A damning grab bag of failures underscored emergency response throughout the North Island before, during and after the devastating weather events of early last year.
The release of the government inquiry into the response to the North Island severe weather events leaves little doubt the country’s emergency response systems are in dire need of an overhaul to avoid outcomes similar to the devastating outcomes of last year.
The inquiry covered responses across three major weather events – Cyclone Hale January 8-12, heavy rainfall from January 26-February 3, and Cyclone Gabrielle on February 14.
Chaired by Sir Jerry Mateparae, the inquiry produced a report that does not apportion blame to individuals or entities, but clearly states the current system is “not fit for purpose” and contains “significant shortcomings” in the way emergency management functions.
It cites the lack of early warning for many communities, a lack of co-ordinated response between departments, decision making that was either slow or non-existent, and a lack of equipment and supplies.
The report panel found individual communities managed to cope heroically during the events. However, the disconnect between them and civil defence emergency management teams was “striking”.
The lack of warnings has undermined public confidence in councils, weather forecasting and the wider emergency system.
It appeared emergency officials assumed communities and volunteer groups already knew their role, but this had often not been made evident to the communities themselves.
Many communities considered civil defence to be all but absent.
Among one of 14 recommendations, the panel says that communities’ role in emergency responses should be put at the heart of an integrated response system. This would include education programmes and more engagement from national civil defence staff.
Making more use of wider government resources is also recommended, including expanding the Defence Force’s role, utilising special skills such as logistics and air co-ordination during emergencies.
The inquiry also called for a weather forecasting system review to identify changes in access to weather data and require timely weather forecasting to all councils.
The big role marae and iwi played in the disaster response has also been recognised, with a call for legislation to enable iwi to participate in planning for and response to natural disasters.
A major overhaul of the national emergency response leadership is called for. This would include having clearer lines of responsibility and leadership across local and national government during an emergency.
A deeper pool of skilled operators capable of being seconded throughout NZ is required, alongside three full-time emergency management assistance teams capable of being deployed nationally.
Guidance on the supplies required by communities for self-sufficiency after an event is recommended to be lifted from three days to two weeks.
A physical move to a purpose-built national crisis management centre is also recommended, with a back-up facility in a city other than Wellington.
The recommendations of the panel matter in a country ranked the second riskiest for insurers globally.
A 2018 Lloyds of London report referenced by the inquiry cites Bangladesh as the world’s highest risk for insurers due to natural disasters, followed by New Zealand, then Chile, China, Vietnam, Indonesia, Thailand and Turkey.
Taken over the past 20 years, natural disaster recovery has cost NZ 4.3% of its GDP per year, similar to that spent on superannuation.
In response to the findings, Emergency Management and Recovery Minister Mark Mitchell said he will consider the inquiry’s recommendations more fully, along with other recent reports, and make further decisions in the next few months.
Released in February, the independent review into the Hawke’s Bay civil defence emergency management response after Gabrielle revealed similar shortcomings particular to that region.
“We need to look at these as well as what is coming through in other reviews of these events. I want to take the time to get this right,” Mitchell said.
He said it is clear the existing emergency management Bill does not go far enough to elicit system-wide change to deliver a fit-for-purpose response system.
“It is my intention to introduce a new Bill this term, alongside making system improvements that do not require legislative change,” he said.
