My Account
Last month, the Auckland Flood Response Review was released, detailing the shortcomings of Auckland’s emergency preparedness.
Many of the findings (see Box) talked about the need for decentralising the response. Many in the aftermath of the Anniversary Day floods, including the Hibiscus & Bays local board chair, were vocal about being left out of the loop, and the local board is now working to improve that for when the next disaster hits.
Mayor Wayne Brown has said the recommendations in the report will be actioned by October 13, and tested with a scenario. Representatives of Auckland Emergency Management (AEM) told a meeting of local board chairs on April 17 that they are in the process of making changes and putting a new structure in place.
Hibiscus & Bays Local Board chair Gary Brown says he is concerned about what would happen if there were a Civil Defence emergency in the interim (between now and October).
Brown says the floods and cyclone showed that local responses need to be coordinated through local boards, who know their areas, facilities and issues.
He wanted to create a Civil Defence refuge at St Stephen’s Church in Whangaparāoa, and at the Salvation Army headquarters in Red Beach during the floods, but says he was told ‘no’ by AEM who opened one at Stanmore Bay Leisure Centre instead (because it is Council-owned).
“The Leisure Centre is in a flood plain, and when I pointed this out, they said they would arrange to evacuate people from there to higher ground if it was flooded, which is madness. You have to have a range of local places to suit the emergency – floods, fire, or earthquakes – and this area needs something accessible for people in Ōrewa and Dairy Flat/Wainui and for Whangaparāoa.”
“I was angry at the poor communication from AEM. We were forgotten on the Coast and that can’t happen again. We could have helped people in places like Puhoi and Dairy Flat – even though they are in Rodney Local Board’s area, we are physically closer.”
Brown says ratepayers have been asking him how things will improve next time, and the short answer is that this area needs to go back to having local volunteers trained in Civil Defence, which the local board is currently working towards.
“We need to take the bull by the horns and look after our own areas.”
Editor’s note: There is no doubt that an independent report into Auckland Council’s performance in a Civil Defence emergency was called for. However, how much that report cost ratepayers is yet to be revealed as Council told Hibiscus Matters to request that figure under the Official Information Act. We have done so.
Among the findings were: “Supercity planning for emergencies seems to have contributed to an optimism bias that Auckland Council’s size and systems could handle anything. • Rather than a model based on central planning and localised delivery, the Council’s emergency response was premised largely on centralised coordination and delivery of response. In the event, this weakened the localised intelligence flows that could have supported better targeted community responses.” • Many respondents [to the review] raised issues relating to the pre-storm state of the drains, culverts and soak pits that drain Auckland’s streets. Elected members reported receiving communications from constituents that drains were not being regularly cleared and that some soak pits appeared obstructed. We strongly suggest that a review of the pre-event condition of Auckland’s horizontal infrastructure be undertaken if this has not already been initiated. From our overview of event-related correspondence, including to the Mayor, there is considerable public interest in Council confirming that any maintenance issues have been identified and a plan of on-going maintenance is in place.” • The list of possible locations [for Civil Defence Centres] does not appear to have been well informed by local and community held information. Prior to Auckland amalgamation, detailed plans were held at local board level and perhaps better reflected local conditions, resources and partnerships. Some of this detail appears to have been lost when lists were revisited from a super city perspective” • “AEM appears to have acted throughout from a centralised service delivery model, when a more devolved response would have better aligned to the locations of displaced people and the available Civil Defence Centres. • “In future, it will be critical that Civil Defence Centres, while planned and tested centrally, are delivered locally, and through partnerships with community providers of all kinds. One of the factors slowing the CDC response on the critical night was the need not only to align Council logistics, welfare and buildings teams, but also the lack of available local knowledge to the AEM. A number of elected members had a good understanding of local conditions and options, but they struggled to know how to connect with AEM to offer suggestions. Their emails to AEM reflect considerable concern at the lack of alignment to community needs.” • “Another implicit assumption seems to centre on the value of centralisation, while in emergency management, a careful balance between centralisation of planning and localisation of service delivery seems likely to be necessary.”
