|
Civil Defence
and Emergency Management Committee
26 April 2023
|
|
Prioritised
plan of actions for the Auckland Emergency Management function
File No.: CP2023/04462
Te take mō te
pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To
consider and endorse a prioritised plan of actions for Auckland Council’s
emergency management function.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
2. On 12 April 2023, the independent review commissioned by Mayor Wayne
Brown into the first 48 hours of the January storm event, the Auckland
Flood Response Review report, was released. The review was led
by former Police Commissioner Mike Bush.
3. Over
the past few years, a number of other reports and reviews into the Auckland
Emergency Management function and its response to emergencies have been carried
out.
4. These
reviews make a number of recommendations or suggestions for improvements in
both Auckland’s emergency preparedness and in future emergency responses.
5. Auckland
Emergency Management is committed to understanding what can be learned from
past responses and making improvements. Staff commissioned MartinJenkins to:
· analyse
the recommendations identified by the Auckland Flood Response Review report and
other reviews
· prioritise
the recommendations into a phased implementation plan of remedial actions for
the emergency management function over the short, medium, and longer-term time
horizons.
6. Based
on this analysis, the MartinJenkins report will present a short-term work
programme for the Civil Defence and Emergency Management Committee’s
consideration and endorsement.
7. It
is recommended that the Civil Defence and Emergency Management Committee also
refer the MartinJenkins report for consideration at the 27 April Governing Body
meeting.
8. Implementation
progress reports will be made regularly to the Governing Body and incorporated
in future reporting to the Civil Defence and Emergency Management Committee.
9. At
the time of the agenda close, the MartinJenkins report was still being
finalised, and will be circulated separately.
Ngā tūtohunga
Recommendation/s
That the Civil Defence and
Emergency Management Committee:
a) whiwhi /
receive the April 2023 MartinJenkins report setting out a prioritised plan of
actions for Auckland Council’s emergency management function
b) ohia /
endorse the short-term work programme set out in the April 2023 MartinJenkins
report
c) whakaae
/ agree to refer the MartinJenkins report to be tabled at the 27 April 2023
Governing Body meeting
d) tuhi ā-taipitopito
/ note that implementation progress reports will be made regularly to the
Governing Body and incorporated in future reporting to the Civil Defence and
Emergency Management Committee.
Ngā tāpirihanga
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
a
|
April 2023 MartinJenkins report
|
|
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
|
Author
|
Anna Bray - Executive Officer, Governance & CCO
Partnerships
|
|
Authorisers
|
Phil Wilson - Director, Governance & CCO Partnerships
Paul Amaral - General Manager Auckland Emergency
Manager
|
|
Civil Defence
and Emergency Management Committee
26 April 2023
|
|
Auckland Civil Defence Emergency Management
(ACDEM) Group Plan
File No.: CP2023/04599
Te take mō te
pūrongo
Purpose of the report
1. To
provide the Committee with an update on the Group Plan review, including two
options for completion of the review.
Whakarāpopototanga matua
Executive summary
2. Work
on the Group Plan review has progressed as outlined in paragraph 9.
3. The
Auckland Anniversary flooding event and Cyclone Gabrielle diverted all Auckland
Emergency Management (AEM) staff away from the Group Plan review during
February and March 2023.
4. The
current official programme for the Group Plan review, approved by the Committee
in June 2022, is for a completion date of November 2023. An updated programme,
to reflect time lost to the recent response, is described in paragraphs 10-12.
This is referred to as Option A.
5. In
light of Recommendation 2 in the Bush Report (Auckland Flood Response Review),
an alternative, accelerated timeline has also been prepared for consideration
by the Committee (Option B).
6. This
paper describes the considerations and implications of both Options, and seeks
a decision of the Committee to confirm the way forward.
Ngā tūtohunga
Recommendation/s
That the Civil Defence and
Emergency Management Committee:
a) whiwhi /
receive the report on the Group Plan programme
b) whakaae
/ approve either:
i) programme
Option A for a more extended strategy design and engagement process; or
ii) programme
Option B for delivery of the Group Plan review in an accelerated timeline with
consolidated engagement.
Horopaki
Context
7. Following
the Auckland Anniversary weekend flooding, Mayor Wayne Brown (the Mayor)
commissioned Bush International Consulting to review the first 48 hours of the
response. The report produced from that review is titled Auckland Flood
Response Review and is referred to as the “Bush report”. The Bush
report contains 17 recommendations to improve Auckland Emergency
Management’s systems and processes. The Mayor has indicated that he
accepts the recommendations. The following recommendation relates to the
programme for the Group Plan review.
Recommendation 2: “Finalise with urgency the
current review of the Auckland Civil Defence and Emergency Management (ACDEM)
Group Plan.”
8. Other
recommendations relate to the content of the Group Plan review. These will be
addressed in advice to this Committee by consultants Martin Jenkins.
9. It
is noted that Recommendation 3 of the Bush Report relates to detailed
operational documentation being contained within the Group Plan. As set out in
the Directors Guidelines for Group Planning produced by NEMA (DGL 09/18), Group
Plans should be considered on a par with Regional Policy Statements in terms of
hierarchy of planning documents. The Group Plan is a strategic document that
sets out the vision of achieving an Auckland that is resilient to disasters. It
identifies objectives (what we are aiming to achieve), challenges (issues that
present risks for achieving the objectives) and actions (steps the Council will
take in order to address the challenges over the five-year horizon of the Group
Plan).
10. Group Plans
refer to lower-level detailed operational planning documents, such as Standard
Operating Procedures (SOPs) that are required to support implementation. An
appropriate level of detail, including a description of the CDEM Operating
Model in Auckland, and roles and responsibilities, will be included in the
Group Plan, guided by the requirements of the DGL. The benefit of this is that
SOPs can be frequently updated to reflect improvements identified as a result
of ongoing exercising and testing of systems, rather than requiring lengthy
consultation processes associated with a Group Plan review.
11. Work to date
on the Group Plan review has included:
· AEM
recruitment for Group Plan support (note that the Project Lead has changed
since the last Committee update due to staff resignation)
· Review
of current Group Plan
· Review
of national level plans and guidance produced by the National Emergency
Management Agency (NEMA)
· Review
of relevant Auckland Council strategies and plans that relate to building
resilient communities
· Review
of previous reports providing recommendations for improvements to the emergency
management system
· Emergency
Management Bill consultation feedback
· Risk
assessment project completed
· Project
plan for delivery of project designed
· Initial
engagement with NEMA, iwi and Māori, and partners in the Civil Defence and
Emergency Management sector through the Coordinating Executive Group and
Emergency Management Committees
· Establishing
Council Project Advisory Group
· Early
drafting and of current arrangements, objectives, challenges and consideration
of potential actions.
12. The Auckland
Anniversary flooding event and Cyclone Gabrielle diverted all AEM staff away
from the Group Plan review during February and March 2023.
Tātaritanga me ngā
tohutohu
Analysis and advice
13. The current
official programme for the Group Plan review, approved by the Committee in June
2022, is for a completion date of November 2023. An updated programme, to
reflect time lost to the recent response, is provided in Figure 1. This is
referred to as Option A.
14. Option A is
based on the following considerations:
· allowing
time for early engagement with partners in the Civil Defence and Emergency
Management Sector via the Coordinating Executive Group (CEG) Group Plan working
group
· allowing
time for engagement with Local Boards in the design of the draft Group Plan
· allowing
time for engagement with Iwi and Māori in the design of the draft Group
Plan
· enabling
the results of a full debrief into the response to both the Anniversary weekend
flood event, and Cyclone Gabrielle, which is being produced by TOA consulting,
to be included in the consultation version of the Group Plan
· aligning
with planned CEG and Committee dates for reporting and approval (refer Fig 1).
15. Option A
requires an extension to the current programme of seven months. This accounts
for the time lost to the response, and the de-brief by TOA consultants.
Figure 1 - Group Plan timeline Option A
16. In light of
recommendation 2 in the Bush Report, an alternative timeline has also been
prepared (Option B).
17. Option B is
an accelerated timeline, with the following implications:
· Engagement
with partners and stakeholders including the CEG working group, Local Boards
and Iwi and Māori, would occur at the same time as consultation with the
wider public during the consultation period, rather than during Group Plan
design.
· The
results of the debrief by TOA consulting would be incorporated into the final
Group Plan, rather than the version of the Group Plan that is published for
community feedback.
· Extra-ordinary
CEG and Committee meetings would be required, as the planned cadence of meeting
dates could not be met. This would require support from Democracy Services.
· This
option still requires an extension to the currently approved programme, but
only of two months, to account for the time lost to the recent response.
· Additional
resources in the form of consultants would be required to support this option.
Figure 2 - Group Plan timeline Option B
Tauākī whakaaweawe
āhuarangi
Climate impact statement
18. The
latest report from the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) declares
the scientific evidence is unequivocal: climate change is a grave and mounting
threat to human wellbeing and the health of our planet. People’s health,
lives and livelihoods, as well as property and critical infrastructure,
including energy and transportation systems, are being adversely affected by
hazards from heat waves, storms, drought, and flooding, as well as slow-onset
changes including sea level rise.
19. The
report states that the world faces unavoidable multiple climate hazards over
the next two decades with global warming of 1.5 degrees celsius. Even
temporarily exceeding this warming level will result in additional severe
impacts, some of which will be irreversible. Risks for society will increase,
including to infrastructure and low-lying coastal settlements.
20. Cities
are described as hotspots of impacts and risks, but also a crucial part of the
solution. The Chair of the IPCC said that our actions today will shape how
people adapt and nature responds to increasing climate risk.
21. The Group
Plan will address actions that can be taken to increase operational and
community readiness to build resilience in the face of increased frequency and
severity of weather events associated with climate change. It will also address
actions that can be taken to reduce risks, respond to and recover from events.
22. The programme
for completion of the Group Plan review is not a decision that impacts
greenhouse gas emissions or approaches to reduce emissions.
Ngā whakaaweawe me
ngā tirohanga a te rōpū Kaunihera
Council group impacts and views
23. The review of
the Auckland CDEM Group Plan is a statutory requirement under the CDEM Act. AEM
have established a Project Advisory Group (PAG) with representatives from the
wider Council to ensure strategic alignment across plans that relate to
building resilient communities. This includes representatives from the Chief
Sustainability Office, Community and Social Policy, Plans and Places and
Auckland Plan Strategy and Research. The PAG are aware of the Group Plan
requirements, and the role they play in supporting its development. This is
particularly important as many of the activities associated with reducing risk
and recovering from events, are led by the wider Council rather than AEM.
24. Council
Controlled Organisations are connected to this work through both CEG and
Lifelines.
Ngā whakaaweawe
ā-rohe me ngā tirohanga a te poari ā-rohe
Local impacts and local board views
25. The review of
the Auckland CDEM Group Plan is required by the CDEM Act, and the prescribed
process requires opportunities for people interested in the plan to make
submissions and be heard. Local boards will also be engaged through the
process, through both Options A and B.
Tauākī whakaaweawe
Māori
Māori impact statement
26. In
line with the National Disaster Resilience Strategy- Rautaki ā-Motu
Manawaroa Aituā, AEM have been working hard to incorporate a Te Ao
Māori worldview into our mahi to ensure greater recognition,
understanding, and integration of iwi/Māori perspectives and tikanga in
emergency management.
27. The
impacts on Māori from disasters can be significant and there are real
strengths in integrating kaupapa Māori, mātauranga Māori and
tikanga Māori into resilience building for disasters.
28. AEM
are committed to honouring Te Tiriti o Waitangi by ensuring the views and
knowledge of Iwi and Māori are reflected in the Group Plan review.
29. Engagement
with iwi and Māori on the Group Plan began with a presentation to the Mana
Whenua Kaitiaki forum in late 2022. The forum were encouraging and supportive
of the kaupapa. AEM continues to build relationships with iwi and Māori at
all levels, from the Independent Māori Statutory Board, to individual
marae through their resilience planning work via Whakaoranga
Marae, Whakaoranga Whānau. AEM plan to embed this marae resilience
programme into the Group Plan, and will continue to use this model as a vehicle
for building strong relationships with Iwi and Māori.
Ngā ritenga
ā-pūtea
Financial implications
30. Additional
resource will be required to support delivery of Option B, in the form of
consultant support. The cost of the additional support will be covered within
the Auckland Emergency Management budget allocation with no additional funding
required.
Ngā raru tūpono me
ngā whakamaurutanga
Risks and mitigations
31. While the
current Group Plan has an operational period of 2016 – 2021, it remains
operational until it is revoked and replaced or updated, regardless of its
stated operational period. Therefore, there is low statutory risk associated
with an extended time period for the completion of the Group Plan review.
32. Both timeline
options A and B are subject to the following risks:
· The
unknown date of the Civil Defence and Emergency Management Bill and the
associated implications for the sector and Group Plan requirements
· Another
emergency response which diverts focus and resource away from the Group Plan
review within AEM and its partner organisations
· Council
restructures underway, and that will be following the Long-Term Plan processes.
Ngā koringa ā-muri
Next steps
33. AEM will
progress completion of the Group Plan review as per the timeline agreed by this
Committee.
Ngā tāpirihanga
Attachments
There are no attachments for
this report.
Ngā kaihaina
Signatories
|
Author
|
Kristen Spooner – Principal Advisor, Strategy
and Planning
|
|
Authoriser
|
Paul Amaral - General Manager Auckland Emergency
Manager
|
