|
Resolution
number RD/2019/85
MOVED by Deputy Chairperson P Pirrie, seconded by Member
B Bailey:
That the Rodney
Local Board:
a) provide
the following feedback on the draft Pathways to Preparedness: A Planning
Framework for Recovery:
General
i) express
concern about the scope and suitability of the Pathways to Preparedness: A
Planning Framework for Recovery (“Pathways document”) for dealing
with a natural disaster in a rural setting
ii) consider
that, given the size and breadth of the rural area and its general lack of
infrastructure, the Pathways document will not be fit for purpose for rural
communities who can be cut off from help and recovery for days or weeks
following a disaster
iii) request
that the Pathways document be redrafted, and the scope expanded to include
disaster response alongside disaster recovery, as you cannot achieve a good
disaster recovery if you have failed to adequately address disaster response
iv) recommend
that the Auckland Civil Defence Emergency Management Group review the
disaster planning completed by the former Rodney District Council which was
extensive and focussed on Rodney’s rural nature, noting that many of
the findings in that plan seem to have been lost in preparing the Pathways
document
v) express
concern that, at present, there is no capacity within council to cope with a
natural disaster on the ground in a rural setting, and no progress has been
made in preparing for a disaster in the 10 year history of Auckland Council
vi) note
that the storms of April 2018 highlighted the shortcoming in council’s
existing centralised emergency response approach, as rural areas in the
north-west were left to respond and recover from the disaster themselves over
several weeks before any assistance from Council was forthcoming
vii) request
that, as a first step, council address the shortcomings in disaster response
by reinstating local civil emergency groups and ensure that these are
adequately trained and resourced, noting that, in the rural setting, these
groups may likely be the only groups on the ground to get access into
effected areas for several days
viii) recommend
that council urgently reassess its approach to civil defence reporting
centres and reinstate these in rural areas, noting that the local board is
currently investing its limited renewal budgets where possible into upgrading
rural halls so that these can work as temporary community shelters in an
emergency in order to try and fill the gap left by Auckland Civil Defence and
Emergency Management
ix) request
that council pay particular attention to the fact that when rural communities
lose power they also lose water and sewerage and this needs to be factored
into Council’s emergency planning as it makes rural needs more urgent
than urban areas which keep these essential services in a power outage
x) request
that council work with utility providers to encourage the use of long-life
battery backups and resilient network infrastructure in our rural areas as
these areas can be completely cut off and without power (and therefore
telecommunications services) for weeks at a time in an emergency
xi) recommend
that Council review how its contact centres are trained to deal with an
emergency, noting that urban based contact centres were completely out of
touch and provided erroneous advice to rural communities during the April
2018 storms, with promises of assistance that never eventuated
xii) note
that the detailed work programme to deliver the Pathways document is to be
developed, and request that the local board be consulted on the development
of that work programme so it can provide input
Values and Priorities
xiii) support
the values and priorities and the community centric approach
xiv) agree
with the community values in the Pathways document, in particular the focus
on “resilience and self reliance”, “local knowledge”,
and “partnership and voice”
xv) request
that the priorities include “vulnerable communities” in
recognition that rural areas will feel more cut off and abandoned in an
emergency, with little other infrastrucutre to fall back on should they lose
a key facility or road etc, and they will therefore require additional,
prioritised support
Vision
xvi) support
the general intent of vision, particuarly the need for clear, well understood
processes, but note that these processes need to be fit for purpose in all
contexts and cannot be a one size fits all model, and this is not clear
enough in the Pathways document
xvii) agree
that, while responsible and cost-effective rehabilitation of a community does
not guarantee a community will be restored to its original state, council
must ensure it puts sufficient weight on the desires of a community if they
feel particularly strongly about returning to an original state and should
give effect to this desire where it is practical and feasible to do so
xviii) request
that the Pathways document include that a disaster should not be used as an
argument to downsize or refuse to replace lost assets on the basis of cutting
cost or to “sweat assets” in other locations
How we
work
xix) support
the proposed partnership approach to recovery, noting that communities know
what is best for them and what their recovery should look like, and add that
a similar partnership approach should be adopted for disaster response as
well
xx) request
that council ensure there is sufficient resource available to provide the
support that communities require, noting that a slow response time, difficult
processes, and an inability to provide the resources needed, will make an
already difficult situation worse for communities that need help recovering
from a disaster
xxi) request
that partnering with iwi be included clearly in the Pathways document, which
includes helping iwi prepare their Marae for a disaster and using those Marae
in a disaster, as this is currently lacking in the document
Work we
do
xxii) support
the five areas for effective recovery, but note that this will only be
successful if council ensure the process is effective and fit for purpose for
specific communities and not a one size fits all approach
xxiii) support
the “actions to build momentum” particularly those centred on
communications and collaboration, noting that a failure to communicate and
reassure communities will exascerbate the effects of any disaster.
CARRIED
|
