllers (Group and National) to meet one mandatory national standard of technical and personal competency, prior to their being accredited as a CDEM Controller and permitted to act as Controllers during any declared state of emergency.

Establish national ‘Fly-in’ Teams, consisting of professional CDEM Controllers and other essential roles (such as CIMS functions, strategic communications, science) that can be immediately deployed (either on request of the Group Controller, or on the discretion of the Director).

Ensure a consistent high standard of volunteer competence and Response Teams by appointing FENZ as the lead agency for NZRTs.

The push for national standards is supported but it is recommended that there is more than one provider for the course to allow for innovation and best practice such as the University of Auckland’s Leadership and Controllers Programme.

For the proposed “Fly-in’ Teams, it is important that members of these teams are, as well as being subject matter experts, able to work with and for communities. Auckland Council has significant expertise to support this fly-in team. It is also important that NEMA, in line with Auckland Council’s submission, is supported to understand the local government operating environment.

Auckland Council supports three NZRTs and is able to provide for these critical roles. Having FENZ as the lead agency for these teams in emergency response situations would allow for a greater level of control relevant to FENZ roles and responsibilities.

6. Authority for Command, Control and Coordination

Enable the Director (NEMA) to direct Group Controller(s) during an emergency under the CDEM Act when there are matters of national interest

Require clear command authority at Group level and clear control authority for Group Controllers.

Require the use of CIMS (2^nd edition)

Seek clarification on the mechanism for this as well as the definition of what constitutes ‘national interest’.

This is critically important but we would require clarification on the mechanism.

Support the use of CIMS but note that CIMS needs to be reviewed and enhanced to reflect best practice in project and programme management.

7. Intelligence

Establish a new national emergency management facility (replacing the Bunker) with a fit-for–future physical layout and technological functionality, allowing for a national emergency to be controlled from managed from the new facility

Establish an integrated 24/7 operation for the monitoring, alerting and warning of emergencies.

Auckland Emergency Management has significant ECC resource in its primary ECC in Auckland CBD and in its purpose-built facility in west Auckland. In Auckland Council’s submission the point was made to restate Auckland’s offer of the use of these facilities for coordinating the response to national or otherwise significant emergency events.

Auckland’s facilities have the potential to be used for this purpose.

8. Information and Communication

Confirm local Mayor as primary spokesperson

Note Auckland’s unique media landscape and Auckland Emergency Management’s Public Information Management function and range of spokespersons.

11. The Minister of Civil Defence has met with the Mayor of Auckland and CDEM Group Committee Chair to discuss the TAG recommendations and the process from here. Feedback from this meeting has been positive with the Minister stating his support for the work Auckland is doing in this area. In addition, Auckland Emergency Management has held discussions with representatives of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, including with the Minister’s Principal Private Secretary, as officials prepare advice to the Minister of Civil Defence on the response to the TAG recommendations. Auckland Emergency Management will continue to offer advice and solutions to the review team throughout this process.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

12. There are no local board impacts arising from this report. Any particular implications or impacts for local boards arising from the Government’s response to the TAG recommendations will be reported to the meeting on 30 May 2018 and thereafter as appropriate.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

13. The TAG, in its recommendations to the Minister of Civil Defence, has recognised the important role of iwi and iwi representation in emergency management. In particular, the recommendations call for greater recognition of the capability that iwi bring to emergency management. The TAG has also recommended having appropriate iwi representatives represented on Coordinating Executive Groups and on Group Committees.

14. Recognising the unique and important role that iwi play in emergency management is current practice in Auckland with partnerships having been formed with a number of iwi and local marae across the region.

15. Auckland Emergency Management has discussed the unique role of the Independent Māori Statutory Board in Auckland’s governance structure with the Government’

16. Any particular implications or impact for Māori arising from the Government’s response to the TAG recommendations will be reported to the meeting on 30 May 2018 and thereafter as appropriate.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

17. There are no financial implications arising from this report.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

18. There are no significant risks arising from this report. That said, it is not clear to what extent the Government’s response to the TAG recommendations and any subsequent proposed changes will be prioritised through the current legislative agenda. It is also not clear if any reforms that are proposed will be part of a series of reforms across the sector. In lieu of any significant changes occurring at the national level, Auckland Emergency Management will continue to deliver innovative, best-practice emergency management services for the Auckland region.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

19. It is expected that the Government will call for public submissions upon release of its response to the TAG recommendations. The timing and process for public submissions is yet to be confirmed but it is understood that the Minister will be taking the next six months to consider the TAG recommendations. An update will be provided at the 30 May 2018 meeting.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Auckland Civil Defence Emergency Manager Group Committee's submission to the TAG	17
b ⇩	Recommendations to the Minister of Civil Defence by the TAG	29

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author	Craig Glover - Head of Strategy and Planning
Authorisers	John Dragicevich - Director Civil Defence and Auckland Emergency Management

Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group Committee

28 February 2018

PDF Creator

Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group Committee

28 February 2018

Auckland Civil Defence Emergency Management Group Committee forward work programme

File No.: CP2018/01788

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To provide an amended forward work programme for the Auckland Civil Defence and Emergency Management (CDEM) Group committee (the committee) for consideration and approval. The programme will assist the committee to have oversight of its strategic functions for the remainder of the 2017/18 financial year.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. The Auckland CDEM Group Committee forward work programme focuses on strategy and policy development, strategic initiatives and projects that support the committee to provide strategic direction to the Coordinating Executive Group.

3. The forward work programme was endorsed at the committee meeting on 30 August 2017 and it was recommended that the programme becomes a standing agenda item to help monitor key activities and deliverables. This will ensure the programme remains forward focused and can take into account any additions or amendments that may arise either regionally or nationally.

4. The amended forward work programme was endorsed by the Coordinating Executive Group (CEG) at its meeting on Monday 12 February 2018.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group Committee:

a) receive the report on the forward work programme; and

b) approve the recommended changes and/or updates to the forward work programme.

Horopaki / Context

5. The Auckland CDEM Group Committee forward work programme focuses on strategy and policy development, strategic initiatives and projects that support the committee’s requirement to provide strategic direction to the Coordinating Executive Group (CEG). The programme has been drafted from actions from Auckland’s Group Plan and also includes activities of regional and national significance.

6. The programme signals when key reports and items are likely to be put on both CEG and committee agendas for endorsement and/or approval. The programme includes an overview of legislative requirements, the actions required from both the CEG and committee, and dates for the reporting of activities to meetings.

7. The work programme is a standing agenda item at CEG and committee meetings to help monitor key activities and deliverables. This will ensure the programme remains forward focused and can take into account any additions or changes that may arise either regionally or nationally.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

8. The proposed amendments include:

a) Activity 2: Auckland’s Natural Hazard Risk Management Action Plan approval at committee on 30 May 2018 (CIV/2017/28);

b) Activity 2.4, 2.5: Changes to dates for endorsement and approval for Auckland’s Resilient Recovery Strategy and Auckland’s Recovery Management Plan (refer to ‘Approval of Group Recovery Manager and update on the Resilient Recovery Strategy’ for more detailed information and rationale);

c) Activity 2.6: minor amendments to Auckland’s CDEM Group Plan by 1 June 2018 to comply with the new requirements for strategic planning for recovery noting that these amendments will not trigger thresholds for full statutory consultation (CIV/2017/26). A full review of Auckland’s CDEM Group Plan will be triggered post the development of the new National Disaster Resilience Strategy.

d) Activity 3: Audit NZ has confirmed that the audit of Auckland’s disaster resilience will not take place however Auckland Emergency Management will continue to progress with its own internal audit;

e) Activity 3.1: ‘Better responses to natural disasters and other emergencies’ (TAG review) report was publicly released in January 2018. The timeframe for consultation and submission on recommendations is to be confirmed (refer to the ‘Update on better responses to natural disasters and other emergencies (TAG review)’ report for more information on Auckland’s approach);

f) Activity 3.2: Auckland’s Evaluation Action Plan will be reported on a six-month cycle to the Coordinating Executive Group;

g) Activity 3.5: Change to date for reporting on the Elected Member Engagement framework due to being able to report on the entire framework rather than individual module updates; and

h) Activity 3.8: Change to date for approval of Auckland’s Capability Development Framework.

9. The amended forward work programme was endorsed by the Coordinating Executive Group (CEG) at its meeting on Monday 12 February 2018.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

10. The forward work programme has been developed primarily from actions contained within Auckland’s Group Plan. Local boards were engaged and consulted through the development of this plan and contributed towards the final document.

11. In addition, some of the projects and strategic initiatives in the programme will require engagement with local boards, for example, Auckland’s Resilient Recovery Strategy.

12. However, the impact on the proposed recommendation to approve the recommended changes and/or updates to the forward work programme does not have impacts on decisions made at the local level.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

13. It is anticipated that the ongoing review and amendments to the forward work programme will give effect to the Auckland Emergency Management Māori Responsiveness Plan to support Māori communities to build a resilient Auckland.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

14. This report does not have any specific financial implications over existing budget allocations.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

15. There are no significant risks.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

16. Following approval of the recommended changes and/or updates to the forward work programme Auckland Emergency Management will apply best practice project management principles to all project execution plans to ensure timely delivery.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Auckland CDEM Group Committee forward work programme	107

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Kiri Maxwell - Civil Defence and Emergency Management

Authorisers

Craig Glover - Head of Strategy and Planning

John Dragicevich - Director Civil Defence and Auckland Emergency Management

Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group Committee

28 February 2018

Auckland’s Capability Development Framework update

File No.: CP2018/01792

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To inform the Auckland Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group committee (the committee) about the recent recruitment campaign across the Auckland Council family. To support the recruitment campaign, this report will discuss the draft Auckland training and exercise plan and calendar aimed to strengthen and support the emergency response and recovery.

2. In addition, this report also discusses the completion of the inaugural Auckland Emergency Management and University of Auckland Controller and Leadership Programme.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

3. During a large-scale or ongoing emergency, Auckland Emergency Management will require the assistance and support of the wider Auckland Council family to strengthen and support the emergency response and recovery.

4. In August 2017 an update was provided to the committee about the Auckland Council Emergency Support (ACES) recruitment campaign. The campaign, conducted in August/September was created to build capability and capacity to be able to effectively respond in an emergency.

5. In addition to the ACES training programme, Auckland Emergency Management has developed a draft training and exercise plan and calendar 2018. The plan formalises Auckland Emergency Management’s planned capability development and provides a framework that can be followed by Auckland Emergency Management staff, ACES and agency partners. The draft plan is out for consultation across key partners and stakeholders.

6. To further strengthen our capability and capacity, 24 participants have successfully completed the Auckland Emergency Management and University of Auckland inaugural Controller and Leadership Programme. The programme was very well received across the participants and Auckland Emergency Management has received further interest from across council, key partners and stakeholders.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group Committee:

a) receive the report on Auckland’s Capability Development Framework.

b) agree to take part in a civil defence desktop exercise scenario following the conclusion of the 30 May CDEM Group Committee meeting.

Horopaki / Context

7. During a large-scale or ongoing emergency, Auckland Emergency Management will require the assistance and support of the wider Auckland Council family to strengthen and support the emergency response and recovery.

8. The structure of the Auckland Emergency Coordination Centre is comprised of several key functions that work together to provide direction and control to the response and recovery. These functions include Control, Planning and Intelligence, Operations, Logistics, Public Information Management, Welfare and Recovery. These functions are also supported by a Chief of Staff, Executive Assistants, Technical Advisors and Experts, Legal, Staff Wellbeing, Procurement and Health and Safety advisors.

9. In August 2017 an update was provided to the committee about the Auckland Council Emergency Support (ACES) recruitment campaign. The campaign, conducted in August to September 2017 was created to build capability and capacity to be able to effectively respond to an emergency. The campaign was developed with the internal communications team and was ran across many different channels. The recruitment sessions generated interest from over 300 staff across 50 different business areas across the council family with 127 council staff completing the first step in the ACES training programme. This will bring the total pool of active ACES to 220 across the council family.

10. In addition to the ACES training programme, Auckland Emergency Management has developed a draft Auckland Training and Exercise Plan and Calendar 2018. The plan formalises Auckland Emergency Management’s planned capability development and provides a framework that can be followed by Auckland Emergency Management staff, ACES and agency partners.

11. A prime focus of the plan is to enable the practice of planned exercises and training across key partners and stakeholders to develop overall capability and competency which will ensure that those involved in the response operations are able to function effectively during emergency events.

12. To further strengthen our capability and capacity 24 participants have successfully completed the inaugural Auckland Emergency Management and University of Auckland Controller and Leadership Programme. The programme aimed to actively lift emergency management competency standards through the delivery of a bespoke course that highlights the unique context of Auckland.

13. Delegate portfolios and assessments were subject to marking criteria set at ‘’masters’ level. All assessments were appraised by Professor Suzanne Wilkinson, Director of the Centre for Disaster Resilience, Recovery and Reconstruction. Marking was rigorous and final grades were issued based not only on the quality of the submissions but also on how the delegates had demonstrated that they had transferred the learnings from the programme into their workplace.

14. The programme was very well received across the participants and Auckland Emergency Management has received further interest from across council, key partners and stakeholders.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

15. Auckland’s Capability Development Framework includes a number of different components, these are:

Assessment of Auckland’s capability and capacity;

Volunteer Engagement Framework;

Competency and development needs assessment;

Exercise programme and calendar;

Training and development; and

Evaluation Action Planning (lessons learned) across emergency events and exercise.

16. This report explores three components of the framework; volunteer engagement, exercise programme and calendar, and training and development.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

17. Local boards have a role to play and responsibilities across risk reduction, readiness, response and recovery. Auckland Emergency Management is developing an Elected Member Engagement Framework, supported by a working group comprised of three councillors and six local board members, which will guide and explain these roles and responsibilities.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

18. It is anticipated that the progression of the Capability Development Framework will give effect to the Auckland Emergency Management Māori Responsiveness Plan to ensure the framework identifies and strengthens the capability of Māori through volunteering and exercising opportunities to support communities to build a resilient Auckland.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

19. This report does not have any specific financial implications over existing budget allocations Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

20. There are no significant risks.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

21. To support the assessment of Auckland’s capability and capacity, Auckland Emergency Management will complete an analysis of how many trained Controllers, Recovery Managers and ACES are required to maintain a 24/7 capability over a small, medium, and large-scale emergency.

22. The draft Auckland Training and Exercise Plan and Calendar 2018 is out for consultation across key partners and stakeholders. Once feedback has been received the final plan will be approved by Auckland’s Coordinating Executive Group. It is recommended that the Auckland CDEM Group Committee agrees to take part in a civil defence desktop exercise scenario following the conclusion of the 30 May 2018 CDEM Group Committee meeting. This desktop exercise will be used to help explain the role of the committee and its membership in declaring emergencies and coordinating the recovery from emergency events.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Adam Maggs,Head of Competency and Public Readiness

Authorisers

Craig Glover - Head of Strategy and Planning

John Dragicevich - Director Civil Defence and Auckland Emergency Management

Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group Committee

28 February 2018

Approval of Group Recovery Manager and update on the Resilient Recovery Strategy.

File No.: CP2018/01314

¨ Reduction

¨ Readiness

¨ Response

þRecovery

Te take mō te pūrongo / Purpose of the report

1. To appoint Auckland Emergency Management’s Head of Recovery as Group Recovery Manager; and to provide an update on strategic planning for recovery.

Whakarāpopototanga matua / Executive summary

2. This report recommends the formal appointment of Auckland Emergency Management’s Head of Recovery as the Group Recovery Manager, a statutory position required by the Civil Defence and Emergency Management Act 2002.

3. An update on Auckland Emergency Management’s strategic planning for recovery is provided, including identification of key milestones, such as when the Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group Committee will receive drafts of the Resilient Recovery Strategy (the Strategy) for consideration.

4. Opportunities for engaging local boards and for their participation in the development of the Strategy have been identified. Work is underway to identify opportunities for engaging with mana whenua and for their participation in the development of the Strategy.

Ngā tūtohunga / Recommendation/s

That the Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group Committee:

a) appoint Jennifer Rose, Auckland Emergency Management’s Head of Recovery as Group Recovery Manager as per S29(1) of the Civil Defence Emergency Management Amendment Act 2002.

b) note that a reviewed list of Controllers, Alternate Controllers and Recovery Managers will come before the Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group Committee when the Group Plan is next reviewed.

c) agree to receive the draft Resilient Recovery Strategy in August 2018 for approval for public consultation.

d) agree to receive the draft Resilient Recovery Strategy in November 2018 for adoption.

Horopaki / Context

Group Recovery Manager

5. The Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002 requires Civil Defence Emergency Management Groups to appoint Group Recovery Managers. Staff changes require the formal appointment of Jennifer Rose, AEM’s Head of Recovery, as Group Recovery Manager as per S29(1) of the Civil Defence Emergency Management Amendment Act 2002.

Strategic Planning for Recovery

6. Key milestones and activities on the development of the Strategy have been identified since last reporting in November 2017.

Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu / Analysis and advice

Group Recovery Manager

7. Reflective review following an emergency is a part of emergency management practice. The departmental review following the floods of early 2017 identified the importance of resilient communities and resulted in a reconfiguration of teams within Auckland Emergency Management. The previous Welfare and Recovery team was separated and two new teams, Welfare and Resilience and Recovery, were created enabling a stronger focus on their respective outcomes. Jennifer Rose was appointed Recovery Manager in September 2017. This report formalises her appointment as Group Recovery Manager as per the requirement of S29(1) of the Civil Defence Emergency Management Amendment Act 2002

Strategic Planning for Recovery

8. The CDEM Group Plan 2015-21 “Resilient Auckland” (the Group Plan) includes the development and implementation of a Recovery Framework within its specified actions. The Framework consists of minor amendments to the recovery section of the Group Plan, the development of the Strategy and subsequent Recovery Management Plans.

9. Key milestones for strategic planning for recovery in 2018 are set out below (and illustrated in Attachment 1):

Deliverable	Milestone
Work on strategic planning for recovery outlined in the update on the Forward Work Programme	CEG 12 February 2018 meeting
Resilient Recovery Workshop	CDEM Group Committee and CEG 28 February 2018
Recovery Walkthrough	Southern/Central local board cluster meeting 19 March 2018 North/West local board cluster meeting 26 March 2018
Approve minor amendments to the recovery section of the Group Plan	CEG 3 May 2018 meeting
Agree minor amendments to the recovery section of the Group Plan	CDEM Group Committee 30 May 2018 meeting
Local board engagement on the Resilient Recovery Strategy	Individual local board meetings July 2018
Recommend the draft Resilient Recovery Strategy to the CDEM Group Committee for consultation	CEG 9 August 2018 meeting
Approve draft Resilient Recovery Strategy for consultation	CDEM Group Committee 29 August 2018 meeting
Recommend the draft Resilient Recovery Strategy to the CDEM Group Committee for adoption	CEG 5 November 2018 meeting
Adopt the Resilient Recovery Strategy	CDEM Group Committee 28 November 2018 meeting

10. Recovery management planning will align with the reviewed guidelines for Recovery Management to be published by the Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management.

Ngā whakaaweawe ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe /
Local impacts and local board views

11. Auckland Emergency Management is working with Local Board Services to provide opportunities to engage with local boards and for their participation in the development of the Strategy as outlined in the table above.

Tauākī whakaaweawe Māori / Māori impact statement

12. An emergency event may adversely impact on land, water, sites of significance, waahi tapu flora or fauna affecting mana whenua and Māori wellbeing in general. So to, the recovery from such an event would similarly affect mana whenua and Māori wellbeing.

13. Work is underway to provide opportunities to engage with mana whenua and their participation in the development of the Strategy. More information will be provided in the next update to the Committee in May 2018.

Ngā ritenga ā-pūtea / Financial implications

14. There are no financial implications arising out of the appointment of Auckland Emergency Management’s Head of Recovery, to the statutory position of Group Recovery Manager. The appointment is administrative and clarifies functions, decision-making and access to powers under the Civil Defence and Emergency Management Act 2002.

15. Auckland Emergency Management’s strategic planning for recovery is funded out of current budget and provided for in the base budget for the 2018-19 financial year.

Ngā raru tūpono / Risks

16. Risk management is a central focus of emergency management. The selection criteria and process for appointing Auckland Emergency Management’s Head of Recovery, together with training, ensure risk associated with the role of Group Recovery Manager has been appropriately addressed.

17. Strategic planning for recovery and the guidelines of the Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management are directed towards ensuring better performance and improved recovery outcomes. Project management disciplines applied to the development of the Resilient Recovery Strategy will ensure it is delivered on schedule.

Ngā koringa ā-muri / Next steps

18. A further update on strategic planning for recovery together with minor amendments to the recovery section of the Group Plan will be reported to the 30 May 2018 Committee meeting.

Ngā tāpirihanga / Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a ⇩	Key Milestones - Strategic Planning For Recovery 2018	117

Ngā kaihaina / Signatories

Author

Wayne Brown – Principal Recovery Advisor

Authorisers

Craig Glover - Head of Strategy and Planning

John Dragicevich - Director Civil Defence and Auckland Emergency Management

Chairperson	Cr Sharon Stewart, QSM
Deputy Chairperson	Cr John Watson
Members	Cr Ross Clow
	Cr Fa’anana Efeso Collins
	Cr Dick Quax
	Cr Sir John Walker, KNZM, CBE
	Cr Wayne Walker
IMSB Members	Hon Tau Henare
	Dennis Kirkwood

Ex-officio	Mayor Hon Phil Goff, CNZM, JP
	Deputy Mayor Bill Cashmore