Notice of Meeting€¦ · 5 Minutes of Previous Meeting Doc# 11461758 Minutes of the previous meeting of Waikato CDEM Group Joint Committee. 9‐15 6

Doc # 11971878

Notice of Meeting: I hereby give notice that an ordinary Meeting of the Waikato Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group Joint Committee will be held on: Date: Monday 26 March 2017 Time: 10.00am Meeting Room: Te Puia Room Venue: Genesis Building, 94 Bryce Street, Hamilton

VRJ Payne Chief Executive Officer

Waikato Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group Agenda

Chairman Cr Hugh Vercoe Deputy Chairman Cr Leo Tooman Members Alternates Hamilton City Council Cr Leo Tooman Cr James Casson Hauraki District Council Cr P Buckthought Mayor John Tregidga Matamata Piako District Cr Brian Hunter Mayor Jan Barnes Otorohanga District Council Mayor Max Baxter Cr Annette Williams / Cr Katrina

Christison South Waikato District Council Cr Thomas Lee Mayor Jenny Shattock Taupō District Council Cr Anna Park Mayor David Trewavas / Cr

Tangonui Kingi Thames Coromandel District Council Cr Rex Simpson Cr Sally Christie / Mayor Sandra

Goudie Waikato District Council Cr Noel Smith Dynes Fulton Waikato Regional Council Cr Hugh Vercoe Cr Stu Husband Waipa District Council Cr Judy Bannon Mayor Jim Mylchreest Waitomo District Council Mayor Brian Hanna Cr Allan Goddard Quorum six members (including vacancies)

Jennie Cox Democracy Advisor

Telephone: 0800 800 401 [email protected]

Website: www.waikatoregion.govt.nz

Doc # 11971878 Page 2

OBJECTIVE: To provide governance and oversight of all planning, co‐ordination and delivery of Civil Defence Emergency Management within the Waikato Region Civil Defence Emergency Management Group area. SCOPE OF ACTIVITY: The functions of the Group and of each member of the Group are to: 1. In relation to relevant hazards and risks:

(a) identify, assess, and manage those hazards and risks; and (b) consult and communicate about risks; and (c) identify and implement cost‐effective risk reduction; and

2. Take all steps necessary on an ongoing basis to maintain and provide, or to arrange the

provision of, or to otherwise make available suitably trained and competent personnel, including volunteers, and an appropriate organisational structure for those personnel, for effective civil defence emergency management in the Waikato Region Civil Defence Emergency Management Group area; and

3. Take all steps necessary on an ongoing basis to maintain and provide, or to arrange the

provision of, or otherwise to make available material, services, information, and any other resources for effective civil defence emergency management in the Waikato Region Civil Defence Emergency Management Group area; and

4. Respond to and manage the adverse effects of emergencies in the Waikato Region Civil Defence

Emergency Management Group area; and 5. Carry out recovery activities; and 6. When requested, assist other civil defence emergency management groups in the

implementation of civil defence emergency management in their areas (having regard to the competing civil defence emergency management demands within the Waikato Region Civil Defence Emergency Management Group area and any other requests for assistance from other civil defence emergency management groups); and

7. Within the Waikato Region Civil Defence Emergency Management Group area, promote and

raise public awareness of, and compliance with, the Act and legislative provisions relevant to the purpose of the Act; and

8. Monitor and report on compliance within the Waikato Region Civil Defence Emergency

Management Group area with the Act and legislative provisions relevant to the purpose of the Act; and

9. Develop, approve, implement, and monitor the Waikato Civil Defence Emergency Management

Group Plan and regularly review the plan; and 10. Participate in the development of the National Civil Defence Emergency Management Strategy

and the National Civil Defence Emergency Management Plan; and 11. Promote civil defence emergency management in the Waikato Region Civil Defence Emergency

Management Group area that is consistent with the purpose of the Act.

Doc # 11971878 Page 3

GENERAL POWER TO ACT: 1. A Civil Defence Emergency Management Group has all the powers that are reasonably necessary

or expedient to enable it to perform its functions, including the power to delegate any of its functions to members, the Group Controller, or other persons.

2. Without limiting the generality of subsection (1), a Group may—

(a) recruit and train volunteers for civil defence emergency management tasks: (b) conduct civil defence emergency management training exercises, practices, and rehearsals: (c) issue and control the use of signs, badges, insignia, and identification passes authorised

under this Act, regulations made under this Act, or any civil defence emergency management plan:

(d) provide, maintain, control, and operate warning systems: (e) provide communications, equipment, accommodation, and facilities for the exercise of its

functions and powers during an emergency: (f) exercise any other powers that are necessary to give effect to any civil defence emergency

management plan. POWERS AND OBLIGATIONS OF CDEM GROUP MEMBERS: 1. Each member of a Civil Defence Emergency Management Group—

(a) may acquire, hold, and dispose of real or personal property for the use of the Group; and (b) may remunerate its representative for the cost of that person’s participation in the Group;

and (c) must provide to the Group the information or reports that may be required by the Group;

and

(d) must pay the costs of administrative and related services in accordance with section 24 of the CDEM Act 2002; and

(e) must pay the costs, or a share of the costs, of any civil defence emergency management activity that the member has agreed to pay; and may carry out any other functions or duties conferred on a member of a Group under this Act.

Civil Defence & Emergency Management Abbreviations and Glossary as at 16 August 2017

CDEM Abbreviations AA Assembly Area AAR After Action Review ACC Accident Compensation Corporation AFTN Aeronautical Fixed Telecommunication Network ANGOA Association of Non Government Organisations of Aotearoa AOG All of Government AREC Amateur Radio Emergency Communications ATP Active Threshold Points BS Business Support (EOC/ICP Admin & staff Welfare) CAA Civil Aviation Authority CaLD Culturally and Linguistically Diverse CAG “Caldera Advisory Group” or “Coordinating Advisory Group” CAP Corrective Action Plan CCO Critical Contingency Operator CD Civil Defence CDC Civil Defence Centre CDEM Civil Defence Emergency Management CDEMG Civil Defence Emergency Management Group CEG Coordinating Executive Group CERT Community Emergency Response Team CIMS Coordinated Incident Management System CODNA Controllers Development Needs Analysis COMMS Communications e.g. radio, telephone, fax, email CPVAG Central Plateau Volcanic Advisory Group CYF Child Youth and Family DC District Council DESC Committee for Domestic and External Security DHB District health board, and includes hospital and health services (including ambulance services) DOC Department of Conservation DoC Department of Corrections DPMC Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet

DWST Disaster Welfare & Support Teams REMA Regional Emergency management adviser EMC Emergency Management Committee EMIS Emergency Management Information System EMO Emergency Management Office EOA Emergency Operating Area EOC Emergency Operations Centre EQC Earthquake Commission ESSCG Emergency Social Services Coordination Group FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency (US) FENZ Fire and Emergency New Zealand GDO GECC Duty Officer GECC Group Emergency Coordination Centre GIS Geographic information system GNS Institute of Geological and Nuclear Sciences HNZC Housing New Zealand Corporation IAP Incident Action Plan ICNZ Insurance Council of New Zealand ICP Incident Control Point ICC Incident Control Centre IRD Inland Revenue Department IMT Incident Management Team IOC Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission IPENZ Institute of Professional Engineers of New Zealand LWC Local Welfare Committee LUC Lifelines Utility Coordinator MCDEM Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management MED Ministry of Economic Development MEP Mass Evacuation Plan MPI Ministry of Primary Industries MoE Ministry of Education MoH Ministry of Health MOU Memorandum of Understanding MSD Ministry of Social Development MNZ Maritime New Zealand (previously known as the Maritime Safety Authority) NCMC National Crisis Management Centre

NDRF Non-Government Organisation Disaster Relief Forum NEP National Exercise Programme NHEP National Health Emergency Plan NGO Non-governmental organisations, and excludes local government NIWA National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NWCG National Welfare Coordination Group NWS National Weather Service (United States) NZAC New Zealand Association of Councillors NZHPT New Zealand Historic Places Trust NZRT New Zealand Response Team ODESC Committee of Officials for Domestic and External Security Coordination OPS Operations OSH Occupational Safety and Health P & I Planning and Intelligence PHO Primary Health Organisation PIM Public Information Manager PRFO Principal Rural Fire Officer PRINZ Public Relations Institute New Zealand PTSD Post-traumatic stress disorder PTWC Pacific Tsunami Warning Centre (in Hawaii, operated by National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration) PTWS Pacific Tsunami Warning System RCA Road Controlling Authority RPS Regional Policy Statement SEOA Southern Emergency Operating Area (Taupō DC/South Waikato DC) SETG Social Environmental Task Group SOP Standard Operating Procedure Sitrep Situation Report SPCA Royal New Zealand Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals TA Territorial Authority (includes city, district and unitary authorities) TPK Te Puni Kokiri TSA The Salvation Army TWA Tainui Waka Alliance TVEOA Thames Valley Emergency Operating Area UNDAC United Nations Disaster Assessment and Coordination USAR Urban Search and Rescue WCATWC West Coast and Alaska Tsunami Warning Centre WCG Welfare Coordination Group

WLUG Waikato Lifeline Utility Group WMO World Meteorological Organisation WRC Waikato Regional Council (Abbreviated: “The Council”) WWEOA Western Waikato Emergency Operating Area

Item Table of Contents

Page

1 Welcome

2 Apologies

3 Confirmation of Agenda

4 Disclosures of Interest

5 Minutes of Previous Meeting Doc# 11461758

Minutes of the previous meeting of Waikato CDEM Group Joint Committee.

9‐15

6 MCDEM Update Doc# 11951809, 11917726

Report to provide an update regarding the work programme undertaken by the Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management (MCDEM)

16‐21

7 Summary of Coordinating Executive Group Minutes Doc# 11966049

Report to provide a summary of the minutes taken at the Coordinating Executive Group meeting that took place on the 9th March 2018.

22‐25

8 Appointment of Group Recovery Manager Doc# 11959456

Report to provide an opportunity to consider the suitability of the nominated candidate for the position of Group Recovery Manager.

26‐27

9 Waikato CDEM Group Plan 2016/2021 Public Consultation Doc# 11959469

Report to provide an overview of the notification process undertaken, the submissions received and an opportunity to consider recommended changes to the Waikato CDEM Group Plan.

28‐39 40‐165

10 Appointment of Local Controllers Doc# 11949552

Report to provide an opportunity to consider the appointment of Local and Group Controllers.

166‐170

11 Appointment of Group Public Information Manager Doc# 11951502

Report to provide an update on staffing arrangements for the Group Public Information manager.

171

12 Group Controller’s Update Doc#11952382

Report to provide an update on progress with the new GEMO/GECC facility, and an overview of recent personnel deployments.

172‐173

13 Technical Advisory Group review Doc# 11963681

Report to provide the findings of the Technical Advisory Group (TAG) review and provide an overview of planned actions.

174

14 Waikato CDEM Group Controller Policy Doc#11960674, 11366638

Report to provide an opportunity to consider the Waikato CDEM Group Controller policy.

175 176‐187

15 Response to January Event Doc11951812

Report to provide an overview of the TVEOA readiness and response activities related to the Firth of Thames storm surge on 5th January 2018; focussing on local authority performance and key learnings.

188‐195

16 Thames Valley EOA Recovery – Firth of Thames storm surge 5 January 2018 Doc#11952383

Report to an overview of the recovery activity undertaken to date by Hauraki, Thames Coromandel and Waikato District Councils following the emergency which occurred as a result of the storm surge event that affected coastal communities on the Firth of Thames on Friday January 5, 2018.

196‐204

17 Waikato Regional Council Long Term Plan 2018/2028 Update Doc# 11950721

Report to provide an update on the Long Term Process used to secure funding for the GEMO’s work programmes.

205‐206

18 GEMO Update Doc# 11952195

Report to provide an update on the activities undertaken by the Group Emergency Management Office (GEMO).

207‐217

19 Warning Systems Strategy update Doc# 11951227

Report to provide an update on activities relating to the Waikato CDEM Group Warning System at both the Group and Local level.

218‐221

20 Items for Next Meeting

Report to provide an opportunity to discuss or propose items for the next meeting 25 June 2018.

Doc # 11971878

Waikato Civil Defence Emergency Management Joint Committee MINUTES

Minutes of a meeting of the Waikato Civil Defence Emergency Management Joint Committee held in Council Chamber, 401 Grey Street, Hamilton East on Monday 27 November 2017 at 1.00pm. Present: Hamilton City Council Cr Leo Tooman Hauraki District Council Cr Phillip Buckthought Matamata Piako District Cr Brian Hunter Otorohanga District Council Cr Annette Williams South Waikato District Council Mayor Jenny Shattock Taupō District Council Cr Anna Park Thames Coromandel District Council Cr Rex Simpson Waikato Regional Council Cr Hugh Vercoe (Chair) Waipā District Council Cr Judy Bannon Waitomo District Council Cr Allan Goddard

In Attendance: Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management

Suzanne Vowles

Staff Langley Cavers – CEG Chair Lee Hazelwood – Group Controller Dainelle Kruger ‐ Emergency Management Coordinator ‐

Strategic Planner Jennie Cox – Democracy Advisor

9

Minutes of Waikato Civil Defence Emergency Management Joint Committee Meeting 27 November 2017 2

Apologies Waikato District Council ‐ Cr Noel Smith / Cr Dynes Fulton

Accepted

Confirmation of Agenda Agenda Item 2

The agenda was accepted as provided. The Chair noted there would be two presentations within the meeting. Disclosures of Interest Agenda Item 3

There were no disclosures of interest.

Minutes of Previous Meeting Agenda Item 4 Doc#1098359 Cr Simpson moved/Cr Hunter seconded.

CD17/31 RESOLVED THAT the Minutes of the Waikato Civil Defence Emergency Management Joint Committee meeting of 4 September 2017 be received and approved as a correct record.

The motion was put and carried (CD17/31)

Ministry of Civil Defence Emergency Management Update Agenda Item 5 Doc#11398076, 11409182

Presented by S Vowles the report provided the Joint Committee members with an update regarding the work programme undertaken by the Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management (MCDEM). During discussion, the following was noted:

Following the Mobile Alert test on Sunday 26 November there were a number of people who did not receive the alert. Members were advised that on the MCDEM website there was an FAQ site where people could review questions in relation to their phone types. There was also a section powered by Survey Monkey where the public could choose to enter their details and have the Ministry interact directly with them in that way.

For those phones that did receive the alert there were a number of ways the message came through and the reasons for these differences were being reviewed.

10


The Technical Advisory Group review had been provided to Minister Brownlee before the election and has since been provided to Minister Faafoi. The ministry were now awaiting comments on the report.

Cr Simpson moved/Cr Bannon seconded.

CD17/32 RESOLVED THAT the report MCDEM Update (Doc #11398076 dated 31 October 2017) be received.


Summarised Coordinating Executive Group Minutes Agenda Item 6 Doc# 11418342, #11418342

Presented by the CEG Chair, L Cavers, the report provided the Joint Committee with a summary of the matters raised and discussed at the last Coordinating Executive Group meeting. During discussion, the following was noted:

A member enquired who Liam Ryan was in relation to the CEG. Members were advised that Liam Ryan was from NZTA and represented the Waikato Lifelines group. Liam came to the role having taken over from Allan Harrop who was from WEL.

Cr Williams moved/Cr Bannon seconded

CD17/33 RESOLVED THAT the report Summarised CEG minutes (Doc # 11418342 dated 17th November 2017) be received.


Mayor Shattock in the meeting at 1.16pm.

The Chair in noting a small change to the agenda, addressed the meeting to announce the departure of Stephen Ward who has worked along with the Civil Defence Emergency Management team for ten years. Stephen was provided with a plaque of thanks from the Chair and the Civil Defence team.

Amended Waikato CDEM Group Plan Agenda Item 7 Doc#11393241, 10993632, 11415140

Presented by S Duignan the report informed the Joint Committee of the amendments to the Waikato Civil Defence Emergency Management (CDEM) Group Plan in accordance with the 2016 changes in the CDEM Act 2002. Members were provided with a presentation and a summary of the proposed changes to the plan.

11


During discussion, the following was noted:

A member enquired why as a group were Waikato CDEM employing a Group Recovery Manager and how would this be communicated with the communities. Members noted that the general sense from the changes in legislation were that the current arrangements for local recovery would have to change significantly. The proposal was to appoint Local Recovery Managers in a similar way to a Local Controllers. Need to ensure that there were set parameters for the Group Recovery Manager to work with the Local Recovery Managers and provide Best Practice guidelines for everyone. There was still a lot of work to determine what a “community” was and to work with the communities to determine acceptable risks. The work that would need to be undertaken would be more than what a Local Recovery Manager would be able to commit to as for most authorities they already hold a role within their area.

The Group would fund the Group Recovery Manager Role and the Local Recovery Manager would continue to be funded through the Local Authorities.

The role was still in development but based on recent national events there was an idea as to how the role would work due to lessons learned. It was proposed that the role would talk with Councils about how to talk to communities and to work through resilience plans and to look at cultural values that communities hold. Education would form a large part of the business as usual role for this person.

It was identified that the regional priorities may differ to the local priorities and it may be that the priority list becomes longer to be relevant to each area. Where a tsunami may not affect Matamata as it would Whitianga, the area may still be impacted by the need to relocate communities, even temporarily, after a large event.

The positions of Group Recovery Manager or Local Recovery Manager had an ability to grow, depending on how serious the Local Authority wanted to be involved.

Cr Tooman moved/Cr Simpson seconded.

CD17/34 RESOLVED 1. THAT the report Amended Waikato CDEM Group Plan (dated 14 November

2017, doc#11393241) be received, and

2. THAT the Joint Committee approve the Amended Waikato CDEM Group Plan for public consultation.


The Chair thanked Sue for her presentation on the Amended Group Plan.

12


Long Term Plan 2018/2028 Agenda Item 8 Doc# 11393770, 11416109, 11417294

Presented by the Group Controller L Hazelwood, the report provided the Joint Committee with an opportunity to consider the proposed budget increases for the LTP. The Joint Committee were taken through the variances from previous budgets that had been presented and through the each of the business cases. During discussion, the following was noted:

The Chair noted that Council would receive a number of requests for increased levels of service through the Long Term Plan process and consideration would be given to determine what could be delivered. The Chair noted his concern that a 26% increase and proposed that staff consider what more could be done for less.

A member enquired why the website platform migration had not occurred at the same time as Council and it was noted that the CDEM website was a stand alone site so had needed to be dealt with separately.

A member enquired what the current marketing budget was for CDEM and it was noted that there wasn’t a budget at the moment. The growing need for marketing support and resources has identified the need for a specific budget. As an example the cost of public notification of a plan such as the Group Plan would cost around $5,500.

A member noted that the professional development for the Group Controller should not be overlooked. The frequency worked out to at least one event a year for the controller to attend national or international conferences. Member agreed that the budget for this should not be overlooked.

A member inquired as to why there were Capital expenditure items in the budget. It was noted that the GEMO does not have a specific capital budget due to its ring‐fenced nature. The benefit for CDEM of a ringfenced budget was that any surplus would remain dedicated for CDEM purposes.

A member suggested collaboration for things like equipment that was budgeted for. Members were advised that where possible staff worked with Council to share resources but there was always competition for items as Civil Defence and Council both had a number of projects underway.

A member noted their support for the Civil Defence team and recognised where they wanted to go, however there would be unease within their district with a proposed 26% increase in Civil Defence. Even the small $2 increase would impact on the community. In response it was noted that a number of the increase were driven by legislative factors and findings from the review.

A member enquired whether there was an option for Central Government funding towards a Regional Recovery Forum or consider corporate partnership opportunities.

A further suggestion proposed was to look at phasing the social media position to balance costs of the website platform migration and over time increasing the position to a full time position.

The Chair, noting the varied comments from members took a poll of members to determine what financial level they were comfortable with. Members noted that the minimum increase would be $165,000 following the legislative requirements highlighted earlier. The majority of members noted they were comfortable with an increase of around $200,000 and not the proposed $400,000. From this staff were asked to review their budget proposal and to work out how this could be achieved. It was acknowledged that the information was required with Waikato

13


Regional Council by 1 December, but that the members would be updated with the re‐worked budget as soon as it was available.

Cr Bannon moved/Cr Hunter seconded.

CD17/35 RESOLVED 1. THAT the report Long Term Plan 2018/2028 (Doc #11393770 dated 15

November 2017) be received, and

2. THAT the Joint Committee be provided with a revised proposed budget increase of around $200,000.


Appointment of Local Controllers Agenda Item 9 Doc# 11423325

Presented by Group Controller L Hazelwood, the item provided the Joint Committee with an opportunity to consider the appointment of Local Controllers. Members were provided with the appointment process. Members were advised that the proposed appointment was Will Gauntlett of Waikato District Council Cr Tooman moved/Cr Simpson seconded

CD17/36 RESOLVED 1. THAT the report Appointment of Local Controllers (Doc # 11423325 dated 20

November 2017) be received, and

2. THAT the Joint Committee approve the recommendation of the Controller Appointment Sub‐Group


Group Controller/Manager’s Report Agenda Item 10 Doc# 11395374

The report provided the Joint Committee with an update on local SLA arrangement and the progress with the new building. The item was taken as read and there was no further discussion. Cr Vercoe moved/Cr Buckthought seconded.

CD17/37 REOLVED THAT the report “Group Controller/Manager’s Report” (Doc #11395374 dated 14 November 2017) be received.


14


Group Emergency Management Office (GEMO) Update Report Agenda Item 11 Doc# 11395837

The report provided the Joint Committee with an update on the activities undertaken by the Group Emergency Management Office (GEMO). The item was taken as read and there was no further discussion. Mayor Shattock moved/Cr Bannonseconded.

CD17/38 RESOLVED THAT the report Group Emergency Management Office (GEMO) Update Report (Doc #11395837 dated 14 November 2017) be received.


The Chair acknowledged the appointment of J Snowball to a position at TVCDEM, and thanked him for his service to Civil Defence in the Waikato and wished him well in his new role.

Meeting closed at 3.45pm Doc # 11461758

15

Doc # 11951809

Report to CDEM Joint Committee

Date: 16 March 2018

Author: Danielle Kruger, Emergency Management Coordinator – Strategic Planning

Authoriser: Lee Hazlewood, Group Controller/Manager

Subject: MCDEM Update

Section: A (Committee has delegated authority to make decision)

Purpose 1. To provide the Joint Committee with an update regarding the work programme undertaken by

the Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management (MCDEM).

Staff Recommendation:

1. That the report MCDEM Update (Doc # 11951809 dated 16 March 2018) be received for information.

Background 2. The attached update from MCDEM provides an overview of the activities undertaken by the

Ministry over the last quarter. Items covered include an update on recent response events, recovery updates, the national emergency management conference and the common alerting protocol technical standard.

Attachments Update from the Director – Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management (Doc #11917726)

16

17

18

Summary of Progress

Recovery after the 14 November 2016 earthquakes & tsunami

The reopening of SH1 on 15 December last year, linking Picton with Christchurch again for the

first time since 14 November 2016, has had a very positive impact on the Kaik6ura community.

Although areas of the road are still under construction with stop/go signs and stretches of

unsealed road, tourists and locals have embraced using the road again. The psychological and

economic impacts in Kaikoura are already evident, and tourists are filling the town.

The Government is supporting Kaik6ura, Hurunui and Marlborough in their focus on the repair of

damaged wastewater, fresh water and storm water infrastructure. The Ministers of Civil Defence

and Finance have just approved Kaikoura's first drawdown from a special fund to assist with

improving the resilience and capacity of the three water's assets in the district: $676,000 to

replace damaged urban water reservoirs and incoming pipes.

We continue to monitor, coordinate and champion the local recovery, including temporary

accommodation and psychosocial support, as needed. The Ministry of Business, Innovation and

Employment has begun the construction of a temporary accommodation village in Kaikoura, to

house seven families at any one time while their homes are repaired.

Contact: Jenna Rogers, MCDEM Manager on 021 924 181 or [email protected].

Whakatane

MCDEM is continuing to support the Local Recovery Office and central and local government

agencies as they help flood-affected families, farmers and businesses.

Around 87% of families have now returned to their homes, or actively working towards returning

home, following the April 2017 floods (as at early February 2018). A 'building navigator' has been

established to help families negotiate the logistics of repairing their homes following cash

insurance settlements.

Contact: Jenna Rogers, MCDEM Manager on 021 924 181 or [email protected].

Factsheets and Quick Guides on declaring a state of local emergency and giving notice of

a local transition period

The 2016 amendment to the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002 introduced

transition periods, which provides a seamless transition from response to an emergency to the

initial recovery period by ensuring appropriate powers and arrangements are available, such as

the ability to limit access to public spaces, and remove or secure dangerous structures.

You will have received a letter informing you that Factsheets and Quick Guides have been

published in relation to declaring a state of local emergency and giving notice of a local transition

period. These documents consolidate material that was previously available on the civil defence

website. In particular, please note that the Declarations Director's Guideline has been

superseded by the Factsheet on declaring a state of local emergency.

3

19

We encourage you and those that are authorised to either declare a state of local emergency or

give notice of a transition period, to become familiar with the content of these documents.

New Declaration factsheet, quick guide, and forms are here:

https://www.civildefence.govt.nz/cdem-sector/cdem-framework/civil-defence-emergency

management-act-2002/#declarations

New local transition period factsheet, quick guide, and forms are here:

https://www.civildefence.govt.nz/cdem-sector/recovery/recovery-framework-and-guidance/

Contact: Clare Robertson, Senior Advisor Recovery on 027 552 3414 or

cl are. [email protected].

MCDEM Webinar for Mayors

MC DEM organised in partnership with LGNZ a free webinar for Mayors in December 2017

focusing on their roles and responsibilities in an emergency. You can view the webinar on our

website https://www.civildefence.govt.nz/cdem-sector/capability-development/cdem-training

courses/#webinar

MCDEM's Regional Emergency Management Advisors are now looking to connect with Mayors,

with CDEM Groups, to assist with outstanding questions and discover additional areas needing

focus. MCDEM's Capability Team will connect shortly with CDEM Groups to work in collaboration

to identify other ways Mayors and elected officials can be supported.

Contact: Karen Singleton on (04) 817 8584 [email protected]

National Emergency Management Conference 2018 - Partners for Resilience

Registrations for the 2018 National Emergency Management Conference are now open.

It is New Zealand's turn to host the Australasian Natural Hazards Management Conference so

this year will be held in partnership with the 2018 National Emergency Management Conference.

The theme for 2018 is Partners for Resilience.

Some of the fantastic speakers will include Mark McCrindle, Holly Ransom and Mark Crosweller.

The 2018's conference will focus on providing relevant skills, advice and discussion that will be

both engaging and helpful to emergency management professionals.

Where: Conference: Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa. Wellington. Awards Dinner: Beehive Banquet Hall

When: Conference, 30 - 31 May 2018, Awards Dinner 30 May, Workshops, 29 May and 1 June

Cost: Conference registration $500 (including access to all workshops). Awards Dinner $80 per person.

Registrations open: 28 February 2018

Registrations close: 4 May 2018

4

20

https://www.civildefence.govt.nz/cdem-sector/cdem-framework/civil-defence-emergency-management-act-2002/#declarations

https://www.civildefence.govt.nz/cdem-sector/recovery/recovery-framework-and-guidance/

https://www.civildefence.govt.nz/cdem-sector/capability-development/cdem-training-courses/

Register online here https://goo.gl/Znmiuh

If you require any further detail please email [email protected]

Cell Broadcast Alerting (delivering Emergency Mobile Alerts)

The nationwide test in late November 2017 revealed some variability in how different handsets

behaved. MCDEM has been undertaking further testing during February to better understand

this, and where issues are identified, take these forward with the handset manufacturers.

Contact: Kevin Fenaughty, Principal Advisor, National Operations on (04) 817 8545

[email protected]

Common Alerting Protocol

MCDEM has published Technical Standard 04/18, Common Alerting Protocol (CAP-NZ) on its

website. This is the culmination of work started in late 2015 by a multi-agency working group,

including representatives from all CDEM Groups.

Common Alerting Protocol (CAP) is a digital format for exchanging emergency alerts in a

standard way, and is used widely and increasingly throughout the world. Due to CAP's flexibility,

this technical standard publishes local guidelines to ensure consistency within the New Zealand

alerting environment. It is aimed at New Zealand's Alerting Authorities, their technology

providers, and indeed any organisation developing or implementing public alerting in New

Zealand.

Contact: Kevin Fenaughty, Principal Advisor, National Operations on (04) 817 8545

[email protected]

Yours sincerely

Sarah Stuart-Black

Director

5

21

https://forms.office.com/Pages/ResponsePage.aspx?id=8ZzbyInRaEaF1KvoHeGR9HZMnqCm2DRCqzEWUUpFWddUQkpBS1UzUEdFM0xFRlhXVzFYTDJLUEZZMi4u

https://www.civildefence.govt.nz/cdem-sector/capability-development/cdem-training-courses/SearchForm?Search=technical+standard&searchlocale=en_NZ&action_results=Search

Doc # 11966049

Report to Joint Committee

Date: 15 March 2018

Author: Jenny Bouwer, Emergency Management Coordinator - Administration

Authoriser: Langley Cavers – Coordinating Executive Group Chair

Subject: Summary of Coordinating Executive Group Minutes


Purpose 1. To provide the Joint Committee with a summary of the minutes taken at the Coordinating Executive Group

meeting that took place on the 9th March 2018.


That the report Summary of Coordinating Executive Group Minutes (Doc # 11966049 dated 16 March 2018) be received.

2 Summary of Minutes 2.1 In-Home Alerting Devices Paul Baunton from Tauranga City Council (TCC) provided an overview of TCC public alerting project.

- Aim to increase resilience in the community

- Aim to provide consistency of alerting among groups along the coastline

- Clarification that it will be an all-hazards system, not just a tsunami warning system

- System does not need to be adopted by all only agreement that should an in-home system be

adopted the system be the same for all that do.

- Consideration needs to be given to uptake of public alerting system – will it be available to all

irrespective of demographic?

Recommendation:

(a) That the Waikato CDEM Group Coordinating Executive Group (CEG) receives report from Tauranga

City Council and Thames Coromandel District Council;

(b) That CEG notes the public alerting approach adopted by Tauranga City Council’s and Thames

Coromandel District Council’s Draft Long Term Plans;

(c) That CEG supports the actions and decision points outlined in the “Next Steps” section of this

report;

(d) That the CEG task Lee Hazlewood to work with Clinton Naude to form a cross border Project

Steering Committee of CEG representatives;

(e) That CEG supports the procurement of the systems and devices by a single entity;

(f) That CEG supports the elements of public alerting outlined in the report, as a means of defining

consistency for “infill” public alerting options for Territorial Authorities in the Waikato CDEM Group

22

Doc # 11966049 Page 2

Moved: B Bowcott Seconded: N Williams

2.2 Waikato CDEM Group Plan Deliberations G Talbot provided overview Late item included: MCDEM submission

- Clarification on what ‘member’ means – it refers to local authority not the organisations that are

represented at CEG.

2.3 Controller Policy L Hazlewood provided an overview of the Controller Policy.

2.4 Endorsement of Group Recovery Manager

2.5 Endorsement of Group PIM

- Update the Group PIM plan to reflect new PIM arrangement/function

2.6 Submission on Technical Advisory Group Report

- Discussion regarding the review and commitment of the new government to the TAG review.

- GEMO to provide a report at the next CEG regarding pros & cons of the outcomes of the TAG review

and what it means for Waikato CDEM.

Recommendation: That the CEG recommends the Group Plan to be approved by the Joint Committee. Moved: L Cavers Seconded: L Ryan

Recommendation: That the Coordinating Executive Group approve the proposed Controller Policy Moved: S Robinson Seconded: D Bellamy

Recommendation: To endorse the appointment of Gary Talbot as Group Recovery Manager Moved: B Fox Seconded: H Beever

Recommendation: To endorse the appointment of Nicola Chrisp as Group PIM. Moved: N Williams Seconded: D Bellamy

23

Doc # 11966049 Page 3

2.7 Post Event Reporting M Bang provided an overview of the establishment of post-event reporting.

- This is to be developed to become a BAU aspect of Waikato CDEM.

Feedback from CEG: - Need to develop a standardized template to be used above a certain activation criteria

- Report should be focused on the strategic nature of the management of an event, and include a level

of analysis

2.8 Local Council Long Term Plan – Metrics Relating to CDEM Ihsana provide an overview of the LTP CDEM metrics report. Feedback from CEG:

- KPIs have to be easy to measure

- There is a need to understand own narrative before understanding what to measure

- Hamilton City Council has a monitoring and evaluation assessment which is a good, traceable

measure

2.9 Thames Valley EOA - Response to January Flooding Event J Snowball provided an overview of the Thames January floods and post-event report. Key issues:

- Initial response

- Timing (Christmas holidays)

- Unavailable trained staff (required for work elsewhere)

- Slow to appoint Response Manager & Controller PA

- No engagement with iwi

- No engagement with lifelines in EOC

Key wins: - CDEM/GEMO professional staff & MCDEM support

- Local and organisational knowledge

- NZDF & Red Cross availability that contributed to increased public confidence

Recommendations: - Develop MOU with neighbour councils that have residents affected by event managed by another

council

- Engage with iwi and lifelines

- Work on intra-council relationships (to overcome different organizational cultures)

Look to form a CDEM Response Team in the northern part of the Waikato region (to provide community support)

Recommendation: 1. To direct the GEMO to provide a consolidated feedback submission for the TAG. 2. To approve the submission document to the CEG Chair Moved: L Hazelwood Seconded: N Williams

24

Doc # 11966049 Page 4

2.10 Thames Valley EOA - Recovery from January Flooding Event G Talbot provided an overview of the recovery arrangements from the January Thames flooding event. 2.11 TAG Review Report taken as read. See item on the Joint Committee agenda for content. 2.12 Long Term Plan Update Report taken as read. See item on the Joint Committee agenda for content. 2.13 CEG Chair’s Report Report taken as read. See item on the Joint Committee agenda for content. 2.14 Group Controller/Manager’s Report Report taken as read. See item on the Joint Committee agenda for content. 2.15 GEMO Update Report Report taken as read. See item on the Joint Committee agenda for content. 2.16 MCDEM Update Report S Vowles spoke to the MCDEM report

- Jane Rollin has been re-appointed into the role of REMA with MCDEM

- Mayors have been invited to participate in declaration training via webinar but there has been poor

uptake in the Waikato Region. L Hazlewood will work with S Vowles on increasing this uptake

2.17 Advisory Group Update Report

- Advisory group update to be presented to next CEG

- Lifelines Advisory Group has been working on shared data. Auckland CDEM worked with Vector on

an app to provide the public with power outage information

- Suggestion that LUC could work on gaining clarification on BAU and emergency contact persons in

the sector to avoid current conflicts within roles

3 Attachments No attached or supporting reports / appendices are included with this item.

25

Doc # 11959456


Date: 16 March 2018

Author: Lee Hazlewood, Group Controller/Manager


Subject: Appointment of Group Recovery Manager


Purpose 1. To provide the Joint Committee with an opportunity to consider the suitability of the nominated candidate

for the position of Group Recovery Manager.


1. That the report Appointment of Group Recovery Manager (Doc # 11959456 dated 16 March 2018) be received, and

2. That the Joint Committee appoint Gary Talbot as the Waikato CDEM Group Recovery Manager, and 3. Acknowledge the resignation of Greg Ryan from the position of Group Recovery Manager.

Background 2. In response to the changes in the CDEM Act and the increased responsibilities around recovery the Joint

Committee approved the creation of a full time, dedicated recovery manager who can address both the strategic and operational requirements of the role.

Identified candidate 3. Gary Talbot has been appointed to the role, and brings with him a strong background in emergency

management. Gary joined the GEMO from the Ministry of Civil Defence & Emergency Management where he was employed as a Regional Emergency Management Advisor. Previous roles include manager/controller for Thames Valley Emergency Operating Area and Hamilton Chief Fire Officer.

4. The Joint Committee are requested to endorse the recommendations of the Recovery Manager interview panel and the Coordinating Executive Group and recommend that the Joint Committee appoint Gary as the Group Recovery Manager and formally recognise Greg Ryan’s resignation from the position. Kurt Abbot of Waikato District Council will remain as an appointed alternative to Gary.

Assessment of Significance 5. Having regard to the decision making provisions in the LGA 2002 and Councils Significance Policy, a

decision in accordance with the recommendations is not considered to have a high degree of significance.

Legislative context 6. The amendments to the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002 (s29) provides Group Recovery

Managers as a statutory role and requires CDEM Groups to appoint, either by name or office, a suitable qualified and experienced person to be the Group Recovery Manager. The Act also allows a Group at any time to remove or replace a Group Recovery Manager.

26

Doc # 11959456 Page 2

Policy Considerations 7. To the best of the writer’s knowledge, this decision is not significantly inconsistent with nor is anticipated

to have consequences that will be significantly inconsistent with any policy adopted by this local authority or any plan required by the Local Government Act 2002, the CDEM Act 2002 or any other enactment.

27

Doc # 11959469


Date: 16 March 2018

Author: Gary Talbot, Group Recovery Manager


Subject: Waikato CDEM Group Plan 2016/2021 Public Consultation


Purpose 1. To provide the Joint Committee with an overview of the notification process undertaken, the

submissions received and an opportunity to consider recommended changes to the Waikato CDEM Group Plan.


1. That the report Waikato CDEM Group Plan (Doc # 11959469 dated 16 March 2018) be received, and

2. That the Joint Committee approve the changes made and adopt the proposed Group Plan for Ministerial Feedback.

Background 2. The Proposed Waikato CDEM Group Plan was approved by the Joint Committee for public consultation

on 27th November 2017, and made available to the public for a period of 1 month from 26th January 2018 (in accordance with the Section 52(2) of the CDEM Act). During this time, the proposed plan was available on the Waikato CDEM Group website, with public notification through the following channels:

- Waikato CDEM Group website - Public notice in regional and local newspapers - Social media - Other publicity such as presentations to key stakeholders by Group Recovery Manager

3. Submissions were able to be made through a dedicated email address or via post.

4. Submissions closed at midday on 26th February 2018, by which time 0 submissions had been received.

One late submission was received.

Submitters 5. Submissions were received from the following parties:

- Ministry of Civil Defence & Emergency Management. 6. The Waikato CDEM Group Recovery Manager was also provided an opportunity to review the plan and

make recommendations on any changes to be made, as he was not employed at the time of Plan review.

28

Doc # 11959469 Page 2

Analysis of submission points 7. The submissions points raised by the Group Recovery Manager are detailed in the following table,

along with the recommended response.

Waikato CDEM Group Recovery Manager

Submission point(s) Accept/reject Recommended response

1. Provide reference to the significant amendment process followed

Accept Insert on page 2:

“The Waikato Group CDEM Plan 2016 – 2021 was significantly amended in November 2017 to incorporate the changes required by the Civil Defence Emergency Amendment Act 2016. It is now a requirement for all Civil Defence Emergency Management Groups to incorporate strategic recovery planning into their Group Plans. A Directors Guideline – Strategic Planning for Recovery: Director’s Guideline for Civil Defence Emergency Management Groups [DGL 20/17] has been produced to assist CDEM Groups with their approach to strategic planning for recovery. The amendments to the Act achieve the following outcomes:

establish a legislative framework for recovery management, by providing powers statutory for recovery managers and by requiring recovery planning

support a seamless transition from response into the initial recovery phase, by establishing a transition notice mechanism that will make some emergency powers available for a specified period of time (local or national transition period), and

makes some minor and technical amendments to improve the Act, and consequential amendments to other legislation and the National Civil Defence Emergency Management Plan Order 2015.

The amendments focus on recovery from small to medium events, however, they are not limited to these types of emergencies. The provision can also be used in a large scare emergency until any bespoke legislation is created.

29

Doc # 11959469 Page 3

The Waikato CDEM Joint Committee approved the amendment on Day/Month/Date/2018 The Minister for Civil Defence approved the amendment on Day/Month/Date/2018”

2. remove repetitive reference to CDEM Amendment Act

Accept Page 20

2.1.3 (d) remove “ The introduction of the CDEM Amendment Act 2016 requires Strategic Planning for Recovery with Replace with – “Engaging with communities. Communities are engage to educate them fully on the hazards and potential risks they face so that they are fully informed and can participate in shared decision making concerning the immediate, medium and long term recovery processes identified through strategic recovery planning activities.

3. Clarify wording Accept 2.2.3 Table Column 2 - 4. Replace with “Identify the implications for recovery from the agreed priority hazards.”

4. Remove repetitive reference to CDEM Amendment Act and reword paragraph to improve understanding

Accept 2.3.2 Change to – “The Waikato CDEM Group and its Members are required to communicate with their communities so that those communities fully understand the risks those hazards potentially pose to them. The primary mechanisms for sharing risk information are currently:

- Land Information Memoranda ………. Continue existing list

The effective application of strategic recovery planning also requires communities to have a sound knowledge in relation to the hazards and risk they are exposed to. This knowledge enables fully informed shared decisions to be made to manage the risks. This in turn will also enhance individual and collective resilience. Through sound risk and hazard education the Waikato CDEM Group will also achieve the following;

- Understanding of a community’s values and priorities for recovery across the four areas of the built, economic, natural and social environments

- Have clearly defined shared vision and outcomes

- Identify the consequences and opportunities from specific hazards and risk

30

Doc # 11959469 Page 4

- Develop capacity, capability, collaborative networks along with trusted leadership

To maintain the effectiveness of hazard and risk education requires robust monitoring and evaluation of the approaches been applied.

5. Insert additional action Accept 2.3.3 Table - Add row

Apply knowledge of hazard consequences

Local authorities to develop strategic recovery planning processes to better inform reduction, readiness, response and recovery (immediate, medium and long term)

2019/21

6. Extend action Accept 3.2.3 Table – 8. …..mechanism for risk reduction and identifying prioritisation and implementation of strategic recovery actions

7. Extend action Accept 3.5.3 Table 13. …….with communities to understand risk tolerance, minimise the escalation of the consequences of emergencies, reduce future exposure to hazards and their associated risk to build resilience, identify opportunities to regenerate and enhance communities that will meet future needs (across the built, economic, natural and social environments) and support the cultural, emotional and physical wellbeing of individuals and communities

8. Remove repetitive reference to CDEM Amendment Act

Accept 4.1.2 Delete (CDEM Amendment Act 2016, section 49). 4.1.3 Delete “The CDEM Amendment Act 2016 requires the……..”

31

Doc # 11959469 Page 5

Replace with “The Waikato CDEM Group is required to strategically plan for recovery by engaging with the communities of the Waikato Region to ensure they fully comprehend the likelihood and consequences of the risks posed by hazards they are exposed to so that they can prepare effective recovery plans”

9. Present affirmative statements

Accept 4.2.2 Reword last paragraph to an affirmative statement: “The Group is actively promoting Community Response Planning and is seeing significant interest and growth in this area. Communities regularly adversely affected by weather events have become more engaged and the Group is using this wave of interest to help other communities to see the benefits of Community Response Planning. Geographic communities in rarely affected areas are less likely to see the benefits. The Group is responding to that challenge by supplying Community Response Planning tools to additional existing community group structures (such as Neighbourhood Support). The Group will use the lessons learned from Community Response Planning to determine how best to approach strategic planning for recovery with effective communities.”

10. Remove repetitive reference to CDEM Amendment Act

Accept 4.3.2 Remove reference to CDEM Amendment Act 2016 – Reword Community response planning engagement provides the opportunity to educate communities in their hazards and the risks they are potentially exposed to. Strategic planning for recovery processes when combined with community response planning enables communities to identify opportunities to maximise risk reduction activities while being better prepared to initiate recovery activities more seamlessly following an emergency based on previously agreed vision for recovery, and outcomes of recovery. 5.1 Overview –Remove reference to CDEM Amendment Act 2016 and rephrase paragraphs 1 & 2 Modify paragraph “Continual improvement of The Waikato CDEM Group readiness is achieved through a combination of strategic planning for recovery informed by a sound

32

Doc # 11959469 Page 6

understanding of the hazards and assessed risks posed by those hazards. This approach provides the data to guide readiness activities, setting standards and processes. It also highlights potential reduction initiatives, provides effective and efficient response while assisting a seamless transition into the phases of recovery.

11. Remove repetitive reference to CDEM Amendment Act and clarify key recovery functions

Accept 7.1 overview The Waikato CDEM Group undertakes key functions relating to recovery;

1. Planning and preparing for recovery activities post an emergency

2. Strategic recovery planning to better inform reduction, readiness, response and recovery activities in the future

The Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002 has defined Recovery and Recovery Activities; “Recovery – means the co-ordinated efforts and processes used to bring about the immediate, medium-term, and long-term holistic regeneration and enhancement of a community following an emergency.” “Recovery activity – means an activity carried out under this Act or any civil defence emergency management plan to deal with the consequences of an emergency, including, without limitation,— (a) the assessment and ongoing monitoring of the needs of a community affected by the emergency; and (b) the co-ordination and integration of planning, decisions, actions, and resources; and (c) measures to support—

(i) the regeneration, restoration, and enhancement of communities across the 4 environments (built, natural, social, and economic); and

(ii) (ii) the cultural and physical well-being of individuals and their communities; and

(iii) (iii) government and non-government organisations and entities working together; and

33

Doc # 11959469 Page 7

(d) measures to enable community participation in recovery planning; and (e) new measures— (i) to reduce risks from hazards; and (ii) to build resilience. The holistic approach undertaken by the Waikato CDEM Group to recovery is intended to strengthen individual and community (including organisations) resilience so that they can adapt to their environment post an emergency, including returning to what might be a new normal.

12. Correct terminology used

Accept 7.2.2. Reword to use correct terminology from the CDEM Act 2002

13. Remove reference to CDEM Amendment Act as changes will be incorporated into CDEM Act 2002

Accept 7.2.3 Paragraph 1 – Remove reference to CDEM Amendment Act 2016 Replace paragraph 1 with; The Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002 provides statutory requirement to allow for national or local transition periods

8. The Group Recovery Manager has considered each of the recommended amendments and undertaken

an assessment of the implications of the proposed amendments and is supportive of each of the changes proposed in the attached letter and recommends they are incorporated into the Plan.

9. In two instances in the feedback document, commentary was provided by MCDEM but recommended

changes were not specifically outlined. Further consultation with MCDEM has offered the following recommended changes:

Page number

Section number

Paragraph heading

Original text Suggested change

Reason for change

25 3.2.2 Group wide arrangements

The Group is engaged in a number of work areas to reduce risks by either eliminating hazards, or where this is not possible, reducing the likelihood or consequence of them occurring to an acceptable level. In general, this work is

The Group is engaged in a number of work areas to reduce risks by either removing the hazard, and when this is not possible, reducing the risk (likelihood x consequences) to an acceptable level by the application of suitable risk treatments. The key focus of this work is targeted

Clarity of wording

34

Doc # 11959469 Page 8

focussed on technological and biological hazards (as opposed to natural hazards, the likelihood of which is unable to be reduced).

towards technological and biological hazards (as opposed to natural hazards, the likelihood of which is unable to be reduced).

27 3.3.2 Warning Systems

A range of warning systems operate across the Waikato CDEM Group (refer to Section 6.4), which provide the community with an opportunity to reduce their exposure to a hazard.

A range of warning systems operate across the Waikato CDEM Group (refer to Section 6.4), which provide the community with an opportunity to prepare for an imminent event reduce their exposure to a hazard. For example, a heavy rainfall warning may allow landowners to temporarily move assets out of harm’s way before an expected flood. The effectiveness of warning systems to reduce exposure to a hazard will depend on a number of factors, including the time that is provided to take the necessary actions and the resilience of the system used to provide the warning

For clarity.

35

Doc # 11959469 Page 9

10. In addition to the identified amendments from MCDEM, the GEMO recommend that an opportunity is taken to correct the following areas of the plan:

Page number

Section number

Paragraph heading

Original text Suggested change

Reason for change

99 6.8.7 A current schedule of Local and Group Controllers

Update list of appointed controllers with all new Local and Group Controllers appointed by the Joint Committee in line with the Controller Appointment process

New controllers have been updated since the Group Plan was updated

When formally placed in control of an event by the relevant territorial authority Chief Executive Officer a Controller is accountable for the actions carried out and the expenses incurred

When formally placed in control of an event by the relevant local authority Chief Executive Officer a Controller is accountable for the actions carried out and the expenses incurred

To include Waikato Regional Council in the provisions

Lists of appointed controllers and appointed recovery managers

Remove and refer to website

MCDEM has advised the GEMO that it would be acceptable to remove listed names and refer to the Waikato CDEM Group website for a list of appointed controllers and recovery managers. The GEMO recommend this approach as amending the Group Plan for each new appointee is an unnecessary administrative burden.

Next steps 11. Following adoption by the Joint Committee, the proposed Group Plan will be presented to the Minister

for ministerial feedback in accordance with s49 of the CDEM Act 2002. Provided this review does not

36

Doc # 11959469 Page 10

request any significant adjustments to be made to the plan, it will be presented to the Joint Committee at an extra-ordinary meeting on 14 May 2018 in accordance with s52(1)(e), allowing adoption before MCDEM’s deadline of 1 June 2018.

Assessment of Significance 12. Having regard to the decision making provisions in the LGA 2002 and Councils Significance Policy, a

decision in accordance with the recommendations is considered to have a high degree of significance.

Legislative context 13. With the release of the Director’s Guideline for Strategic Recovery Planning, changes to the Waikato

CDEM Group Plan 2016/2021 were necessitated in accordance with s53 of the CDEM Act 2002. The intention to amend the plan was publically notified for a period of 1 month in accordance with s52 of the Act. The proposed plan will be provided to the Minister of Civil Defence for a period of 20 working days in accordance with s49 of the Act, and will be presented at a meeting of the Joint Committee on 14 May 2018 in accordance with s52(1)(e).

Policy Considerations 14. To the best of the writer’s knowledge, this decision is not significantly inconsistent with nor is anticipated

to have consequences that will be significantly inconsistent with any policy adopted by this local authority or any plan required by the Local Government Act 2002, the CDEM Amendment Act 2016 or the CDEM Act 2002 or any other enactment.

Attachments Proposed Waikato CDEM Group Plan 2016/2021 for Ministerial Feedback Doc # 11949224

References CDEM Act 2002 http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2002/0033/latest/DLM149789.html?search=ts_act%40bill%40regulation%40deemedreg_civil+defence_resel_25_a&p=1 CDEM Amendment Act 2016 http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2016/0088/latest/DLM6648809.html?search=ts_act%40bill%40regulation%40deemedreg_civil+defence_resel_25_a&p=1

37

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2002/0033/latest/DLM149789.html?search=ts_act%40bill%40regulation%40deemedreg_civil+defence_resel_25_a&p=1




Doc # 11959469 Page 11

Assessment of significance Having had regard to the decision making provisions in the Local Government Act 2002, the CDEM Act 2002 and Council’s Policy on Significance and Engagement, a decision in accordance with the recommendation(s) is not considered to have a high degree of significance. Staff are of the opinion that the content and recommendations in this report are consistent with the decision making requirements contained in Part Six of the Local Government Act 2002 and that the decision making requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 have been met.

38

Doc # 11959469 Page 12

39

40

Waikato CDEM Group Plan, 2016-2021

Proposal for consultation 25 January 2018 Page 2

WAIKATO CIVIL DEFENCE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT GROUP PLAN Mahere o te Rōpū Whakahaere Raru-Ohotata o Waikato o Waikato

2016 – 2021 ISBN 978-0-9922583-2-0 ISBN 978-0-9922583-3-7 (online) Doc# 11949224 Proposal for adoption for Ministerial Feedback – 26 March 2018

Plan Development and Review

This is the third plan prepared by the Waikato CDEM Group. It has been prepared in accordance with the Act and the Director’s Guideline on CDEM Group Plan Reviews. The Plan was developed as follows:

1. April 2015 – June 2016 developed by a Waikato CDEM Group working party in consultation with CDEM Members and Partners;

2. 20 June 2016, made available for public submission in accordance with the CDEM Act (Section 52);

3. 28 September 2016, submitted to the Minister of Civil Defence for review and comment in accordance with the CDEM Act (Section 49(1)) (with feedback received on 14 October 2016);

4. 28 November 2016, adopted by the Waikato CDEM Group Joint Committee in accordance with the CDEM Act (Section 52(1)(e)) with effect from that date.

5. September 2017 – November 2017, revised by a working group in response to the CDEM Amendment Act (2016) and subsequent ‘Strategic Planning for Recovery’ Director’s Guideline.

6. 27 November 2017, submitted to the Joint Committee for adoption prior to public consultation in accordance with the CDEM Act

7. The Waikato Group CDEM Plan 2016 – 2021 was significantly amended in November 2017 to incorporate the changes required by the Civil Defence Emergency Amendment Act 2016. It is now a requirement for all Civil Defence Emergency Management Groups to incorporate strategic planning for recovery into their Group Plans. A Directors Guideline – Strategic Planning for Recovery: Director’s Guideline for Civil Defence Emergency Management Groups [DGL 20/17] has been produced to assist CDEM Groups with their approach to strategic planning for recovery.

The amendments to the Act achieve the following outcomes: - establish legislative framework for recovery management, by providing powers statutory for recovery managers and by requiring recovery planning - support a seamless transition from response into the initial recovery phase, by establishing a transition notice mechanism that will make some emergency powers available for a specified period of time (local or national transition period), and - makes some minor and technical amendments to improve the Act, and consequential amendments to other legislation and the National Civil Defence Emergency Management Plan Order 2015.

The amendments focus on recovery from small to medium events, however, they are not limited to these types of emergencies. The provision can also be used in a large scale emergency until any bespoke legislation is created. The Waikato CDEM Joint Committee approved the amendment on Day/Month/Date/2018 The Minister for Civil Defence approved the amendment on Day/Month/Date/2018 The Plan will remain in effect until reviewed by the Group and either amended, revoked, replaced or left unchanged. In accordance with the CDEM Act (Section 56(1)), this plan will be reviewed and proposed five years from when this plan was adopted (28 November 2021).

41



Contents

Contents ............................................................................................................................. 3

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................ 5

1. Introduction .................................................................................................................. 8 1.1 Plan Overview ................................................................................................................... 8 1.2 Strategic Framework ............................................................................................................ 9 1.3 CDEM Plan Structure and Relationships ..................................................................................... 10 1.4 The Waikato CDEM Group Context ............................................................................................ 12

2. Understanding and Communicating our Risks ....................................................................... 17 2.1 Overview ......................................................................................................................... 17 2.2 Understanding our Hazards and Risks ....................................................................................... 17 2.3 Communicating Our Risks ...................................................................................................... 22

3. Reducing our Risks ......................................................................................................... 24 3.1 Overview ........................................................................................................................ 24 3.2 Reducing the Likelihood that Hazards Occur ............................................................................... 25 3.3 Reducing the Exposure to Hazards .......................................................................................... 26 3.4 Building Resilience to Hazards ............................................................................................... 28 3.5 Defining ‘Acceptable’ Levels of Risk ......................................................................................... 29

4. Being Ready – Our Communities ........................................................................................ 31 4.1 Overview ......................................................................................................................... 31 4.2 Community Engagement ....................................................................................................... 32 4.3 Community Response Planning and Recovery Preparation .............................................................. 34 4.4 Civil Defence Centres ........................................................................................................... 35 4.5 Volunteers ....................................................................................................................... 36 4.6 Business Outreach ............................................................................................................... 37 4.7 Organisational readiness ....................................................................................................... 37

5. Being Ready – The Waikato CDEM Group .............................................................................. 38 5.1 Overview ........................................................................................................................ 38 5.2 Emergency Operation and Coordination Centres .......................................................................... 39 5.3 Capability and Capacity Development ....................................................................................... 40 5.4 Warning Systems ............................................................................................................... 42 5.5 Inter-Agency Communication ................................................................................................ 42 5.6 Resource Coordination (Logistics) ............................................................................................ 43

6. Response Arrangements .................................................................................................. 44 6.1 Overview ........................................................................................................................ 44 6.2 Response Structure, Roles and Functions................................................................................... 45 6.3 Activation of Response Arrangements ...................................................................................... 46 6.4 Warning Systems ............................................................................................................... 48 6.5 Declaration Arrangements .................................................................................................... 49 6.6 Emergency Communications and Information Management Systems .................................................. 51 6.7 Stakeholder Coordination during a Response .............................................................................. 51 6.8 Delegated Authorities, Functions and Powers during an Emergency .................................................. 52

7. Recovery ...................................................................................................................... 57 7.1 Overview .........................................................................................................................57 7.2 Statutory Recovery Framework ............................................................................................... 59 7.3 Recovery Planning ............................................................................................................. 62 7.4 Recovery Capability ............................................................................................................ 64

8. Partnership Arrangements ...............................................................................................66 8.1 Overview ........................................................................................................................ 66 8.2 Issues and Opportunities ...................................................................................................... 66 8.3 Emergency services ............................................................................................................. 66 8.4 Welfare Services ................................................................................................................ 70 8.5 Iwi ................................................................................................................................. 73 8.6 Lifeline utilities ................................................................................................................. 74

42



8.7 The CDEM Community ...........................................................................................................75 8.8 Volunteering Partners ......................................................................................................... 76

9. Our Structure ................................................................................................................ 77 9.1 Overview ......................................................................................................................... 77 9.2 Governance ..................................................................................................................... 78 9.3 Leadership ...................................................................................................................... 80 9.4 Integration ...................................................................................................................... 81 9.5 Delivery .......................................................................................................................... 82 9.6 Advisory Groups ................................................................................................................ 83 9.7 Financial Arrangements ....................................................................................................... 83 9.8 Actions ........................................................................................................................... 86

10. Monitoring and Evaluation............................................................................................... 87 10.1 Overview ........................................................................................................................ 87 10.2 Group-Wide arrangements ................................................................................................... 87 10.3 Actions ........................................................................................................................... 88

Attachment 1: Our hazards ..................................................................................................... 89 Guide to using this information ..................................................................................................... 89 Drought ................................................................................................................................. 90 Pandemic (animal) ..................................................................................................................... 91 Pandemic (human) ................................................................................................................... 92 Tsunami ................................................................................................................................. 93 Volcanic (ashfall only) ................................................................................................................ 95 Volcanic (caldera unrest) ............................................................................................................. 96 Earthquake ............................................................................................................................. 97 Infrastructure failure .................................................................................................................. 99 Land instability (long-term deformation) ........................................................................................ 100 Marine oil spill ......................................................................................................................... 101 River flooding ......................................................................................................................... 102 Severe storm .......................................................................................................................... 104 Volcanic (caldera eruption) ......................................................................................................... 105 Volcanic (eruption) ................................................................................................................... 106 Coastal (surge/flood/erosion) ....................................................................................................... 108 Dam break .............................................................................................................................. 110 Fire (structure) ......................................................................................................................... 111 Fire (vegetation) ....................................................................................................................... 112 Hazardous substance incident ...................................................................................................... 113 Land instability (subsidence) ........................................................................................................ 114 Land instability (landslide) .......................................................................................................... 115 Mass casualty incident (land/air/sea) ............................................................................................... 116 Terrorism ................................................................................................................................ 117 Geothermal ground activity .......................................................................................................... 118

Attachment 2: Action Plan ..................................................................................................... 119

Attachment 3: Glossary ....................................................................................................... 1233

43



Executive Summary This Plan sets out the arrangements for Civil Defence Emergency Management (CDEM) in the Waikato CDEM Group (the Group) and its future intentions over the next five years. The Group includes local authorities, emergency services, lifeline utilities, welfare services and other agencies with a mandated role in the CDEM Act 2002 and National CDEM Plan 2015. The Group’s vision in this Plan “We are all Civil Defence” expresses an aspiration that the people, organisations and communities in the Waikato work together to be more resilient to hazards. Being resilient means that collectively we have “the capacity to survive a crisis and thrive in an uncertain world”1.

We are all civil defence

Eight goals frame the Group’s approach to delivering this Vision. The approach to delivering these goals is summarised below.

Build and sustain an understanding of hazards and risks (Section 2)

The Group maintains a register of hazards and applies a risk rating for each hazard considering both the likelihood and consequence of the hazard occurring. The register includes a summary of arrangements in place to manage the hazards and these arrangements are taken into account in determining the risk rating. The highest risk hazards in the region are assessed as drought, pandemic (both animal and human), tsunami and volcanoes (caldera unrest and ashfall). The Group aims to continually improve its understanding of hazards and risks, such as through ongoing work being done by the Waikato Lifeline Utilities Group to understand the risks that hazards pose to Waikato’s lifelines infrastructure. Another area of focus is to provide easy access to, and promote the use of, hazard and risk information by stakeholders and communities in their own emergency planning initiatives. The ‘Strategic Planning for Recovery’ Director’s Guideline require the Group Plan to provide for strategic planning for recovery

from the hazards and risks in the CDEM Group plan. The approach requires local authorities and other agencies to engage with

local communities in order to understand the hazards and risks within their communities, what the consequences may mean

for their communities and what support may be needed to help their communities adapt. The local authorities will work

collaboratively to prepare for recovery, and the Group will coordinate across the Group area.

1 www.resorgs.org.nz

44

http://www.resorgs.org.nz/

Executive Summary



Reduce risks from hazards to acceptable levels (Section 3) The Group’s risk reduction framework considers the implementation of appropriate strategies in three areas:

- Reducing the likelihood that a hazard will occur, such as reducing the likelihood of an animal pandemic through biosecurity measures;

- Reducing the likelihood of exposure of a community to a hazard, such as land use planning to avoid building in

hazard-prone areas; and

- Reducing the vulnerability of the community to a hazard such as through warning systems and building

standards to mitigate the impacts of a hazard when a community is exposed. The Group aims to ensure a consistent and comprehensive understanding of ‘acceptable risk’ to communities. Risk levels are currently expressed through regulatory tools (such as the Building Act) and plans (such as the District Plan). There is an opportunity to better use these plans as a means of communicating and engaging with communities over hazards and risk management.

Increase community preparedness and ownership (Section 4)

Community engagement is a vital component of the Group’s work. Three particular areas of focus are the ongoing development of Community Response Plans for our communities, the preparation for recovery pre-event and partnering more effectively with other community-facing agencies to deliver CDEM messages to communities.

Other components of community resilience that the Group aims to maintain and enhance include the provision of appropriate Civil Defence Centres (CDCs), effective management of volunteers and improved partnering with businesses.

Enhance capability to deliver an effective response and recovery (Section 5 and 6)

To coordinate an effective CDEM response, and recovery the Group needs to have in place:

- Emergency Operation and Coordination Centres with appropriate facilities that meet the requirements for facilities that are essential to post-disaster recovery;

- The right people – both in terms of capability and capacity – to lead and coordinate the CDEM response and recovery;

- Warning systems to mobilise agencies and communities in the event of a potential or actual hazard;

- Communication systems and processes to ensure all agencies are effectively coordinated; and

- Access to critical resources to support the response and recovery.

Enhance capability to recover from emergencies (Section 7)

The CDEM Act 2002 was amended in 2016 to strengthen recovery requirements. This included the need to strategically plan for

recovery, appoint a Group Recovery Manager, and the ability to give notice of a transition period which allows Recovery

Managers to use extraordinary powers if needed to support a seamless transition from recovery into the initial recovery phase.

The ‘Strategic Planning for Recovery’ Director’s Guideline further mandates the requirement for local authorities to engage with local communities to prepare and plan for recovery. The Group plans to audit its Group Recovery arrangements against relevant recovery related Director’s Guidelines and information.

Maintain effective partnerships (Section 8)

Our CDEM partnerships are outlined in Section 8 of this Plan including Emergency Services, lifeline utilities, welfare services, iwi, volunteering partners and other CDEM agencies (MCDEM and neighbouring Groups). The actions in this Plan require the ongoing development and reporting on business plans (Welfare Coordination Group and Lifeline Utilities Group) and the establishment or review of coordination arrangements with other partners.

45

Executive Summary



Maintain effective leadership, governance and delivery arrangements (Section 9)

The Joint Committee is the governing body for CDEM in the Group. It is established in accordance with the CDEM Act, Section 13 and the Waikato CDEM Group Constituting Agreement. The CDEM Act requires Members of the Joint Committee (the local authorities within the Waikato region) to give effect to this Plan. The Coordinating Executive Group (CEG) provides oversight and decision making in relation to strategic, planning, risk and accountability matters. It plays a pivotal role in coordinating and integrating CDEM Group strategy with local CDEM planning and implementation. The delivery of Group programmes is supported by the Group Emergency Management Office (GEMO), the administering authority (Waikato Regional Council – WRC), local authorities and our partners. Proposed actions in relation to these arrangements include the review of the CDEM delivery model, to achieve greater coordination of work programmes, and the establishment of a Group Relief fund.

Effectively monitor CDEM outcomes (Section 10)

The Joint Committee is required under the CDEM Act to monitor and report on compliance within its area and to develop, approve, implement, monitor and regularly review a CDEM Group Plan (this Plan). The Group has identified the need for improved reporting of progress against all CDEM work programmes, as well as considering more outcome-based progress reporting. The CDEM Act 2002 (section 20 (2) (c)) states that the executive group (CEG) is responsible for monitoring and evaluation of the CDEM Group plan. For the plan to be effective, this will now include monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of strategic planning for recovery.

Action Plan

The Action Plan in Attachment 2 lists 66 actions that will guide the Group in working towards these goals outlined above. The Action Plan sets out the Group’s intentions in terms of what we are going to do and when we expect to do it, in order to achieve our target competency. Project plans with deliverables, costs and timeframes will be developed to support the development of long term and annual plans that incorporate these actions. The scope and timing of the actions will be reviewed annually as part of Group Members’ and Partners’ planning and budgeting arrangements.

46



1. Introduction

1.1 Plan Overview

1.1.1 Purpose

Civil Defence Emergency Management (CDEM) Groups are required to prepare a plan describing local CDEM arrangements and how these arrangements support the national framework for CDEM in New Zealand. (CDEM Act 2002 – ‘the CDEM Act’). The purpose of this Plan is to enable effective and efficient CDEM within the Waikato CDEM Group (‘the Group’) area by:

- Defining the vision, goals and principles for CDEM within the Group area;

- Identifying the hazards that present the greatest risk to the community, and how these risks will be actively managed over time to minimise consequences and reduce risks;

- Defining the principles of operation as to how the key emergency management agencies will work together to prepare for, respond to and recover from civil defence emergencies; and

- Outlining roles and responsibilities and management and governance arrangements.

The CDEM Act requires Members of the Joint Committee (the local authorities within the Waikato region) to give effect to this Plan. The specific actions required to deliver CDEM outcomes will be outlined within the Group Members’ Long Term Plans and annual work programmes, along with Group Partner business and activity plans. Other plans owned by members (e.g. district plans) may also be influenced by this plan.

Notes:

The Act defines the ‘CDEM Group’ as: “The Joint Committee established under section 12 or re-established under section 22 of the CDEM Act.” In this Plan we use the term ‘Joint Committee’ to refer to this statutorily appointed Committee and the term ‘CDEM Group’ (or ‘the Group’) is used to refer to: “The consortia of local authorities and Group Partners, including emergency services, lifeline utilities, welfare organisations, Government departments and non-government organisations with a role in CDEM in the region.”

1.1.2 Plan Audience

This Plan has been developed primarily for the CDEM sector, including CDEM Group Members, Partners and other stakeholders with involvement and vested interest in CDEM. This includes the various organisations that have a mandated role through the National CDEM Plan. Communities play a very important role in being prepared and being able to get through and recover from emergencies when they happen. The Plan is also a means of informing the communities within the Group of the hazards and risks they face. However, this Plan is not the primary mechanism for communicating with communities, there are a wide range of methods described in this Plan.

9. Governance, Leadership

and Delivery

3. Reducing

Risks

4. Community resilience

5. CDEM Group

readiness

6. Response

7. Recovery

8. Our partners

Monitor,

evaluate

and

improve

1. Introduction

2. Understanding and communicating our risks

47

Section 1: Introduction



1.1.3 Background to this Plan Development

In October 2009 the Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management (MCDEM) conducted a capability assessment of the Group. The Group was found to have an adequate baseline capability to respond to localised or short duration emergencies but a general level of concern was expressed about the capability and capacity to respond to larger or longer duration events. The Waikato 2010 CDEM Plan set out an action plan to address the findings of the assessment and the following five years have been focussed on establishing the necessary leadership, resources, arrangements and tools to enable delivery of CDEM objectives. The second Capability Assessment Report version 2.0 - June 2014, showed that significant progress has been made, with overall scores increasing from 45% to 72%. The report also outlined further areas for improvement which were developed into a Corrective Action Plan. This CDEM Plan presents the Capability Assessment results in the relevant sections and incorporates the agreed Corrective Action Plan targets using the following diagram.

1.2 Strategic Framework

1.2.1 Our Vision

A theme that threads its way through this Plan is that Civil Defence is not an agency or combination of agencies. It is all the people, communities and organisations in the Waikato Group area, a concept illustrated in Figure 1-1. This concept lies at the heart of our Vision:


FIGURE 1-1: CIVIL DEFENCE IN WAIKATO

Unsatisfactory DevelopingDeveloping

X% (2009)

Advancing

Y% (2014)

Mature

Z% (2019)Mature

2009 MCDEM capability

assessment (ACTUAL)


assessment (ACTUAL)


assessment (TARGET)

48




1.2.2 Goals and Objectives

The CDEM Group goals are shown in Figure 1-2. The goals are derived from, and expand on, the goals in the National CDEM Strategy 2007. Under each goal, a number of objectives have been identified. These are outlined in each section of the plan.

FIGURE 1-2: CDEM GROUP VISION AND GOALS

1.2.3 Guiding Principles

The following principles guide the way in which the Group delivers the vision, goals and objectives outlined above.

a. Promote the sustainable management of hazards.

b. Empower communities to achieve acceptable levels of risk.

c. Provide for planning and preparation in response to, and recovery from, emergencies.

d. Coordinate programmes and activities, and encourage cooperation and joint action, among agencies across the 4Rs

e. Provide the basis for the integration of local with national CDEM policies, processes and operations. (Guide to the National CDEM Plan, 2015).

1.3 CDEM Plan Structure and Relationships

1.3.1 The National Context

National CDEM legislation, strategy and guidance provide the context for this CDEM Plan. In turn, this Group Plan guides the development of Group-wide and local CDEM strategies and plans. This framework is illustrated in FIGURE 1-3.

FIGURE 1-3: CDEM PLAN RELATIONSHIPS


SECTION 2

Building and sustain an

understanding of hazards and

risks

SECTION 3

Reduce risks from hazards to acceptable

levels

SECTION 4

Increase community

preparedness and

ownership

SECTION 5/6

Enhance our capability to deliver an effective response

SECTION 7

Enhance our capability to

recovery from

emergencies

SECTION 8

Build and sustain effective

partnerships

SECTION 9

Maintain effective

leadership, governance and delivery

arrangements

SECTION 10

Effectively monitor

CDEM outcomes

CDEM Act 2002

National CDEM Plan, Strategy and Guides

Waitako CDEM Group

Plan

Group-wide Strategies and

Plans

Example:

Group Welfare Plan

Group-wide Emergency Procedures

Example:

Lifelines Coordination Protocol

Local Plans and Procedures

Example:

Community response plans

49




1.3.2 Plan Structure

This Plan has been structured in a manner consistent with that described in the Director’s Guideline on CDEM Group Planning (DGL09/15). The plan structure is shown in Figure 1-4.

FIGURE 1-4: PLAN STRUCTURE


•Outlines Plan purpose, audience and structure and development process.

•The Group's membership, vision and goals.

•The social, natural, built and economic context in which the Group operates.

Section 2: Understanding and commuincating our

risks

•The hazards that could impact on the Group.

•A summary of the Group risk profile and risk priorities.

•Communicating risks to our partners and communities.

Section 3: Reducing our risks

•The principles and objectives for risk reduction within the Group.

•The approach to reducing the likelihood of hazards occurring, the likelihood of the communities' exposure to the hazard and the vulnerability of the community to that hazard.

Section 4: Being ready –our communities

•An overview of community readiness.

• Issues and actions for improving readiness, including community engagement, pre-event preparation for recovery, community response planning, Civil Defence Centres, warning systems, volunteer management and business outreach.

Section 5: Being ready –the Waikato CDEM Group

•The capabilities and resources of CDEM agencies and stakeholder organisations.

• Issues and actions for improving readiness, such as through ECC/EOC readiness, professional develoment, warning systems, resource coordination and communication processes.

Section 6: Response arrangements

•Response principles, objectives and frameworks for responding to emergencies.

•Response roles, functions, responsibilities and relationships.

•Processes for emergency escalation and declaring states of emergencies.

Section 7: Recovery

•Recovery principles and objectives.

•Recovery statute, roles, functions, responsibilities and relationships.

•Recovery arrangements and processes for helping the community to recover from an emergency.

• Issues and actions for improving recovery processes.

Section 8: Partnership arrangements

•Arrangements of key CDEM partners including emergency services, lifeline utilities, welfare agencies, iwi, MCDEM and neighbouring CDEM Groups.

Section 9: Our structure•Roles and responsibilities of the Joint Committee (governance), CEG (leadership) delivery agencies (GEMO, local authorities) and advisory groups.

•Financial arrangements.

Section 10: Measuring success - monitoring and

evaluation

•The basis for monitoring and evaluation of the CDEM Group Plan.

•The method of measuring achievement of objectives and for Plan reviews.

50




1.4 The Waikato CDEM Group Context

1.4.1 Overview

The Group area is the largest in New Zealand in terms of numbers of local authorities with ten territorial authorities (illustrated in Figure 1-5) and the Waikato Regional Council. Around 10% of NZ’s population is resident in Waikato. The Waikato region covers around 25,000 km2 stretching from the Bombay Hills and Coromandel Peninsula in the north, to the King Country and Central Plateau in the south. It also borders 5 other CDEM Groups that have hazards that may indirectly impact the Waikato CDEM Group. The environment varies from built-up urban areas to remote, isolated small communities. The hazards faced are equally diverse with variation in level of hazard risk around the region, notably higher tsunami risks on the east coast, volcanic risks in the southern areas and severe storm and flooding risks in the Coromandel area.

FIGURE 1-5: WAIKATO CDEM GROUP AREA

1.4.2 Members of the Waikato CDEM Group

The Group is a consortia of the following organisations that have a function in relation to CDEM: - Local authorities (11 in total).

- Emergency services (police, fire and health).

- Organisations involved in delivering welfare services.

- Lifeline utilities (broadcasting, fuel, gas telecommunications, three waters, transport and electricity). The CDEM function of each organisation is defined by a combination of the CDEM Act and the National CDEM Plan, along with the range of guidelines that make up the CDEM doctrine for New Zealand. The functions of these agencies are further described in each section of this plan.

Thames-Valley Hauraki District Matamata-Piako District Thames-Coromandel District

Western Waikato Otorohanga District

Waipa District Waitomo District

Waikato District

Taupō District

South Waikato District

Hamilton City

51




1.4.3 Social Environment

The Waikato Group’s community is briefly described as follows (Statistics New Zealand 2013 Census): - A usually resident population of around 400,000;

- A median age of 36 years;

- 73% of people in this area class themselves as European;

- 21% of people in this area identify themselves as Māori; and

- The average median income for people aged 15 years and over was $27,280. These statistics are similar to the national profile, though the percentage of Maori is notably higher (21% in the Waikato compared to 15% nationally). There are significant differences in economic and social circumstances between communities across the Group and therefore varying ability to provide for everyday needs and prepare for emergencies. Some areas are recognised as having “above average deprivation”, including some urban communities within Hamilton City and Waikato, Hauraki, South Waikato and Waitomo Districts, and some rural communities. There are also a number of rest homes and retirement villages that host communities that may be more vulnerable to hazards.

1.4.4 Natural Environment

The Waikato CDEM Group jurisdiction covers an area that has a rich array of natural assets and resources, including:

- 100 lakes, 20 rivers and 1,420 streams;

- 1,150 kilometres of coastline, including iconic west coast and Coromandel beaches;

- 80 per cent of New Zealand’s geothermal systems;

- 3 out of 6 of the country’s internationally important wetlands (recognised under the Ramsar Convention); and

- Important mineral producing areas providing coal, aggregate, iron sand, gold, silver and limestone. The area covered by the Group is all within 80 km from the coast, which means temperatures are quite regulated. Sheltered and elevated inland places experience extremes of hot and cold. The north central Waikato region tends to have warm, humid summers and mild winters. The average annual rainfall is 1,250 mm; generally enough for agriculture but with potential for drought during summer. The three areas with the highest annual rainfall figures are the Coromandel Peninsula, Waitomo/Kawhia and Tongariro National Park. The topography of this area is varied and includes flat floodplains, rolling hills, mountain ranges and steep volcanoes. The Group area can be divided into four distinct topographical areas, characterised by different landscapes – the Taupō Volcanic Zone, the Waikato Lowlands and Hauraki Plains, the Western and Central Hill Country and the Eastern Ranges. The topography has a significant influence on land use, hazards and risks within each area.

1.4.5 Built Environment

The largest population centre in the Group area is Hamilton City, with an estimated population in 2013 of 141,612 people (2013 census). The other main population centres are shown in Figure 1-6.

52




FIGURE 1-6: POPULATION CENTRES IN THE WAIKATO CDEM GROUP AREA

In addition to the main population centres, there are numerous small communities within the Group area. Some communities are isolated, including those in the northern Coromandel Peninsula and those on the west coast such as Raglan and Kawhia. A key consideration of the built environment for the Group is the spread of relatively remote population centres over a large geographic area. Also of note is the spill over of communities from the Auckland Council area, placing additional pressures on the built environment in the northern part of Waikato District. The area of the Waikato CDEM Group has complex networks of infrastructural assets including 1,700km of state highways and 8,500km of local roads. The region is a major road transport corridor that links Auckland and Tauranga to the rest of the North Island and also a major corridor for the supply of essential services such as electricity generation and distribution, telecommunications networks, rail and gas distribution. Industry across the Group area produces and processes heavy bulk goods, which are transported to the two busiest ports in the country, along with other freight that passes through the region. Therefore, there are strong links between local GDP and the role of the Group as a major transport corridor. The Waikato region is experiencing strong population growth and ever-increasing freight transport requirements.

53




FIGURE 1-7: TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE

1.4.6 Economic Environment

During 2014, the Waikato region produced an estimated gross domestic product of $18.2 billion, or 9% of the New Zealand total. The ten largest industries contributing towards GDP in the Waikato region in 2014 were2:

- Dairy farming

- Health care and social assistance

- Property operators and real estate services

- Professional, scientific and technological services

- Education and training

- Electricity and gas supply

- Mining

- Wholesale trade

- Construction services

- Central government administration, defence and safety Electricity generation and distribution is an important industry at both the regional and national levels. The power generating base of the North Island is located within the Waikato region, with nine hydroelectric stations on the Waikato River, geothermal power stations including Wairakei, Ohaaki, Nga Awa Puria, Ngatamariki, Rotokawa and Mokai, and the Huntly thermal power station. The backbone of the nation’s electricity system is located within the Waikato CDEM Group area, with almost 40 per cent of the nation’s electricity generation capacity, and it is capable of generating up to 50 per cent of New Zealand’s electricity when required3.

2 Source: Infometrics Waikato Regional Economic Profile (2014) (https://ecoprofile.infometrics.co.nz/Waikato%20region/Gdp/GrowthIndustries)

3 Source: Waikato Regional Energy Strategy (http://www.waikatoregion.govt.nz/PageFiles/13327/Waikato%20regional%20energy%20strategy.pdf)

Road network State Highway

Local road

Rail network Rail

54

https://ecoprofile.infometrics.co.nz/Waikato%20region/Gdp/GrowthIndustries

http://www.waikatoregion.govt.nz/PageFiles/13327/Waikato%20regional%20energy%20strategy.pdf




While not currently in the top ten industries from an economic perspective, it is acknowledged that tourism is very important for the Waikato CDEM Group area.

1.4.7 Summary of the Challenges

The context described above presents several challenges:

- A large number of organisations engaged in the management of the same risks, including several instances where multiple jurisdictions also need to be considered with the one organisation.

- A large geographic area with widespread small population centres with areas of particularly vulnerable communities subject to a wide range of hazards;

- An increasing population and development pressure on land that is at risk from a number of hazards, including significant spill over from the Auckland Council area;

- A strong local economy that produces a significant proportion of New Zealand’s GDP;

- Important national lifeline infrastructure, power generation and transport corridors with relatively widespread resources;

- Potential large numbers of people away from their normal homes (holiday houses, tourists) that need a higher level of support;

- A changing population with increasing numbers of new migrants and a large Māori population that has a special

relationship with the Waikato region; and

- Low levels of household awareness of risks and preparedness for emergencies (MCDEM Get Ready Get Thru’ Surveys). In order to respond to these challenges, it is essential that the Group provides an effective and efficient foundation for local authorities, emergency services, lifeline utilities and welfare services organisations to collectively build a more resilient community. It is also important that the assessment of risks within the Waikato CDEM Group area takes into account the variety of environments that these challenges relate to.

55



2. Understanding and Communicating our Risks

2.1 Overview

2.1.1 Goal

An understanding of the hazards that could affect the Group area, along with the risk associated with those hazards, is fundamental information that guides the work that the Group undertakes. The Group goal is to:

Build and sustain an understanding of the hazards and risks that affect the Group.

2.1.2 The Function of the Waikato CDEM Group

The functions of the Joint Committee in relation to understanding our risks includes:

- Identification, assessment and management of hazards and risks (CDEM Act Section 17(1)(a)(i)).

- Consultation and communication about risks (CDEM Act Section 17(1)(a)(ii)).

- The identification of hazards and risks that may require national level support and coordination (National CDEM Plan Section 29(3)(a)).

The Joint Committee is supported by the Coordinating Executive Group and Group Partner agencies to fulfil these functions (National CDEM Plan (Section 26(d))). The roles of these partners are outlined in the National CDEM Plan as follows.

2.1.3 Key Issues and Opportunities

The following key issues and opportunities have been identified:

a. Maintaining and completing hazard information: Information describing the Group hazardscape is incomplete and needs to be kept up to date, requiring ongoing resourcing.

b. Improving understanding of risks and mitigations required: A Group risk register has been established and actions being taken to mitigate risks identified. This needs ongoing review and improvement.

c. Improved access to hazard information: Hazard information is not easily accessible, limiting organisational and community awareness.

d. Engaging with communities: Communities are engage to educate them fully on the hazards and potential risks they face so that they are fully informed and can participate in shared decision making concerning the immediate, medium and long term recovery processes identified through strategic planning for recovery activities.

2.2 Understanding our Hazards and Risks

2.2.1 Objective

A comprehensive understanding of the hazards that affect the Group and the associated risks and the consequences to inform risk reduction, readiness, response and recovery activities.


and Delivery

3. Reducing

Risks


5. CDEM Group

readiness

6. Response

7. Recovery

8. Our partners

Monitor,

evaluate

and

improve

1. Introduction


56

Section 2: Understanding and Communicating our Risks



Group-Wide Arrangements

Overview

The Group area is affected by a number of hazards, which result in risks to our social, natural, built and economic environments. These risks are managed by the Group using the following approach.

FIGURE 2-1: WAIKATO CDEM GROUP APPROACH TO RISK MANAGEMENT

The Group work programmes are developed to ensure that planning and arrangements for each hazard are appropriate to the level of residual risk. The prioritisation of resources is collectively agreed and based on the discrepancy between the level of residual risk and planning arrangements in place. The hazards and risks will be reviewed on an ongoing basis as follows:

- If a new hazard is identified, this will be incorporated into this approach, including an assessment of the associated risk, the identification of measures to reduce that risk, an assessment of the residual risk, and the creation of the projects and/or tasks in the Group work programme that are necessary given the level of residual risk.

- If a measure to reduce a risk changes, the residual risk will be re-assessed and the Group work programme priorities reviewed and amended as agreed.

- If the risk or residual risk associated with a hazard changes, the Group work programme priorities will be reviewed and amended as agreed.

Identification of Hazards

The Group maintains a register of hazards based on best available information. This information is based on a combination of local hazard research undertaken by territorial authorities and other CDEM partners, along with region-wide hazard research undertaken by the Waikato Regional Council. It is acknowledged that the Waikato CDEM Group relies heavily on the Waikato Regional Council’s regional hazards programme to undertake this work, along with individual territorial authority work programmes.

Implementation of Group work programmes to build resilienceCommunity Readiness

(Section 4)Group Readiness

(Section 5)

Response Arrangements

(Section 6)

Recovery Arrangements

(Section 7)

Partnership Arrangements

(Section 8)

Assessment of Residual Risks (this section)

The residual risk is recorded in the risk register reflecting the measures in place to reduce risk.

Identification of measures to reduce risk (section 3)The risk register identifies measures to reduce the risk - the likelihood of the hazard, the exposure to the hazard and/or the

vulnerabilty to the hazard.

Assessment of Risks (this section)

The risk register includes an assessment of likelihood, consequence and overall risk score for each risk.

Identification of Hazards (this section)

The Group maintains a register of hazards based on best available information.

57




Further details on the hazards that have been identified as presenting a risk to the Waikato CDEM Group area are provided in Attachment 1 of this plan. There are a number of groups involved in supporting the development of hazard information and efforts to manage hazards. These include:

- Central Plateau Volcanic Advisory Group (volcanic risk on the central plateau)

- Caldera Advisory Group (risk from caldera volcanoes)

- Regional Hazards Forum (all hazards).

Assessment of Risks

The hazards that could potentially impact the Group each have an associated risk, which is determined by:

- The likelihood of an event occurring.

- The consequence of the event occurring.

The likelihood of an event occurring is described as the probability of it occurring during a person’s lifetime (with the average life expectancy currently 81 years).

The consequence of an event is based on the expected scale of the event with regard to casualties (injuries and/or deaths), the built environment and the economic environment, and is based on the assumption that the bigger the scale, the greater the consequence. This is a particularly relevant assumption for a CDEM Group risk assessment as it recognises the greater level of coordination that is required for events that have a wider impact.

The risk that is assessed for each hazard, based on likelihood and consequence, is then placed in one of six categories. The relationship between likelihood, consequence and risk is shown below, and is taken from the Directors Guideline for CDEM Groups (DGL 09/15 - CDEM Group Planning). The Group, in preparing the risk matrixes, has also taken cognisance of the fact that some hazards create risks that can have significant secondary consequences that do not immediately impact on the Waikato Region in terms of life or property losses. For example, a Foot and Mouth disease outbreak could have significant consequences for other sectors such as tourism. Similarly, a volcanic eruption and resultant ash cloud could seriously affect air travel domestically and internationally.

INDIVIDUALS COMMUNITIES DISTRICTS REGION NATION

UNLIKELY LIKELY ALMOST CERTAIN

5 - 15 % 51 - 80 % Above 80 %

RARE

Below 5 %

POSSIBLE

16 - 50 %

FIGURE 2-3: CONSEQUENCE RATING SCALE

FIGURE 2-2: LIKELIHOOD RATING SCALE

58




CONSEQUENCE

INDIVIDUALS COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGION NATION

LIKEL

IHOOD

RARE Very low Very low Low Moderate High

UNLIKELY Very low Low Moderate High Very high

POSSIBLE Low Moderate Moderate High Very high

LIKELY Low Moderate High Very high Extreme

ALMOST CERTAIN Moderate High Very high Extreme Extreme

FIGURE 2-4: RISK MATRIX

This approach has been used to assess the risk associated with each hazard that has been identified as having the potential to affect the Group area. This assessment has been completed using the two stage process outlined above, that first considers the risk if all current reduction measures are ignored. The impact of existing reduction measures are then incorporated into the assessment, which could be a plan, process or ongoing aspect of a work programme. An assessment of the risks that remain after the identified reduction measures is then produced and used to guide the Waikato CDEM Group work programme in areas such as community resilience, organisational readiness, response arrangements and recovery.

59




Risk assessment

(BEFORE reduction)

Risk reduction focuses on…

Risk assessment

(AFTER reduction)

Hazard Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Haz

ard

Exp

osu

re

Vuln

erab

ility

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Drought Possible Nation Very high Possible Nation Very high

Pandemic (animal) Almost certain Nation Extreme Possible Nation Very high

Pandemic (human) Almost certain Nation Extreme Possible Region Very high

Tsunami Possible Nation Very high Possible Nation Very high

Volcanic (ashfall only) Likely Region Very high Likely Region Very high

Volcanic (caldera unrest only) Likely Region Very high Likely Region Very high

Earthquake Possible Region High Possible Region High

Infrastructure failure (lifeline) Almost certain Region Extreme Possible Region High

Infrastructure failure (technological) Almost certain Nation Extreme Possible Region High

Land instability (long-term deformation) Almost certain Community High Almost certain Community High

Marine oil spill Likely Nation Extreme Possible Region High

River flooding Likely Region Very high Possible Region High

Severe storm Likely Region Very high Likely District High

Volcanic (caldera eruption) Rare Nation High Rare Nation High

Volcanic (eruption) Likely Region Very high Likely District High

Coastal (surge/flood/erosion) Possible District High Possible Community Moderate

Dam break Possible Region High Rare Region Moderate

Fire (structure) Almost certain Community High Likely Community Moderate

Fire (vegetation) Almost certain District Very high Likely Community Moderate

Hazardous substance incident Almost certain District Very high Likely Community Moderate

Land stability (subsidence) Likely Community Moderate Likely Community Moderate

Land stability (landslide) Possible Community Moderate Possible Community Moderate

Mass casualty incident (land/air/sea) Likely Community Moderate Possible Community Moderate

Terrorism Rare Region Moderate Rare Region Moderate

Geothermal ground activity Likely Individual Low Likely Individual Low

FIGURE 2-5: WAIKATO CDEM GROUP RISKS

Important note: Within each broad category of risk (high, moderate, etc.) the risks are not listed in order of ranking or priority. Also, the likelihood of an event occurring is described as the probability of it occurring during a person’s lifetime (with the average life expectancy currently 81 years).

60




2.2.2 Actions

The following actions have been identified to address issues relating to our understanding of hazards and risks. Arrangements to manage these risks, and further mitigation actions required, are outlined in Section 3.

Issue / Opportunity Responses and Actions Timeframe

Maintaining and completing hazard information

1. Collation of hazard and risk information, gap analysis and data improvement programme.

2016/17

Improving understanding of risks and mitigations required

2. Ongoing development of the regional multi-hazard lifeline utilities vulnerability assessment project.

Annual

3. Ongoing implementation of the hazard and risk data improvement programme.

Annual

Identify the consequences and opportunities from specific hazard risks.

4. Identify the implications for recovery from the agreed priority hazards. 2018/19

2.3 Communicating Our Risks

2.3.1 Objective

Communities understand their risks.

2.3.2 Group-Wide Arrangements

The Waikato CDEM Group and its Members are required to communicate with their communities so that those communities fully understand the risks those hazards potentially pose to them. The primary mechanisms for sharing risk information are currently:

- Land Information Memoranda

- Project Information Memoranda

- District Plans

- Organisational websites

- Group hazard/risk register (under development)

- Community Response Plans

- Hazard/risk public education

- Asset management plans

The effective application of strategic planning for recovery also requires communities to have a sound knowledge in relation to the hazards and risk they are exposed to. This knowledge enables fully informed shared decisions to be made to manage the risks. This in turn will also enhance individual and collective resilience. Through sound risk and hazard education the Waikato CDEM Group will also achieve the following;

- Understanding of a community’s values and priorities for recovery across the four areas of the built, economic,

natural and social environments

- Have clearly defined shared vision and outcomes

- Identify the consequences and opportunities from specific hazards and risk

- Develop capacity, capability, collaborative networks along with trusted leadership

To maintain the effectiveness of hazard and risk education requires robust monitoring and evaluation of the approaches been applied.

61




2.3.3 Actions

The following actions have been identified to improve the communication of hazard and risk information across the Group:


Improved access to hazard information.

5. Develop a platform for collection, collation and sharing of hazard and risk information (Waikato Hazards Database).

2016/2017

6. Promote the availability of hazard and risk information to CDEM Partners, stakeholders and the community.

Annual

Communicating risks to local communities

7. Local authorities to utilise hazard information to communicate with local communities to assist them in the understanding of potential risks to their community and identify their risk tolerance level.

2018/21

Apply knowledge of hazard consequences

8. Local authorities to develop strategic planning for recovery processes to better inform reduction, readiness, response and recovery (immediate, medium and long term)

2019/21

62



3. Reducing our Risks

3.1 Overview This section outlines a three-pronged approach to achieving this goal by reducing the likelihood, exposure or vulnerability associated with a hazard. For example:

- The likelihood that a hazard will occur can be reduced for technological and biological hazards – an example is reducing the likelihood of an animal pandemic through biosecurity measures;

- The likelihood of exposure of a community to a hazard can be reduced through measures such as land use planning to avoid building in hazard-prone areas;

- The vulnerability of the community when they are exposed to a hazard can be reduced through a wide range of mechanisms from warning systems to building standards.

3.1.1 Goal

Reduce Risks from Hazards to Acceptable Levels Achievement of this Goal is measured through the Risk Reduction section of the Capability Assessment Tool. The 2014 Capability Assessment Report identified that the Group has moved from a developing to advancing level in the last five years. The target capability for this work area is Advancing (60-80%) by 2019.


Some risk reduction strategies are undertaken as part of the Group work programme, but many occur as part of the day-to-day activities of Group Members and Partners. Given the number of agencies engaged in this work and the resulting highly complex operating environment, the Group advocates for a coordinated and consistent approach to avoid gaps and duplication. The functions of the Joint Committee in reducing risks are:

- Identification and implementation of cost-effective risk reduction (CDEM Act Section 17(1)(a)(iii))

- The reduction of risks that may require national level support and coordination (National CDEM Plan Section 29(3)(b)). The Joint Committee is supported by the Coordinating Executive Group and Group Partner agencies to fulfil these functions (National CDEM Plan (Section 26(d))). The roles of these partners are outlined in the National CDEM Plan. In addition to this support from partner agencies, the risk reduction functions of the Joint Committee are also supported by other organisational functions, including:

- Risk-based decision making in relation to land use and subdivision using the Resource Management Act (e.g. Regional Policy Statement and district plans).


49% (2009)

Advancing

62% (2014)

Mature

>80% (2019)Mature


and Delivery

3. Reducing

Risks


5. CDEM Group

readiness

6. Response

7. Recovery

8. Our partners

Monitor,

evaluate

and

improve

1. Introduction


63

Section 3: Reducing Our Risks



- The provision of hazard and risk information using the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act (e.g. the provision of LIMS).

- Risk-based building design using the Building Act. A full list of the legislation that contributes to reducing risk is provided in the National CDEM Plan (Section 89).

3.1.3 Key Issues and Opportunities

Reducing risk is an integral part of all CDEM agency activities, however it is generally recognised that reducing risk is not well understood or coordinated as a CDEM function – within the Group as well as across New Zealand. The risk profile presented in the previous section provides a strategic foundation for risk management across the Group area. It identifies the hazards that require the coordination of local authorities, emergency services, lifeline utilities and welfare services organisations to effectively manage the associated risks. In summary, the following issues and opportunities have been identified in relation to risk reduction:

a. Coordination of resilience initiatives: There are a number of organisations undertaking activities to reduce risks,

leading to potential duplication, conflict and contradiction.

b. Alignment with local authority planning: There is poor alignment between local authority planning and other CDEM risk reduction activities.

c. Lack of understanding of “acceptable risk levels”: The Capability Assessment Tool identified particular areas of improvement required in the area of risk reduction programmes and monitoring, and the encouragement of all CDEM stakeholders to reduce risks to acceptable levels. There is a poor understanding of what level of risk is acceptable.

3.2 Reducing the Likelihood that Hazards Occur

3.2.1 Objective

Risks, where manageable, are reduced to acceptable levels.


The Group is engaged in a number of work areas to reduce risks by either removing the hazard, and when this is not possible, reducing the risk (likelihood x consequences) to an acceptable level by the application of suitable risk treatments. The key focus of this work is targeted towards technological and biological hazards (as opposed to natural hazards, the likelihood of which is unable to be reduced).

Elimination or isolation

Organisations within the Group undertake work to either eliminate or isolate hazards. Examples of these hazards are:

- Animal pandemic (through the provisions in the Biosecurity Act 1993)

- Human pandemic (through the provisions in the Health Act 1956 and subsequent amendments)

Reduce the Likelihood of the Hazard

Reduce the Exposure to the Hazard

(Section 3.3)

Reduce the Vulnerability to the Hazard (Building Resilience)

(Section 3.4)

64




Reduction in likelihood

Where a hazard is unable to be isolated or eliminated, organisations within the Group undertake work to reduce the likelihood that hazards will occur. Examples of these hazards pandemic, as described above, plus:

- Dam break (under the provisions in the Building Act 2004)

- Hazardous substance release (under the provisions in the HSNO Act 1996)

- Lifeline infrastructure failure (through the provisions in the CDEM Act 2002)

- Marine oil spills (under the provisions of the Maritime Transport Act 1994)

- Structural and vegetation fire (under the provisions in the Fire Service Act 1975 and related regulations)

3.2.3 Actions

The following actions have been identified to either sustain or improve efforts to reduce the likelihood that hazards will affect the Group.

Issue Responses and Actions Timeframe

Coordination of risk reduction initiatives.

9. Audit the hazard risks identified in the Waikato Regional Policy Statement, Regional Plans, District Plans and Long Term Plans and report their effectiveness as a CDEM mechanism for risk reduction and identifying prioritisation and implementation of strategic recovery actions

2019/20

10. Review risk reduction reporting requirements to CEG to support a more coordinated approach across all agencies.

2019/20

11. Implement the risk reduction framework to facilitate a consistent approach to risk reduction across the Group.

2020/21

3.3 Reducing the Exposure to Hazards

3.3.1 Objective

Where the hazard cannot be eliminated, the likelihood of exposure to that hazard is acceptable.


The Group is engaged in a number of work areas that reduce the likelihood of exposure. This work relates to all hazards (i.e. natural, technological and biological).

Decisions in relation to changing land use and subdivision

Local authorities, through provisions in the Resource Management Act 1991, make decisions on land use and subdivision applications, designations and plan changes using decision making processes and guidance provided in the Waikato Regional Policy Statement, Waikato Regional Plan and District Plans. In some cases this decision making process can include a consideration of what natural hazards a proposal is exposed to and what the decision making response should be to those hazards. Local authorities may be able to require controls on a proposal that reduces the likelihood or consequence of exposure to the hazard (e.g. by requiring building platforms in a new residential area to be outside of a 1 % AEP floodplain). Examples of hazards that are managed in this way are:


(Section 3.2)


Reduce the Vulnerability to the Hazard (Building Resilience)

(Section 3.4)

65




- Coastal hazards

- Geothermal ground activity

- Land instability (subsidence)

- Landslide

- River flooding

Monitoring, identification and containment

Where organisations are unable to eliminate or isolate a hazard, further work is undertaken to reduce the likelihood or consequence of hazard exposure by having systems, processes and resources to assist with the monitoring, identification and containment of hazards. Examples of these hazards are:

- Animal pandemic (through the provisions in the Biosecurity Act 1993)

- Human pandemic (through the provisions in the Health Act 1956 and subsequence amendments)

- Hazardous substance release (under the provisions in the HSNO Act 1996)

- Lifeline infrastructure failure (through the provisions in the CDEM Act 2002)

- Marine oil spills (under the provisions of the Maritime Transport Act 1994)

- Structural and vegetation fire (under the provisions in the Fire Service Act 1975 and related regulations)

Infrastructure

Organisations within the Group develop, maintain and improve infrastructure to reduce the likelihood of exposure to various hazards. Examples of strategies for reducing the exposure of hazards are:

- Coastal (erosion protection and flood protection infrastructure provided by local authorities).

- Drought (water supply infrastructure provided by territorial authorities).

- Infrastructure failure (locate away from hazard prone areas).

- River flooding (drainage and flood protection schemes provided by local authorities).

- Pandemic (human) (health infrastructure provided by health organizations). Note: Territorial authorities refers to the ten district and city councils, local authorities include territorial authorities plus the Waikato Regional Council.

Warning Systems

A range of warning systems operate across the Waikato CDEM Group (refer to Section 6.4), which provide the community with an opportunity to prepare for an imminent event. For example, a heavy rainfall warning may allow landowners to temporarily move assets out of harm’s way before an expected flood. The effectiveness of warning systems will depend on a number of factors, including the time that is provided to take the necessary actions and the resilience of the system used to provide the warning.

3.3.3 Actions

The following actions have been identified that focus on reducing hazard exposure (actions in section 3.2.3 also contribute to this objective):

Issue Responses and Actions Timeframe

Alignment with local authority planning.

12. Review processes for integrating local authority planning with other CDEM resilience building activities.

2017/18

66




3.4 Building Resilience to Hazards

3.4.1 Objective

Where exposure to a hazard cannot be avoided, our resilience to that hazard is acceptable.


Where hazards are unable to be eliminated, the Group is engaged in a number of work areas that build resilience (or reduce the consequence) of the communities exposed to those hazards.

Building controls

Local authorities, through provisions in the Building Act 2004, control the design and construction of new buildings, along with alterations and renewal of existing buildings. In many cases, this control relates to the imposition of requirements that build resilience by reducing the vulnerability of the building to the hazards that it is exposed to. Examples of these hazards are:

- Coastal hazards

- Earthquake

- Geothermal ground activity

- Land instability (subsidence)

- Landslide

- River flooding

- Severe storm (flood, high winds)

- Structural fire

Business Continuity Planning

Organisations and businesses undertake business continuity planning to understand the risks that they are exposed to, agree on the actions that may be necessary in the event of an emergency. A wide range of issues are considered during this process, including the impact that an emergency may have on the workforce, essential systems and supply chains. By having a business continuity plan in place and undertaking proactive actions to prepare for an emergency, organisations and businesses can increase their resilience to the hazards they are exposed to.

Other work areas outlined in this plan

This plan outlines a number of work areas developed and overseen by the Waikato CDEM Group. These are:

- Understanding and communicating our risks (outlined in Section 2 of this Plan).

- Community resilience (outlined in Section 4 of this Plan (Being Ready – Our Communities))

- Organisational readiness (outlined in Section 1 of this plan (Being Ready – the CDEM Group))

- Response arrangements (outlined in Section 6 of this plan (Response Arrangements)).

- Recovery arrangements (outlined in Section 7 of this plan (Recovery Arrangements)).

- Partnership arrangements (outlined in Section 8 of this plan (Partnership Arrangements)). These work areas all contribute to the building of resilience in our community to the hazards it is exposed to.

3.4.3 Actions

The actions to reduce vulnerability to hazards are included in the relevant sections of this plan listed above.


(Section 3.2)


(Section 3.3)

Reduce the Vulnerability to the

Hazard

67




3.5 Defining ‘Acceptable’ Levels of Risk

3.5.1 Objective

There is a consistent and comprehensive understanding of acceptable risk.


The end result of ‘reducing our risks’ is to ensure that the characteristics of the hazard, along with the exposure and vulnerability in the community, is acceptable. The parameters that define an acceptable level of risk are included in a number of documents that are prepared across the Group, many of which are informed by views across the community regarding what is considered acceptable. Some examples are described below.

National regulatory tools

Different pieces of national legislation require the development of national regulatory tools. These are useful for the development and description of nationally consistent requirements for risk acceptability (noting that hazard exposure and vulnerability often crosses local and regional jurisdictions, thereby driving a need for national consistency). Examples of national regulatory tools include:

- National policy statements and environmental standards: The Resource Management Act enables the development of National Policy Statements and National Environmental Standards. These documents provide nationally consistent guidance to the regional and local regulatory tools that are outlined below.

- Building Act: The Building Act places requirements on building work, some of which relates to risks that the building is exposed to (e.g. seismic performance, minimum floor levels and wind loads). These requirements define how resilient a building design needs to be to these environmental factors (i.e. the vulnerability of the building is only acceptable if these requirements are complied with).

- Building Code: The Building Act requires the development of the Building Code, which provides a detailed description of building design and construction requirements.

Regional regulatory tools

Sitting under the national regulatory tools is a set of regional regulatory tools that are applied across the Group and provide a platform for the consistent description of acceptable risks across the Waikato Region (and the Group). Examples of regional regulatory tools include:

- Waikato Regional Policy Statement: The Resource Management Act requires the development of a Regional Policy Statement by the Waikato Regional Council, which provides a consistent set of objectives, policies and methods for the Waikato Region (and the Group) across activities that are covered by the Resource Management Act. This includes the management of land use and subdivision in response to natural hazards.

- Waikato Regional Plan: The Resource Management Act requires the development of a Regional Plan by the Waikato Regional Council, which provides a consistent basis for decision making with regard to a range of activities that impact on the environment, as well as those being undertaken in the coastal marine area.

- Waikato Regional Council Infrastructure Strategy: The Local Government Act requires the Waikato Regional Council to develop an infrastructure strategy for those assets under its control. Part of the infrastructure strategy involves describing the level of service that is provided by different assets which help to define how risks will be managed (i.e. the risk associated with an asset is only acceptable if the corresponding level of service is met).

Local regulatory tools

Sitting under the national and regional regulatory tools is a set of local regulatory tools that are developed and applied by individual territorial authorities which provide a platform for the consistent description of acceptable risk across territorial authorities (i.e. the aspects of resilience where it has been agreed that national or regional consistency is not necessary). Examples of local regulatory tools include:

68




- District plans: The Resource Management Act requires the development of a district plan by each territorial authority, which provides a consistent basis for decision making with regard to activities such as land use and subdivision.

- Territorial authority infrastructure strategies: As with the Waikato Regional Council, the Local Government Act requires territorial authorities to develop infrastructure strategies, part of which involves describing the level of service that is provided by different assets.

Long-term, asset management and annual planning

Local authorities prepare Long Term Plans every 3 years and annual work programmes every year. These plans include a description of the work that will be undertaken over the corresponding period, and how that work will be funded. The decisions on which works are funded helps to define acceptable risk (i.e. a decision to not undertake a piece of work means that the associated risk is accepted by the local authority). Lifeline utility providers also have in place long term asset management plans. These Long Term Plans, and the Asset Management Plans that support them, have level of service statements that relate to their capability to manage the hazards that they are exposed to or associated with. These levels of service are another way of defining what level of risk is acceptable, for example through targets, emergency response times and service reliability standards.

3.5.3 Actions

The following actions have been identified to either sustain or improve the understanding of risk acceptability across the Group:


Lack of understanding of “acceptable risk levels”

13. During the next review periods, review the effectiveness of the Waikato Regional Policy Statement, Regional Plans, District Plan and Long Term Plans as a CDEM mechanism for defining acceptable risk.

Depends on statutory timings.

14. Collate data from local authority preparation for recovery with communities to understand risk tolerance, minimise the escalation of the consequences of emergencies, reduce future exposure to hazards and their associated risk to build resilience, identify opportunities to regenerate and enhance communities that will meet future needs (across the built, economic, natural and social environments) and support the cultural, emotional and physical wellbeing of individuals and communities.

2020/21

69



4. Being Ready – Our Communities

4.1 Overview Community resilience is the ability of individuals, families, businesses and communities to be able to meet their own needs during and after emergencies. Community readiness activities are intended to build community resilience. Enhancing community resilience is primarily about public education, effective public warning systems and supporting community-level response planning.

4.1.1 Goal

Increase community awareness, understanding, preparedness and ownership Achievement of this goal is measured through the Capability Assessment Tool. The 2014 Capability Assessment Report identified that this has been an area of significant focus and improvement since the last CDEM Plan. The target capability for this work area is Mature (>80%) by

2019.


The function of the Joint Committee with regard to community resilience covers the following area:

- Public awareness of CDEM (CDEM Act Section 17(1)(g)).

- The provision of timely warnings and public information (National CDEM Plan Section 29(3)(c)).

- The requirement for Strategic Planning for Recovery which focuses on communities being well-placed and supported to

recover from any emergencies arising from hazards and risks. The community resilience function of the Joint Committee is enabled by the National CDEM Plan (Sections 109-111), which describes the national approach to CDEM public education and community engagement. In addition to this, the Joint Committee is supported by the Coordinating Executive Group and Group Partner agencies to fulfil these functions (National CDEM Plan (Section 26(d))). The roles of these partners are outlined in the National CDEM Plan.

4.1.3 Issues and Opportunities

Increased community resilience through self-preparedness is a key focus in the next five years. There is an identified need to discuss community levels of service expectations in relation to hazards and associated risks before deciding on appropriate actions to reduce or otherwise manage risk. The Waikato CDEM Group is required to strategically plan for recovery by engaging with the communities of the Waikato Region to ensure they fully comprehend the likelihood and consequences of the risks posed by hazards they are exposed to so that they can prepare effective recovery plans

UnsatisfactoryDeveloping

35% (2009)Developing

Advancing

71 % (2014)

Mature

>80% (2019)Mature


and Delivery

3. Reducting Our Risks


5. CDEM Group

readiness

6. Response

7. Recovery

8. Our Partners

Monitor,

evaluate

and

improve

70

Section 4: Being Ready – Our Communities



The Capability Assessment review in 2014 identified that the monitoring and reviewing of community resilience programmes, and support of volunteer participation are two areas requiring significant improvement. Other key issues and opportunities identified include:

a. Targeted community information: The need to develop more useful and targeted information to enable communities to plan for themselves (generic information messaging is not considered adequate).

b. Effective community engagement: How to engage with communities and determine each community’s ‘risk appetite’. This includes trying to overcome the ‘it’s not going to happen to me’ mindset.

c. Facilitating active community involvement in CDEM: How to translate community awareness of hazards into actions, including the coordination of both planned and spontaneous volunteers.

d. Facilitating active business involvement in CDEM: Community recovery relies on the sustainment of business

activity and businesses can also play a key role supporting CDEM response and recovery.

e. Coordinating engagement initiatives: There has been limited coordination of initiatives among CDEM Group Members and Partners in the development of public information and awareness initiatives. There are opportunities to work with other organisations (community groups, corporates, etc), to get the messaging out.

f. Standardising and rationalising Civil Defence Centres: Historical practices have resulted in a wide range of facilities developed and maintained to various standards.

In order to respond to these challenges, the CDEM Group needs to agree how the existing approach to the delivery of CDEM outcomes can be further optimised, with a particular focus on smarter solutions that improve connectivity, coordination and collaboration across all members of the Group.

4.2 Community Engagement

4.2.1 Objective

The community understands its hazards and the associated risks.


The CDEM Group carries out a number of public education initiatives, as detailed in the Group Public Education Plan 2011:

- The website (www.waikatoregioncdemg.govt.nz) provides information on hazards, being ready, news and events and CDEM policies and plans.

- Social media is used to generate both pre-event awareness and updates during events via Facebook, Twitter and Instagram.

- Good relationships with print and electronic media are maintained and used as another channel for communication.

- Other local opportunities used for awareness raising and education on self-preparedness include the community newsletters, displays at libraries and events, presentations to schools, community groups, and other relevant stakeholder meetings.

The Group Public Education Plan will be updated and expanded to a ‘Community Engagement Strategy’. Particular focus will be given to using opportunities to partner with other agencies involved in community engagement such as Neighbourhood Watch and iwi organisations, to create community resilience building opportunities.

The Group is actively promoting Community Response Planning and is seeing significant interest and growth in this area. Communities regularly adversely affected by weather events have become more engaged and the Group is using this wave of interest to help other communities to see the benefits of Community Response Planning. Geographic communities in rarely affected areas are less likely to see the benefits. The Group is responding to that challenge by supplying Community Response Planning tools to additional existing community group structures (such as Neighbourhood Support). The Group will use the lessons learned from Community Response Planning to determine how best to approach strategic planning for recovery with effective communities.

71

http://www.waikatoregioncdemg.govt.nz/




4.2.3 Actions

The following actions have been identified to either sustain or improve community engagement:

Issue / Opportunity Proposed Actions Timeframe

Targeted community information

15. Incorporate hazard and risks (including infrastructure risks) as part of community response planning.

Part of Community Response Plan development

Facilitating active community involvement

16. Use Waikato Hazard and Risk database to prioritise community response planning and vice versa.

2016/17 and annual review

Coordinating engagement initiatives

17. Develop and implement a Community Engagement Strategy (update/expansion of the Public Education Strategy) with a focus on coordinating initiatives.

2016/17 then annual monitoring

Develop a strategic planning for recovery framework.

18. Engage with other CDEM groups to identify their approaches to strategic planning for recovery. Pilot 2-3 approaches in the Waikato and determine the ‘best’ approach for the Waikato.

2018/19

72




4.3 Community Response Planning and Recovery Preparation

4.3.1 Objective

Ownership of individual, community and business preparedness.


Community response plans aim to provide communities with pre-arrangements to support a self-sufficient community response for at least three days. The CDEM Group has developed three guidance documents to support the development of community response plans:

- Community-Driven Emergency Response Plan Development – Guidance for Communities.

- Community Response Plan Template.

- Guidance for Local CDEM Staff. The Group also maintains a set of web-based resources to support the sustainment and development of community response plans, along with providing a platform for communities to discuss and share ideas. The Group will continue to support communities to develop and sustain community response plans and will prioritise this work based on the level of risk and the availability and willingness of community members to progress this work. Community response planning engagement provides the opportunity to educate communities in their hazards and the risks they are potentially exposed to. Strategic planning for recovery processes when combined with community response planning enables communities to identify opportunities to maximise risk reduction activities while being better prepared to initiate recovery activities more seamlessly following an emergency based on previously agreed vision for recovery, and outcomes of recovery.

4.3.3 Actions

The following actions have been identified to either sustain or improve community response planning across the Group:


Encouraging active community involvement

19. Develop a prioritised programme for development and updates of CRPs.

2016/17, prioritised CRP programme. Implementation 16-21.

20. Test, review and maintain community resilience plans. 2018 report on CRP status.

21. Review the CRP framework post the pilots for recovery planning and assess ‘the fit’ of combining response and recovery planning with local communities.

2018/19

Effective community engagement

22. Develop a programme to measure community resilience outcomes.

Part of Community Engagement Strategy.

23. Establish and sustain communication processes between communities and CDEM.

Incorporate into CRPs.

73




4.4 Civil Defence Centres

4.4.1 Objective

Appropriate Civil Defence Centre (CDC) facilities are provided.


Historically, communities have had identified sites, variously named, including schools and halls, that were the designated Civil Defence Centre sites for their community. This practice has resulted in a wide range of CDC facilities across the Waikato, equipped to varying levels. In 2015/16, a stock take was commenced to assess the current status and level of provision of all CDCs with the intention to rationalise and/or expand as appropriate. The intended approach for future management of CDCs is to:

- Establish a Group wide process for the identification and management of our CDC and contacts.

- Implement a registration process to provide a system for the Group to record the location, facility contacts and resources the facility has.

This approach is detailed in the Civil Defence Centre Project Plan (December 2015) and incorporated in the actions below.

4.4.3 Actions

The following actions have been identified to either sustain or improve CDC arrangements across the Group:


Standardising and rationalising Civil Defence Centres

24. Complete a stock take of facilities and plan for removal / development.

2016/17

25. Implementation of plan. 2017-19

26. Establish standardised arrangements for CDC administration and communication arrangements.

2016/17

27. Implementation of CDC arrangements Group-wide. 2017-19

28. Promote CDC locations appropriate to community requirements.

Part of CRP development

74




4.5 Volunteers

4.5.1 Objective

Community volunteers are capable and available for disaster response and recovery activities.


The Group’s volunteer management arrangements are outlined in the Waikato CDEM Group Volunteer Management Plan (2014), developed in line with the Directors Guidelines for CDEM Groups (Volunteer Coordination – DGL15/13). The implementation of the Group Volunteer Coordination Plan will be a key area of focus over the next five years. The Plan identified the need to:

- Engage with community focused groups before, during and after a significant emergency event including during the recovery phase.

- Support our preferred volunteer coordination partner in the identification, recruitment and registration of volunteers.

- Provide specific training for roles where skilled volunteers are likely to undertake specialist roles.

- Hold regular meetings between the Group, our preferred volunteer coordination partner, and relevant community groups to discuss volunteer coordination in an emergency.

- Reduce the number of spontaneous volunteers and increase the number of trained CDEM volunteers.

- Identify and train volunteer coordinators from within existing volunteer groups.

- Test the identification, availability and deployment of volunteers as part of local, regional and national exercise schedules.

4.5.3 Actions


Facilitating active community involvement

29. Establish and sustain protocols with volunteer groups for the oversight, mobilisation and coordination of community volunteer capability (including aspects identified in the Volunteer Plan).

2016/17 to 2017/18 then monitor implementation annually.

30. Develop and deliver a programme for CDEM trained volunteers in partnership with our preferred volunteer coordination partner.

2016/17 to 2017/18 then monitor implementation annually.

75




4.6 Business Outreach

4.6.1 Objective

Businesses are resilient to disasters and have a defined role in disaster response and recovery.


Supporting business resilience

The CDEM Group engages with businesses for two key reasons – firstly to support their ability to survive (and thrive) both during and following emergencies. This work builds on the work being undertaken by the Group in the broader community to reduce vulnerability and build resilience, but provides a focus on aspects that are particularly relevant to business. As an example, the Hamilton City Council has a Business Resilience Toolkit that is available through their website.

Business support to response and recovery

The second aspect to business outreach by the Group involves working alongside businesses to identify how they can become involved in a response. This includes understanding the available capability of these businesses, for example in terms of trained personnel and equipment/resources, and then developing plans for how those available resources can be deployed in response to an emergency, or during the recovery from an emergency. At a group-wide level, the focus is on those businesses that have a group-wide footprint. At a local level, the focus is on leveraging off any group-wide engagement, along with those businesses that have a local footprint.

4.6.3 Actions

The following actions have been identified to either sustain or improve business resilience across the Group:


Facilitating active business involvement in CDEM.

31. Establish CDEM relationships with large scale businesses. 2016/17 to 2017/18

32. Establish CDEM relationships with professional bodies and institutions.

2016/17 to 2017/18

33. Promote and build business engagement with CDEM (eg: Waikato Hazard and Risk Information).

Annual

34. Establish and sustain protocols with businesses for the oversight and mobilisation of skills and assets during an emergency response and recovery

2016/17 to 2017/18

35. Develop evaluation framework to measure the effectiveness of regional and local business engagement by CDEM.

2016/17 to 2017/18

4.7 Organisational readiness An important part of community resilience is the capability and capacity of organisations to respond to an emergency. This aspect is covered in more detail in Section 5 of this plan.

76



5. Being Ready – The Waikato CDEM Group

5.1 Overview Continual improvement of The Waikato CDEM Group readiness is achieved through a combination of strategic planning for recovery informed by a sound understanding of the hazards and assessed risks posed by those hazards. This approach provides the data to guide readiness activities, setting standards and processes. It also highlights potential reduction initiatives, provides effective and efficient response while assisting a seamless transition into the phases of recovery.

5.1.1 Goal

Enhance capability to deliver an effective, expedient and efficient response and recovery Achievement of this goal is measured through the Capability Assessment Tool that shows that the Group has moved into ‘advancing’ level. The target for this work area is to achieve Mature level (>80%).

Enhancing Capability to Manage Emergencies:

Organisational Resilience Score:

A specific target has not been established in the Corrective Action Plan developed by the Group. The responsibility for improving organisational resilience lies with the individual agencies that are part of the wider CDEM Group.


The functions of the Joint Committee in relation to Group readiness cover the following areas:

- Personnel capability (CDEM Act Section 17(1)(b)).

- Materials, services, information and other resources (CDEM Act Section 17(1)(c)).

- Plan for and carry out recovery activities (CDEM ACT Section 17(1)(e)).

- The development, maintenance and review of organizational capability (National CDEM Plan Section 29(3)(d)).

- The appointment, development and maintenance of key operational positions (National CDEM Plan Section 29(3)(e)).


58% (2009)

Advancing

75% (2014)

Mature

>80% (2019)Mature

Unsatisfactory Developing DevelopingAdvancing

66% (2014)

Mature

>80% (2019)Mature


and Delivery

3. Reducing Our Risks


5. CDEM Group

readiness

6. Response

7. Recovery

8. Our partners

Monitor,

evaluate

and

improve

77

Section 5: Being Ready – The Waikato CDEM Group



The Group readiness functions of the Joint Committee are enabled by several aspects of the CDEM Act, including:

- The establishment of the Group (Sections 12-19).

- The appointment of persons who can declare a state of local emergency (Section 25).

- The appointment of the Group Controller.

- The appointment of the Group Recovery Manager (Section 29) and Local Recovery Managers (Section 30).

- The duties of various organizations (Sections 60-65). These functions of the Joint Committee are also enabled by the National CDEM Plan (Part 7), which describes planning, capability development, exercising and testing. In addition to this, the Joint Committee is supported by the Coordinating Executive Group and Group Partner agencies to fulfil these functions (National CDEM Plan (Section 26(d))). The roles of these partners are outlined in the National CDEM Plan.

5.1.3 Issues and Priorities

Maintaining capability and capacity is a particular issue highlighted during stakeholder meetings for the development

of this Plan. Each of the 11 local authorities in the region have historically chosen to provide sufficient staff to operate the GECC and EOCs, and to maintain the capability of staff to fulfil key roles (e.g. Controller, Recovery Manager and Welfare Manager). This can be an onerous requirement, particularly for smaller territorial authorities, which has been partly addressed through Shared Service arrangements in some areas (Emergency Operating Areas). Other CDEM Group readiness issues and opportunities include:

a. Development of communication and information management systems: Investment has been made to communication and emergency information management systems which meet the collective needs of the CDEM Group Member and Partner organisations.

b. Clarifying roles and arrangements at different emergency levels: Greater clarity is required across the Group regarding the transition between levels of emergency events.

c. Improving coordination between key response organisations in large-scale events: There are opportunities to better define and align CDEM procedures across the group for more centralised support and coordination. Another opportunity is to include fast-moving consumable goods (FMCG) and fuel providers into emergency management plans as they are a critical part of response and recovery during major emergencies.

d. GECC facilities: The current Group Emergency Coordination Centre (GECC) does not meet the essential requirements for facilities in post-disaster recovery. However, investment has been approved for a new facility which will enable operations to continue during and after a catastrophic event. This will align the Waikato GECC with the facilities operated by our colleagues around New Zealand. In addition, there is opportunity to build greater efficiencies through the co-location of partner agencies into the new building.

e. Arrangements for sharing of Waikato CDEM staff resources: The capacity for local authorities / local ECCs to

sustain a significant response is limited. While support would be provided from across the Group there are opportunities to create formal protocols and agreements for this to occur. It is however acknowledged that the Waikato CDEM Group Constitution supports this occurring in principal.

f. Identifying and planning for critical resources: As identified by the Capability Assessment Tool, there is an opportunity to enhance the processes for logistics and the sourcing of critical resources.

g. Organisational resilience of key response agencies: The Capability Assessment Tool also identified opportunities to strengthen organisational resilience amongst key response agencies.

5.2 Emergency Operation and Coordination Centres

5.2.1 Objective

The Group's EOCs and ECC are maintained at a high level of readiness to support local, regional and national events.


The Group’s arrangements for EOCs and the ECC are outlined in Section 6.3. However as the development of these arrangements is considered a readiness activity, the Action Plan for both ‘readiness’ and ‘response’ is outlined below.

78




5.2.3 Actions

The following actions have been identified to sustain or improve ECC and EOC arrangements across the Group.

Issues/ Opportunity Actions Timeframe

Development of communication and information systems

36. Develop situational awareness processes. Annual

37. Implementation and exercising of EMIS and other ICT solutions. Annual

Improving coordination between key response organisations

38. Improve and align all Group standard operating procedures. Annual

GECC Facilities 39. Identify and implement a plan addressing the accommodation arrangements for the GEMO/GECC in the short, medium and long term.

2016/17

5.3 Capability and Capacity Development

5.3.1 Objective

Capable people are available to support an appropriate level of response.


Training

As a first step toward improving capability, the Group adopted the 2012-1017 Integrated Training Strategy, which defined the required capability and competency requirements for Group and identified the approach to the implementation of a training programme. This approach to capability development was subsequently adopted nationally as the Integrated Training Framework and continues to be the basis for training across the Group, along with other targeted training material as required.

Exercise Programmes

The Group participates in exercises to reinforce and sustain the training that is delivered, along with providing an opportunity for organizations to build and sustain their capability to respond to scenarios that are particularly relevant. CDEM Members and Partners are expected to arrange their own local exercises, appropriate to their response and recovery functions, and participate in Tier 2, 3 and 4 exercises that would involve their agency.

Tier Description

1 - Local exercise (individual organisation)

2 - Group exercise (within CDEM Group)

3 - Inter-group exercise (across CDEM Groups, may include MCDEM)

4 - National exercise (New Zealand or part thereof, including central government).

TABLE 5-1: EXERCISE TIERS

79




5.3.3 Actions

The following actions have been identified to sustain or improve capability development arrangements across the Group.

Issue / Opportunity Actions Timeframe

Maintaining capability and capacity

Improving coordination between key response organisations in large-scale events.

40. Support the development of the Integrated Training Framework (ITF). Include training for Recovery Managers.

Ongoing

41. Develop and implement a training exercise programme to deliver the ITF.

2016/17

42. Develop the professional capability of professional CDEM staff through goal setting, reviews and training opportunities.

Ongoing

Arrangements for sharing of Waikato CDEM staff resources

43. Develop protocols for sharing of CDEM staff resources across the Group and maintaining key positions during a prolonged activation, including recovery.

2016/17

Organisational Resilience of key response agencies:

44. Establish a Group business continuity forum for members to review organisational resilience and identify collective areas for improvement. As a first step in the establishment of this forum, members are to provide a copy of their current business continuity arrangements/plans in order to establish a baseline for future improvements.

2017/18

80




5.4 Warning Systems

5.4.1 Objective

Effective and expedient warning systems are in place.


The Group’s arrangements are outlined in the Group Warning Systems Strategy and these are summarised in Section 6.4 of this Plan. However, as the development of these arrangements is considered a readiness activity, the Action Plan for both ‘readiness’ and ‘response’ is outlined below.

5.4.3 Actions

The following actions have been identified to sustain or improve warning system arrangements across the Group:


Development of communication and information management systems

45. Implement the Warning Systems Strategy Ongoing. Annual progress report.

5.5 Inter-Agency Communication

5.5.1 Objective

Effective and efficient interagency communications are in place.


The Group has established and maintains a number of systems and protocols to support interagency communication and these are summarised in Section 6.6 of this Plan. However, as the development of these arrangements is considered a readiness activity, the Action Plan for both ‘readiness’ and ‘response’ is outlined below.

5.5.3 Actions

The following actions have been identified to either sustain or improve inter-agency communication across the Group. Actions specifically relating to Welfare and Lifeline Utilities communication protocols are included in Section 8.


Improving coordination between key response organisations in large-scale events.

46. Improve and sustain interagency operational communications protocols (including the principles of consistent messaging)

Annual.

47. Establish and sustain the coordination of interagency public information and social media management.

Annual.

81




5.6 Resource Coordination (Logistics)

5.6.1 Objective

Response and recovery resources are available.


Local CDEM agencies and a number of response partners each hold lists of critical resource requirements and how these will be managed (to varying degrees).

5.6.3 Actions

The following actions have been identified to either sustain or improve resource coordination across the Group.


Identifying and planning for critical resources

48. Review resource requirements for a major Group response.

Annual

49. Develop a Group Logistics Plan for use of the resources4.

2016/17 to 2017/18

4 in accordance with the Director’s Guidelines for CDEM Groups (Logistics – DGL 17/15).

82



6. Response Arrangements

6.1 Overview Response comprises the actions taken immediately before, during, or directly after a civil defence emergency to save lives, protect property and to support communities in the transition to recovery. Response starts prior to an emergency being declared and lasts until the immediate threats to lives, safety and property are over, and systems and processes are in place to manage the recovery process.

6.1.1 Goal

Sustained capability to deliver an effective, expedient and efficient response


The functions of the Joint Committee in relation to response cover the following areas:

- Response to emergencies (CDEM Act Section 17(1)(d)).

- Support to other CDEM Groups (CDEM Act Section 17(1)(f)).

- Being available to activate response arrangements if requested or directed by the National Controller (National CDEM Plan Section 29(4)).

The response functions of the Joint Committee are enabled by several aspects of the CDEM Act and National CDEM Plan, including:

- The functions of the Group Controller (CDEM Act Section 28).

- The state of emergency concept (CDEM Act Part 4).

- General powers in relation to CDEM (CDEM Act Part 5).

- General response arrangements (National CDEM Plan (Part 8, response)).

In addition to this, the Joint Committee is supported by the Coordinating Executive Group and our partner agencies to fulfil these functions (National CDEM Plan (Section 26(d))). This support is underpinned by other sections in the National CDEM Plan that define the role of these partners.

6.1.3 Objectives

The Group’s response objectives are:

1. Response plans are implemented effectively during emergencies, in accordance with agreed priorities (see box to right).

2. Response arrangements are monitored and continuously improved.

The issues, priorities and actions for improving response are considered Group readiness activities and are included in Section 5.

9. Leadership, Governande and Delivery



5. CDEM Group

readiness

6. Response

7. Recovery

8. Our partners

EMERGENCY RESPONSE PRIORITIES

(in no particular order):

- Preservation of life;

- Prevention of escalation of the emergency;

- Maintenance of law and order;

- Care of sick, injured, and dependent people

(first aid, medical, and evacuation facilities,

and welfare);

- Provision of essential services (lifeline utilities,

food, shelter, public information, and media);

- Preservation of governance (continuity of the

machinery of government);

- Asset protection, including buildings and

historic heritage assets (including structures,

areas, landscapes, archaeological sites, and

waahi tapu);

- Protection of natural and physical resources;

and

- Preservation of economic activity.

Monitor,

evaluate

and

improve

83

Section 6: Response Arrangements



6.2 Response Structure, Roles and Functions The National CDEM Plan 2015 outlines the responsibilities of each CDEM Group Partner during response. This Section summarises the key roles of CDEM agencies at a local, group and national level. The response structure for the CDEM Group is illustrated in Figure 6-1 and is in accordance with the New Zealand Coordinated Incident Management System (CIMS) 2nd edition.

FIGURE 6-1: WAIKATO CDEM GROUP RESPONSE COORDINATION STRUCTURE

Further information regarding the sub-functions that sit under each of the above functions is provided in CIMS documentation. The roles of EOCs, GECC and NCMC are summarised in Table 6-1. Further detailed arrangements for EOC and GECC operations are provided in Operating Manuals.

Controller

Intelligence

Information

Situation

Forecasting

Planning

Action planning

Long term planning

Contingency planning

Operations

Operational coordination

Liaison

Volunteer coordination

Logistics

Administration

Finance

Transport

Supply

Catering

ICT

Facilities

Personnel

Public information

Information and warnings

Media

Community liaison

Welfare

Psychosocial support

Registration

Household goods and services

Inquiry

Financial assistance

Needs assessment

Shelter and accommodation

Children and young people

Animal welfare

84




6.3 Activation of Response Arrangements Activation of response coordination is on the basis of need, generally as a result of receipt of a warning, or a response to a sudden or gradually escalating event. Activation involves the mobilisation of personnel and EOCs in response to an event. Initial activation of response coordination occurs via CDEM Duty Officers, who maintain a continuous response capacity at both the EOC and GECC levels. The specific activation procedures for EOCs and the GECC are contained within the respective Standard Operating Procedures of the administering organisation. The nature and extent of the emergency will dictate the functions required in the EOC and the staffing levels necessary to manage them. Due consideration must be given to the advice of emergency services and CDEM Group staff as well as the need for the functions of the EOC and GECC.

GECC or EOC ACTIVATION STATUS 1 (MONITOR)

GECC or EOC monitors incidents/events that may lead to an emergency or that

may require support.

Controller informed.

Limited staffing.

Other CDEM stakeholders informed.

Public may be informed (consider public information needs).

GECC or EOC ACTIVATION STATUS 2 (SUPPORT)

GECC or EOC supports the response.

Controller involved.

Increased staffing.

Other CDEM stakeholders informed and may be involved.

Political stakeholders informed.

Public informed.

GECC or EOC ACTIVATION STATUS 3 (COORDINATE)

GECC or EOC coordinates the response.

Controller coordinates.

Full staffing.

Other CDEM stakeholders informed and involved.

Political stakeholders involved.

Public informed.

GECC or EOC ACTIVATION STATUS 4 (DIRECT)

GECC or EOC directs the response.

Controller directs.

Full staffing.

Other CDEM stakeholders informed and involved.

Political stakeholders involved.

Public informed.

85




TABLE 6-1: ROLES OF CDEM RESPONSE CENTRES

Local Emergency Operations Centres Group Emergency Coordination Centre National Crisis Management Centre

Each territorial authority is responsible for maintaining the EOC identified within its jurisdiction according to local arrangements. Some territorial authorities have shared services arrangements for delivery of the EOC functions.

EOCs may be activated at the request of responding agencies, the Local Controller or the Group Controller. The role of the EOC is to:

- Provide permanent coordination facilities for supporting responses within territorial authorities

- Provide a base for the Local Controller to exercise coordination and control functions.

- Provide a coordination and liaison point for all emergency services, voluntary organisations, territorial authority personnel and Government departments involved in emergency management during significant, multi-agency events.

- Collect, collate, analyse and disseminate intelligence and information about the impact of the emergency from all parts of the district.

- Control and coordinate the deployment of personnel and material resources throughout the District.

- Keep the GECC informed on the emergency situation.

- Provide public information management.

- Activate CDCs to support affected communities.

- Request assistance from the GECC as required.

The GEMO is responsible for maintaining GECC facilities. An event may be considered regionally significant, whether a state of local emergency has been declared or not. However, the GECC is activated in support whenever an emergency response by the territorial authorities is being initiated through an EOC. The role of the GECC is to:

- Provide a permanent coordination facility for response to regionally significant events.

- Provide a base for the Group Controller to exercise his/her functions.

- Collect, collate, analyse and disseminate intelligence and information about the event.

- Provide advice to the NCMC on the status and nature of response within the group.

- Provide advice to EOCs on response and gathered intelligence.

- Liaise between EOCs and the Group Controller.

- Coordinate the responses of regional level agencies in support of the local response.

- Provide coordination for national resources assigned to the group.

- Organise support with other CDEM Groups.

- Provide and coordinate resources and facilities for the Group Controller.

- Coordinate a group-wide response (communications, database access, expert advice, briefing and liaison).

- Collect and evaluate information related to the incident and reporting this to the Group Controller and developing appropriate action plans.

- Preparation, dissemination and coordination of public information.

- Coordinated liaison / communication with Partner agencies.

- Allocate and prioritise facilities, services and materials or resources necessary for emergency management response.

The NCMC is the Government’s facility for coordinating the response to events of national significance and providing national support to Groups for regionally significant events. It is managed, and usually activated by, MCDEM (though other agencies may lead Government responses).

The NCMC may activate in support of Waikato Group responses at any level, but typically will activate in support of a GECC response.

The primary interaction between the NCMC and the Group will be between the National Controller and Group Controller. The role of the NCMC is to:

- Gather, collate, assess and produce information.

- Direct response operations and support, issue public information and conduct media liaison.

- Inform and advise the Government.

- Where required, coordinate government and non-government resources.

86




6.4 Warning Systems

Agencies responsible for issuing warnings

Warnings are the notifications used to advise agencies, authorities, and the public of possible events, enabling them to prepare for a potential or actual emergency. Early warnings and alerts to potential hazards and emergency events enables effective response and timely mobilisation of resources. There are a number of agencies involved in surveillance, monitoring and assessment of hazards, both at the national and local levels, as summarised in Table 6-2. In addition to this, the Waikato CDEM Group has identified several actions to enhance the capability of warning systems (refer to Section 5.4).

National Warning System

The National Warning System establishes a process for the receipt of general warnings and communication of CDEM related warning information. MCDEM maintains the system to issue civil defence warnings received from responsible agencies. National warnings must be provided by MCDEM to CDEM Groups, local authorities, police as well as certain government departments, lifeline utilities and broadcasters.

Waikato CDEM warning system

The Group is responsible for maintaining warning systems and disseminating warnings to local communities within the Group area. The Waikato CDEM warning system is illustrated in Figure 6-2. Initial notification of hazard events comes from alert notification systems from either the National Warning System, local or Government agencies responsible for warnings and/or directly from local communities. Warnings from the National Warning System are distributed to local authority CDEM Duty Officers. Local arrangements and procedures are then used to disseminate warning messages, activate response and notify other agencies.

Hazard Lead Agency Responsibilities

Volcanic unrest or

eruption

GNS Science (Geonet) Develop and disseminate volcanic status (Volcanic Alert Levels) to MCDEM and

CDEM Groups.

Earthquake GNS Science Develop and disseminate seismic activity (magnitude/location) to MCDEM and

CDEM Groups and public.

Severe weather MetService Issue severe weather outlooks, watches and warnings; special weather

advisories; severe convection and thunderstorm outlooks; road snowfall

warnings; heavy swell and storm surge.

Regional and distal source

tsunami

MCDEM Receive tsunami information bulletins, watches or warnings from the Pacific

Tsunami Warning Centre and issue warnings to CDEM Groups and the public.

Local source tsunami MCDEM It may not be possible to warn the public due to short timeframes, so response

relies on the public responding to physical warnings.

Public health and

pandemic

MoH/DHBs Develop and disseminate alerts and warnings to MCDEM, CDEM Groups and the

public.

River flood WRC Develop and disseminate regional river flood warnings and flood level

predictions.

Rural Fire Fire and Emergency New

Zealand

Develop and disseminate warnings about adverse weather conditions likely to

increase the possibility of rural fires.

Animal disease Ministry for Primary

Industries

Develop and disseminate alerts and warnings to MCDEM, CDEM Groups and the

public

Tides NIWA Develop and disseminate warnings about tidal events that are likely to present

risks to coastal communities.

87




Hazard Lead Agency Responsibilities

Drought WRC Identify conditions that may lead to droughts and issue advice to communities

and stakeholders.

Land instability GNS Science Issue alerts and warnings.

Any hazards that may

lead to or exacerbate an

emergency

MCDEM and emergency

services

Warnings may be issued for any hazard by the National Warning System, and

MCDEM is responsible for notification to CDEM Groups.

TABLE 6-2: AGENCIES RESPONSIBLE FOR HAZARD WARNINGS

FIGURE 6-2: WAIKATO CDEM WARNING SYSTEM

6.5 Declaration Arrangements

Background

This Plan identifies situations that require consideration to be given to the declaration of a state of emergency. Under the CDEM Act 2002, there are two types of declarations.

1. National declarations - Under section 66 of the Act, the Minister of Civil Defence may declare that a state of national emergency exists over the whole of New Zealand, or any areas or districts, if an emergency has occurred or may occur, and the emergency is, or is likely to be, of such extent that it is beyond the resources of the CDEM Group(s) whose area(s) may be affected by the emergency.

2. Local declarations - Under section 68 of the Act, a state of local emergency may be declared by those persons authorised under the CDEM Act (refer box following page).

While the Lead Agency for a specific function may not change as a result of a declaration, overall coordination becomes the responsibility of the CDEM Group. Declaring a state of emergency gives the Group Controller access to statutory powers under the CDEM Act to protect life and property in emergency events (refer Glossary for definition of emergency events). Local Controllers also gain statutory powers under a declaration.

88




Factors to consider before declaring

Factors to consider before making a declaration include:

- Can the emergency be managed through the existing powers of agencies without a declaration being made?

- Can a Controller coordinate without the need for a declaration?

- Is there clear and present danger to the population within the group area?

- Is there a need to evacuate significant numbers of people?

- Are lifeline utility services still functioning e.g. power, roads, water supplies?

- Are any problems perceived if any (or all) of the lifeline utility services are unavailable for several days?

- Is sufficient and correct information available?

- Have other agencies and appropriate persons been consulted in reaching a decision to declare?

Extension and termination of local declarations

In accordance with Section 71 of the CDEM Act 2002, a state of local emergency may be extended by declaration by a person authorised by the Group or by the Minister of Civil Defence. Cessation of a state of declaration, either through expiry of the declaration or through termination, will also be publicised to stakeholders and the public in accordance with the Public Information and Media Management Plan. Cessation of the declaration marks the formal end of the execution of the statutory powers of the Controller. Before a declaration terminating a state of local emergency is made, all arrangements for recovery management should be in place.

See also: Directors Guidelines for CDEM Groups (Declarations – DGL13/12)

AUTHORISATION TO DECLARE In accordance with section 25(5) of the Act, the following persons are appointed to make local declarations within all or part of a territorial authority area:

- The Mayor, or a designated elected member of the territorial authority in the absence of the Mayor.

Where practicable, the following should be consulted:

- The Chief Executive Officer of the territorial authorities.

- The Local Controller.

- A representative from MCDEM.

- The Group Controller.

- The Chair of the Joint Committee, as required.

- Senior members of the emergency services, as required.

- Local iwi (where appropriate)

- Other agencies as deemed appropriate.

In accordance with Section 25 of the CDEM Act 2002, the following persons are appointed by the Joint Committee to make local declarations for all or part of the Waikato Group area:

- The Chairperson of the Joint Committee.

In the absence of the Chairperson, the following person is authorised, in order, to undertake this function:

- The Deputy Chairperson of the Joint Committee. In the absence of the Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson, the following persons are authorised to undertake this function:

- Any other Member’s representative on the Joint Committee.

Prior to making a declaration for all or part of the Waikato Group area, where practicable, the person authorised to declare should consult with:

- The Group Controller.

- Persons appointed to make local declarations within territorial authorities.

- Local Controllers.

- CEOs of affected Councils.


- Senior members of the emergency services, as

required.


If at any time it appears to the Minister of Civil Defence that an emergency has occurred or may occur in the area and a state of local emergency has not been declared, the Minister of Civil Defence may declare a state of local emergency for that area.

89




6.6 Emergency Communications and Information Management Systems

6.6.1 Information Management Systems

In the CDEM context, information management systems are those systems that are used to receive, process and disseminate all information in support of emergency response activities. The Group is implementing EMIS as outlined in the Waikato CDEM Group EMIS Implementation Strategy, with consideration of other supporting information system solutions, is identified as a priority in Section 5 of this Plan.

6.6.2 Telecommunications systems

The primary means of emergency telecommunications within the Group is land and cellular telephone systems. In case of failure of these primary systems, alternative telecommunications systems available in the GECC and EOCs include:

- HF (State Services Band), some territorial authorities and the GECC.

- Fleetlink maintained by GECC (all local EOCs and the GECC have Fleetlink capability).

- Satellite communications (five of the six local EOCs and the GECC have Satellite capability)

- Amateur radio provision is maintained by the GECC. CDEM telecommunications systems must be able to function in both day-to-day and emergency conditions. The order of preference for communication methods within the group during responses is as follows: 1. Email. 2. Voice over the public switched telephone network. 3. Voice over HF or VHF radio. 4. Satellite phone Specific arrangements for the Group telecommunications and information management systems are documented within the local EOC and the GECC Operating Manuals and communications plans.

6.6.3 Public information management

Public information management (PIM) during an emergency involves collecting, analysing and disseminating information to the public. It promotes effective leadership and decision-making, and enables the people affected by the emergency to understand what is happening and take the appropriate actions to protect themselves. The primary responsibilities of Public Information Managers are set out in the Group Public Information Plan.

6.7 Stakeholder Coordination during a Response

6.7.1 Lifeline Utility Coordination

Coordination of lifeline utility information and response is a key function of the GECC and EOCs. The Group’s Lifeline Utility Coordination arrangements are outlined in the Group Lifelines-CDEM Coordination Protocols, developed in line with the Directors Guidelines for CDEM Groups (Lifelines Utilities – DGL16/14). The Group maintains the appointment of the Lifeline Utilities Coordinator, who is also a CDEM professional based at the Group Emergency Management Office. To support lifeline utility coordination processes, utility providers are expected to be able to provide the following information where possible:

- The scale and extent of event impact on networks;

- Major disruptions experienced, including location and number of users affected and estimated restoration times;

- The nature and locations of immediate actions that require the support of access and tasking prioritisation;

- Alternative solutions available to users where appropriate;

- Precautions, and public information to be promulgated; and

- Requests for support or specific information. Further information regarding the coordination of lifeline utilities by the Group outside of a response (through the Waikato Lifeline Utilities Group) is provided in Section 5.6.

90




6.7.2 Welfare Coordination Group

While welfare services management takes place across the 4Rs, the actual provision of welfare services begins in response, and continues into recovery. During a response, communities are affected differently, the Group welfare services response requires coordination of multiple welfare services agencies to support communities affected by the event. The mechanism for this is through the Waikato Welfare Coordination Group (established in line with the Director’s Guidelines for CDEM Groups and agencies with responsibilities for welfare services in an emergency (Welfare Services in an Emergency – DGL 11/15) or local welfare committees, who are responsible for the delivery of welfare services. It is coordinated by the welfare manager at either group or local level. Further information regarding the coordination of welfare services by the Group outside of a response is provided in Section 8.4.

6.8 Delegated Authorities, Functions and Powers during an Emergency The Joint Committee has legislative responsibilities to appoint Group and Local Controllers to lead a CDEM response. The appointment process, authorities, functions and powers associated with these roles are outlined in this Section. The implementation of the outcomes detailed in this Section will be achieved through a revision of the Waikato CDEM Group Controller Policy.

6.8.1 The Role of Controllers

Coordination Centres serve as the primary location for a council, agency or organisation to carry out all or some of the functions of coordinating operations, including planning, developing intelligence, gathering and managing resources, providing information and warnings to the public and ensuring the welfare needs of those impacted (refer Section 6.2). The person with overall responsibility for coordinating the emergency response at each level, will ordinarily operate out of a Coordination Centre, and is referred to as the National, Group or Local Controller. During a response, controllers in the Group are tasked, in accordance with the Group Controller Protocol, to establish priorities, objectives and action plans intended to ensure a response is coordinated, resources are appropriately allocated and necessary intelligence is shared across all response or support entities involved in an effective, efficient and expedient manner best suited for the needs of the community. During a state of national emergency, and in accordance with the CDEM Act (Section 28(4)), the decision of controllers within the Group needs to be consistent with any priorities for the use of resources and services that have been determined by the National Controller. To effectively support this task, controllers, both at the Group and Local level, must be engaged in the planning and implementation of activities which prepare the community to respond effectively to any emergency. In addition, they should also be engaged in reduction and recovery initiatives as an advocate for CDEM. Local and Group Controllers will ensure that all requests for national level resources such as urban search and rescue and support from the New Zealand Defence Forces will be directed through MCDEM.

6.8.2 The Functions and Powers of Controllers

The functions of the Group Controller are defined by the CDEM Act (Section 28). The Act provides controllers with a range of powers in the event of a declaration of a state of emergency, including:

- Section 78 (Power of entry to obtain information in urgent cases).

- Section 86 (Evacuation of premises and places).

- Section 87 (Entry onto premises)

- Section 88 (Closing of roads and public places).

- Section 89 (Removal of aircraft, vessels, vehicles, etc)

- Section 90 (Requisitioning powers).

- Section 91 (Power to give directions)

91




- Section 92 (Power to carry out inspections etc)

- Section 94 (Power to enter into contracts) In addition to these functions and powers that are provided directly to the controller, the CDEM Act (Section 85) also provides the Group (through the Joint Committee) with a number of powers. These powers, as authorised by the Act, have been delegated to the Group Controller.

6.8.3 The Appointment of Controllers

The power to appoint the Group Controller and Local Controllers is provided by the CDEM Act (Section 26 and 27). In addition to this, the Group has adopted a Controllers Policy to provide further details on the appointment process for both the Group Controller and Local Controllers. Further details are provided in the following sections.

6.8.4 Waikato CDEM Group Controller

The Group Controller, a full-time dedicated resource within the Group, is the head of the Group response organisation and has two key functions:

1. To lead the coordination of the planning and implementation of activities which will prepare the community to respond effectively to any emergency

2. To lead, direct, and coordinate all resources as necessary to respond effectively to the impact of a disaster during a state of emergency.

As noted above, the appointment of the Group Controller is required by the CDEM Act (Section 26). The Joint Committee delegates the authority to make financial decisions on behalf of the Group during an emergency (as defined by the CDEM Act (Section 4)) for a regional event for all resources and services under the control of the Group Controller to the Group Controller. In accordance with the CDEM Act (26 (4)), the authority to replace the Group Controller or Deputy Controllers during a state of emergency has been delegated to two Joint Committee representatives, being in order of preference the:

1. Chair and Deputy Chair of the Group;

2. In the absence of the Chair and/or Deputy Chair, other members of the Joint Committee. Where practicable, this delegation should be exercised by the same Joint Committee Member representatives who were responsible for the declaration.

6.8.5 Local Controllers

The CDEM Act (Section 27 (1)) allows local controllers to be appointed. Within the Waikato CDEM Group, Local Controllers are appointed to direct or coordinate the response to an emergency at the local level. Where these appointments are made, the functions and powers available to local controllers are derived from those provided to the Group Controller by the CDEM Act, but with the following important distinctions:

- Local Controllers are authorised to exercise the functions and powers only within the territorial authority(s) to which they are appointed (see Tiers below); and

- Notwithstanding the Local Controllers mandate to direct or coordinate a local emergency (declared or not), the Local Controller must follow any direction given by the Group Controller during an emergency (Section 27(2)). Circumstances where this may apply are outlined in 6.8.6 below.

The Group has decided to appoint local controllers using a system of 3 tiers:

- Tier 1: Controllers approved to act as controller for all territorial authorities (subject to the formal endorsement by each territorial authority) and as deputy for the Group Controller.

- Tier 2: Controllers approved to act as controller for all territorial authorities (subject to the formal endorsement by each territorial authority).

- Tier 3: Controllers approved to act as controller for a specific territorial authority.

92




To enable this approach, each territorial authority must formally endorse (by way of council resolution) all Tier 1 and 2 local controllers as a potential local controller for that territorial authority as well as their specific Tier 3 controller where this applies. This approach to local controllers in the Group has been developed as an efficient approach to the sustainment of competency across the Group.

6.8.6 Relationship between the Group and Local Controller during an Emergency

The interaction between a Group and Local Controller is a critically important interface in the CDEM environment. Knowing the boundaries of responsibilities before, during and after an emergency is essential to ensure an effective response. The responsibilities of the Group Controller in a response (declared or not) are generally more strategic in nature, working mostly with command staff or senior management of agencies or organisations with regional response or support obligations. The Group Controller operates out of the Group Emergency Coordination Centre (GECC). The Local Controller’s responsibilities are to address the needs of a specific community, working directly with agencies and organisations responsible for local emergency response or support. The Local Controller operates out of the local Emergency Operations Centre (EOC). In most cases the Local Controller will be the primary individual responsible for providing direction or coordinating instructions during a CDEM emergency. Working with the staff of the EOC, the Local Controller determines what must be achieved and in some cases exactly how it will be done. Where it is required the Group Controller can activate the GECC to support the Local Controller. The GECC will provide such things as advice, situational awareness, and/or source technical input where requested (refer to Figure 6.3). However, where the emergency requires broader coordination due to such things as multiple council/agency involvement, complexity of response or magnitude of impact, the Group Controller may assume primary control at the regional level. In these cases the Group Controller will provide direction or coordinating instructions in the form of strategic priorities and objectives to the Local Controllers. In turn, the Local Controllers develop local strategies and tactics to deliver on those objectives. In these circumstances, the Local controllers are providing direction or coordination at the local level on behalf of the Group Controller (refer to 6.4). The Group Controller also serves as the primary contact or liaison with central government, taking direction from the National Controller where required.

6.8.7 Schedule of Controllers

A current schedule of Local and Group Controllers is available at www.waikatocivildefence.govt.nz.

6.8.8 Controller Financial Delegations

The existence of a declaration of an emergency is not necessarily an indication of the size or complexity of an incident, merely the fact that certain powers may or may not be required by a Controller. Noting this, reimbursement of costs from the New Zealand government for certain response actions (e.g. provision of welfare) does not require a declaration of a state emergency nor does the lack of a declaration negate the appointment of a Controller to manage the emergency (noting that for a Controller to use powers a declaration must be in force). When formally placed in control of an event by the relevant local authority Chief Executive Officer a Controller is accountable for the actions carried out and the expenses incurred, regardless of whether they are using the powers conferred upon by the CDEM Act 2002 or not. Where placed in control of an event, councils must provide Local and Group Controllers with uncapped financial delegations to manage emergency events (as defined in the act), declared or otherwise, within their area. This delegation should apply to all Tier 1 and 2 Controllers and the specific Tier 3 Controller in the case of a council where they exist. This does not limit the right of a council to impose a lower delegation for business as usual activities. However, to ensure oversight of expenditure during an emergency, each Controller is required, over and above any local finance protocol, to report ongoing total expenditure to the applicable CEO and also, in the case of local controllers, to the Group Controller at predefined increments.

93




94




FIGURE 6-3: CONTROLLER RELATIONSHIP (LOCAL EMERGENCY)

FIGURE 6-4: CONTROLLER RELATIONSHIP (REGIONAL EMERGENCY)

Note*: Regional Emergency may include emergencies that are entirely contained within the boundaries of one Territorial Authority but due to size or complexity are still viewed as regionally significant.

95



7. Recovery

7.1 Overview The Waikato CDEM Group undertakes key functions relating to recovery;

1. Planning and preparing for recovery activities post an emergency

2. Strategic planning for recovery to better inform reduction, readiness,

response and recovery activities in the future

The Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002 has defined Recovery and Recovery Activities; “Recovery – means the coordinated efforts and processes used to bring about the immediate, medium-term, and long-term holistic regeneration and enhancement of a community following an emergency.” “Recovery activity – means an activity carried out under this Act or any civil defence emergency management plan to deal with the consequences of an emergency, including, without limitation,— (a) the assessment and ongoing monitoring of the needs of a community affected by the emergency; and (b) the co-ordination and integration of planning, decisions, actions, and resources; and (c) measures to support—

(i) the regeneration, restoration, and enhancement

of communities across the 4 environments (built,

natural, social, and economic); and

(ii) (ii) the cultural and physical well-being of individuals and their communities; and

(iii) (iii) government and non-government organisations and entities working together; and

(d) measures to enable community participation in recovery planning; and (e) new measures— (i) to reduce risks from hazards; and (ii) to build resilience.

The holistic approach undertaken by the Waikato CDEM Group to recovery is intended to strengthen individual and community (including organisations) resilience so that they can adapt to their environment post an emergency, including returning to what might be a new normal.

7.1.1 Goal

Enhanced capability to prepare for and recover from civil defence

emergencies Achievement of this goal is measured through the Capability Assessment Tool which shows that, while significant improvement has been made since the last CDEM Plan, this remains a key area for development. There has been a lack of Group leadership for recovery. The 2016 amendments to the Act and the appointment of a Group Recovery Manager will enable a focus on significantly improving the recovery culture across the Waikato CDEM Group. The target for this work area is to achieve Advancing level (60-80%) by 2019.

9. Leadership, Governance and Delivery

3. Reducing our Risks


5. Group Readiness

6. Response

7. Recovery

8. Our partners

Monitor,

evaluate

and

improve

96

Section 7: Recovery




The functions of the CDEM Group in relation to recovery are covered in the CDEM Act (Section 17 (1) (e)) and enabled through Part 9 of the National CDEM Plan (Section 26(d)). The Group is responsible for planning for and carrying out recovery activities. The Group Plan identifies preparatory action for recovery in Section 2 (Understanding and communicating our risk), Section 3 (Reducing our risk), Section 4 (Being ready-our communities) and Section 5 (Being ready-The Waikato CDEM Group) of the Plan. Section 10 (Monitoring and evaluation) identifies the responsibility the Group has to monitor and evaluate progress in strategic planning for recovery. The responsibilities of the CDEM Group in relation to strategic planning for recovery include the following areas:

- Educating local authorities, agencies and communities on the legislative requirements in respect to recovery, and their role in preparing for and carrying out recovery activities.

- Ensuring that strategic planning for recovery (pre-event planning) is coordinated, integrated and resourced at the regional and local level.

- Collaboration between local authorities, agencies and communities to understand and manage risks and hazards.

- Community participation in recovery planning, including Iwi, community and business leaders.

- Measuring and monitoring the effectiveness of progress towards compliance with strategic planning for recovery. The recovery functions of the CDEM Group enabled by the 2016 amendments to the CDEM Act 2002 include:

- The requirement to appoint a Group Recovery Manager (CDEM Act Section 29 (1)).

- The functions of the Group Recovery Manager (CDEM Act Section 30A).

- The power to appoint one or more Local Recovery Managers (CDEM Act Section 30 (1)).

- Involvement in decisions in respect of any local Notice of Transition Period (CDEM Act Section 94B).

- The appointment of at least one person authorised to give notice of a local transition period for the area (CDEM Act Section 25 1 (b)) and the powers to act in that period (CDEM Act Section 94G-P).


The requirements under the CDEM Act 2002 for the Waikato Group and its Members to undertake strategic planning for recovery provides the opportunities to;

Better understand the hazards and potential risks the Group is exposed to both within the Region and from neighbouring Regions

Learn what is important to communities in relation to recovering from emergencies in the short, medium and long term

Enter into meaningful shared decisions pertaining to recovery options involving all sectors in communities

Better inform current reduction, readiness, response and recovery activities

Strengthen community engagement in developing effective response plans that include transition to recovery elements

Put in place meaningful tools to measure the effectiveness of the strategy and approaches been undertaken to enable refinements.

There is also opportunities for the group and its members to work with their communities to address the challenges that are being created by climate change, e.g. coastal erosion, to develop short, medium and long term recovery plans in consultation with the communities.

UnsatisfactoryDeveloping

22% (2009)

Developing

52% (2014)

Advancing

>60% (2019)Mature Mature

97

Section 7: Recovery



7.2 Statutory Recovery Framework

7.2.1 Objective

New statutory requirements and powers in the amended CDEM Act 2002 are widely understood.

7.2.2 Local Transition Period

The CDEM Act 2002 allows for certain authorised persons to give

notice of a local transition period. This will generally follow the end of a state of emergency (however notice of a local transition period can be given without there being an initial state of emergency, providing the Minister’s approval is obtained first). CDEM Groups must appoint a Group Recovery Manager who, during a transition period, has access to powers designed to assist the recovery phase. CDEM Groups may appoint Local Recovery Managers who will also have these powers. Powers during transition periods include the ability to enter, examine and mark buildings, close roads, require assessments of buildings, carry out works and keep areas clear of the public. The Minister of Civil Defence can also give notice of local or national transition notices if the Minister believes this is required.

Notice of Transition Period Arrangements

The Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002 provides statutory requirement to allow for national or local transition periods

1. Notice of national transition period - Under section 94A of the Act, the Minister of Civil Defence may after a state of emergency has been declared for any area or after a state of emergency arises for any area, give notice of a national transition period for the whole of New Zealand or any areas if it appears that a national transition period is required. This will invoke powers to manage, control and direct recovery in the public interests and as necessary to ensure a timely and effective recovery.

2. Notice of local transition period - Under section 94B of the Act, a person who is authorized to give notice of a local transition period by being appointed under section 25(1)(b) or otherwise authorized under section 25 (4) or (5) may, after a state of emergency has been declared (or after an emergency arises for which a state of emergency has not been declared) for the area of the Civil Defence Emergency Management Group concerned, give notice of a local transition period for the area of the Civil Defence Management Group concerned, or for 1 or more districts or wards within the area, if it appears to the person that a local transition period is required.

AUTHORISATION for notice of transition period In accordance with section 25(1)(b) of the Act, persons must be appointed to authorize a notice of transition period within all or part of a territorial authority area. Across the

Waikato CDEM Group:

- The Mayor, or a designated elected member of the territorial authority, in the absence of the Mayor.

Where practicable before any notice of transition period is issued the following should be consulted:

- The Chief Executive Officer of the territorial authorities.

- The Group and Local Controller

- The Group and Local Recovery Manager


- The Chair of the Joint Committee, as required.

- Senior members of the emergency services, as required.

- Local iwi (where appropriate)


In accordance with Section 25 of the CDEM Act 2002, the following persons are appointed by the Joint Committee to authorize a notice of transition period within all or part of the Waikato Group area:

- The Chairperson of the Joint Committee.

In the absence of the Chairperson, the following person is authorised, in order, to undertake this function:

- The Deputy Chairperson of the Joint Committee.

In the absence of the Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson, the following persons are authorised to undertake this function:

- Any other Member’s representative on the Joint Committee.

If at any time it appears to the Minister of Civil Defence that notice of a local transition period is required and a local notice of transition period has not been declared, the Minister of Civil Defence may declare a local transition period emergency for that area.

98

Section 7: Recovery



Factors to consider before giving notice of local transition periods.

A notice of local transition period must not be given unless the person authorised to give notice is satisfied that the following legal tests are met:

- It must appear to the person giving the notice that a local transition period is required (94B(1));

- Invoking the powers to manage, coordinate, or direct recovery activities is:

- In the public interest; and

- Necessary or desirable to ensure a timely and effective recovery (s94B(4)).

The person authorised must also have regard to the areas, districts, or wards affected by the emergency and whether the focus is moving from response to recovery, including if the state of emergency is about to expire or be terminated (s94B(5)).

There are also other situations when a notice of local transition period can be given e.g. if there has been no local state of emergency declared (needs Minister’s approval), or there has been a ‘gap’ between the local state of emergency and the need for a transition period (doesn’t need Minister’s approval but legal tests for transition period need to be met).

Extension and termination of local periods of transition

In accordance with Section 94D of the CDEM Act 2002, a transition period may be extended by a person authorised by the Group or by the Minister of Civil Defence if it appears to that person that that the extension is required. In accordance with Section 94E of the CDEM Act 2002, a transition period may be terminated by a person authorized by the Group or by the Minister of Civil Defence. Notice must be in the form prescribed by the regulations under section 115.

7.2.3 Delegated Authorities, Functions and Powers during Recovery

The Joint Committee has legislative responsibilities to appoint a Group Recovery Manager and powers to appoint Local Recovery Managers to lead a CDEM recovery. The appointment process, authorities, functions and powers associated with these roles are stated in CDEM Act, 2002.

Group Recovery Manager

The Joint Committee must appoint a Group Recovery Manager, who is a suitably qualified and experienced person to perform the functions and duties and exercise the powers of the Group Recovery Manager and at least one other person, also suitably qualified and experienced, to carry out the role if the Group Recovery Manager is absent (CDEM Act, 2002, section 29). The Joint Committee authorizes the following functions of the Group Recovery Manager (CDEM Act, 2002 section 30A):

A Group Recovery Manager must, during a local transition period for the area for which the Group Recovery Manager is appointed, direct and co-ordinate the use of the personnel, material, information, services, and other resources made available by departments, Civil Defence Emergency Management Groups, and other persons for the purpose of carrying out recovery activities.

The Group Recovery Manager must also perform any functions or duties delegated to the Group Recovery Manager by the Civil Defence Emergency Management Group or conferred on Group Recovery Managers by the Act, and may exercise any power conferred on the Group Recovery Manager by delegation under the Act.

A Group Recovery Manager has authority under section 25(1)(b) to give notice of a transition period for its area.

Local Recovery Managers

The Joint Committee may appoint a Local Recovery Manager(s). The Waikato CDEM Group will develop a role description for local recovery managers and assess the current role-holders for competence. It will appoint local recovery managers who are responsible for recovery preparation and work for territorial authorities, and direct them to perform any of the functions and duties of, or delegated to, the Group Recovery Manager of the Group and to exercise the powers of the Group Recovery Manager in the area for which the Group Recovery Manager is appointed, including, but not limited to, the powers in sections 94H, 94I, and 94K to 94N. These sections describe the powers during transition periods including the ability to enter, examine and mark buildings, close roads, require assessment of buildings or types of buildings, carry out works and keep areas clear of the public.

A Local Recovery Manager must follow any directions given by the Group Recovery Manager during a transition period.

99

http://prd-lgnz-nlb.prd.pco.net.nz/act/public/2002/0033/latest/link.aspx?id=DLM150719#DLM150719




Section 7: Recovery



A Group or Local Recovery Manager has authority to perform the following functions (CDEM Act, 2002, section 30A):

A Group Recovery Manager or a Local Recovery Manager may authorise any suitably qualified and experienced person to perform any function or duty or exercise any power of that Group Recovery Manager or Local Recovery Manager, except the power to authorise another person to perform those functions and duties or to exercise those powers.

A Group Recovery Manager or Local Recovery Manager who authorises a person under subsection (3) to perform a function or duty or to exercise a power remains responsible and accountable under this Act for the performance of the function or duty or the exercise of the power.

No Group Recovery Manager or Local Recovery Manager, and no person performing the functions or duties or exercising the powers of a Group Recovery Manager or Local Recovery Manager, may exercise any power conferred on Group Recovery Managers by this Act during any national transition period in any manner contrary to any priorities for the use of resources and services that have been determined by the Director or National Recovery Manager.

Whilst the CDEM Act provides appointed Group and Local Recovery Managers with specific authority during the transition period following an emergency, successful recovery is reliant on sound preparation with local communities as documented in the Group Recovery Plan and local recovery planning and arrangements.

7.2.4 Relationships between the Group/Local Controller and Group/Local Recovery Manager during an emergency

The interactions between a Group and Local Controller and a Group and Local Recovery Manager are important communication channels when transitioning from response to recovery. All role holders must be clear of the statutory responsibilities of each function and not interfere with these, but know when to inform and when to consult each other. The Recovery Manager needs to be included in the response in order to seamlessly transition to recovery with full knowledge of what has gone before. It should be noted that the Recovery Manager has no legislated powers until any notice of transition period is authorised. Prior to this the Recovery Manager’s role in response is one of providing feedback to the Controller on matters that might impact or assist the recovery. These are for consideration by the Controller as the Recovery Manager does not have decision-making responsibility on the Incident Management Team. The recommended approach is that the Recovery Manager works within the planning function in the EOC to plan for recovery, to prevent unnecessary negative impacts on recovery and to leverage opportunities that may present. The Recovery Manager will step up to the recovery role as the need for preparatory recovery actions arises (e.g. activation of task groups, establishing the Recovery Office, communicating with local authority Chief Executives and formulating recovery plans). The CDEM Group will establish protocol to follow in the changeover from response to recovery. The interactions between the National, Group and Local Recovery Managers needs to operate smoothly during any recovery with clear knowledge of boundaries and responsibilities and with good communication. In most cases the Local Recovery Manager will have responsibility for providing direction and coordinating within the local authority area. Dependent on the size of the recovery operation this may require the Group Recovery Manager to activate technical support and advice.

7.2.5 Schedule of Recovery Managers (Schedule of Recovery Managers required)

A current schedule of Group and Local Recovery Managers (as at Nov 2017) is available at www.waikatocivildefence.govt.nz.

100

http://www.waikatocivildefence.govt.nz/

Section 7: Recovery



7.3 Recovery Planning

7.3.1 Objective

Comprehensive recovery arrangements are in place.


Strategic planning for Recovery

The 2016 amendments to the CDEM Act 2002 provides an increased focus to strengthen recovery planning to ensure that measures are in place to minimize the consequences of emergencies on communities and help communities recover more efficiently and effectively from emergencies. The Sendai Framework for Disaster Recovery refers to this pre-event planning as ‘Build Back Better’. It refers to the fact that communities which have taken actions prior to the onset of a disaster to strengthen recovery capacity and decision-making effectiveness will ‘Build Back Better’ during the extended period of recovery, rehabilitation and reconstruction. This preparation includes building capacity with the creation of recovery-focused relationships, the establishment of planning and coordination mechanisms and the introduction of methods and procedures to ensure recovery activities are adequately informed and supported. It is the responsibility of the CDEM Group and each member to ensure our communities are well-placed and supported to recover from any emergencies from the hazards and risks identified in the CDEM Group Plan. The ‘Strategic Planning for Recovery’ Director’s Guideline is a key reference document to support recovery planning.

Group Recovery Plan

The Waikato CDEM Group Recovery Plan, 2013 is a means for describing the group-wide recovery arrangements that are in place. It is also a document to guide and support consistent local arrangements. This plan requires a comprehensive review to align it with the 2016 amendments to the CDEM Act 2002, with an emphasis on these actions:

1. The role description, appointment and training of Group and Local Recovery Managers.

2. The inclusion of recovery activity across reduction, readiness and response.

3. A model or framework for local authorities to engage with local communities in the preparation for recovery. This must include establishing a community vision(s) for recovery and evidence of community values, priorities and risk tolerance prior to an emergency.

4. A model for local recovery planning is required that relates to the Group Recovery Plan with a consistent process for the identification of local risks and hazards and their consequences.

5. A performance framework that enables consistent reporting to the CDEM Group on progress to achieving the recovery preparedness outcomes.

Local Recovery Planning

In addition to the Group Plan, each territorial authority must review their Local Recovery Plan ensuring they integrate with the group-wide recovery arrangements described in the Group Recovery Plan ensuring:

- A community engagement approach which includes a recovery vision and outcomes.

- A community understanding of the consequences from specific hazards and risks and identification of the opportunities to reduce risk and strengthen resilience from specific hazards.

- A focus on collaborative relationships and processes, including the engagement of local business and community leaders.

- A local recovery work programme.

- A connection of the local plan/arrangements to the Waikato CDEM Group Plan, including reporting on the performance framework to monitor the effectiveness of recovery preparedness.

Recovery Activation

101

Section 7: Recovery



The key components of “actions during recovery activation” are shown in Fig 7-1 below (insert from p40 of Group Recovery Plan). Actions during recovery are the collective actions required to ensure recovery occurs efficiently and effectively following emergency events. These roles are required in the group recovery office, the purpose of which includes:

Coordinating and supporting the recovery process with communities, sector groups and recovery staff;

Continuation of response initiatives that support recovery;

Emphasising reduction opportunities to those in a position to influence change; and

MCDM or National Recovery Manager if appointed. The Group has a key role in providing support for local recovery offices and local recovery managers following local emergencies and coordinating recovery on behalf of the Waikato CDEM Group following significant events. A key role of the Group Recovery Office is to liaise with central government agencies, and the National Recovery Manager if appointed, to access the support needed to support recovery activities. The Group Recovery Office will be set up and located along the following lines depending on the size of the emergency event and recovery required:

Local event within one district: set-up at the TA, alongside the local recovery office, with support staff for the group recovery manager. Activation will generally be at the request of the TA, in consultation with the CEG Chair.

Significant event, covering more than one district: set up at the Group Emergency Coordination Centre (GECC). The office will use the same systems and processes as the response at the GECC, with initial set up during the emergency and staffing by the Group Recovery Manager and the Recovery Administrator. The group Recovery Manager will work alongside the Group Controller in an advisory capacity. At transition, the Group Recovery Office will expand and take over the functions of the GECC-populated with the required positions. The structure of the Group Recovery Office is in Fig 7-2 on pg. 65

7.3.3 Actions

The following actions have been identified to either sustain or improve recovery planning:


Strategic planning for recovery

50. Educate the Group in respect of the requirements of the 2016 amendments to the CDEM Act 2002 and the ‘Strategic Planning for Recovery’ Director’s Guideline which require local authorities to prepare communities for recovery.

2018/19

Gaps in Recovery Arrangements

51. Complete an audit of the Group Recovery arrangements against the legislative requirements and relevant recovery related Director’s Guidelines and information.

2018/19

52. Update Local Recovery Plans in line with the legislation and Group Plan. A work programme for strategic planning for recovery activity must be set.

2019/20

53. Report on achievements against Recovery Plan actions. Annually.

Clarify coordination between controllers and recovery managers

54. Develop protocol for Controllers and Recovery Managers to transition from response to recovery.

2018/19

102

Section 7: Recovery



7.4 Recovery Capability

7.4.1 Objective

Capable people are available to lead and support recovery.


Group and Local Capacity to Sustain Recovery

The region is increasingly impacted by severe weather events and the capacity to sustain a recovery effort that needs to continue for a period has challenged resources, primarily those of smaller local authorities. Investigation is needed into the impact of recovery on business continuity in local authorities and ways of managing this identified. If an emergency has severe consequences on the community over a number of districts it is likely that regional and/or national support is needed, compared with an emergency that has localised consequences that must be managed by the local authority or by collaboration with neighbouring districts.

Each local authority needs to determine the roles and responsibilities of key government agencies, non-government agencies, the private sector, community groups and other key stakeholders in supporting both the preparedness and management of recovery. Predetermined arrangements and protocols need to be established between councils and parties before an emergency, taking into account the different types of emergency that may arise.

Training and Exercising

The Group will support training and exercising for recovery managers and key agencies, local leaders and businesses with whom collaborative recovery relationships are required. It is hoped that the new legislation will drive a national training programme for recovery managers to enable a nationally consistent standard. The Group will coordinate regional training initiatives to educate recovery managers in the legislative requirements and ensure the incorporation of aspects of recovery into exercises. This activity serves to develop capability by:

- Ensuring recovery managers are equipped to lead their local authorities to engage with communities in recovery preparation.

- Facilitating a collaborative local recovery environment with key agencies, community leaders and businesses.

- Providing recovery managers with an opportunity to become familiar with the practical expectations of their role.

- Exposing response focused roles to the needs of recovery (during a response and the transition to recovery).

7.4.3 Actions

The following actions have been identified to either sustain or improve recovery capability across the Group.


Sustaining recovery 55. Review Group and local authority capacity to staff and sustain recovery over an extended timeframe and document reciprocal arrangements.

56. Train Local Recovery Managers in their role and responsibilities.

2018/ongoing

Educate local authorities on the requirements of the 2016 CDEM Amendment Act.

57. Promote the inclusion of strategic planning for recovery as a key aspect of an integrated approach to community engagement across all aspects of council business.

2018/19

58. Develop guidelines that support local authorities to document their local recovery arrangements.

2019/20

103

Section 7: Recovery



104



8. Partnership Arrangements

8.1 Overview The CDEM operating environment requires alignment and cooperation across numerous organisations to support the all work areas (reduction, readiness, response and recovery). To support this requirement, the Group has a number of arrangements in place with the partner agencies outlined in this Section.

8.2 Issues and Opportunities The following issues and opportunities have been identified:

- Emergency Services / CDEM partnership opportunities:

There are opportunities to explore integration of emergency services and CDEM activities, both in terms of function and location.

- Implementation of the 2016-21 Welfare Coordination Group (WCG) Plan: Significant changes to the welfare sector in 2015/16 have seen local authorities taking on a much larger role alongside a raft of other changes. The Group has prepared the WCG Plan to ensure that arrangements and capabilities reflect these new requirements. Implementation of the actions in that Plan are a priority.

- Engagement of iwi in Group activities: While arrangements exist, there is no oversight by the Group regarding the engagement of iwi in the work undertaken by the Group.

- Maintain effective lifeline partnership arrangements and plans: Lifeline utilities have an effective partnership with CDEM through the Waikato Lifeline Utility Group and

lifeline utility coordination arrangements. These arrangements should continue to be maintained, tested and improved.

8.3 Emergency services

8.3.1 Background

Emergency services in New Zealand are the New Zealand Police, Fire and Emergency New Zealand, National Rural Fire Authority, rural fire authorities, hospital and health/ambulance services. These agencies have a number of duties in relation to CDEM, outlined in the CDEM Act Section 63 and the National CDEM Plan. Significant changes to the Fire Sector are currently being considered, notably the establishment of a single fire authority for New Zealand. The need for any changes to this Plan will be considered if and when these changes occur. Emergency Services support the delivery of the Group strategy and work programme through their participation in the CEG (refer to Section 9.2.2), various advisory groups established by the Joint Committee (refer to Section 9.6), as well as their contribution to objectives and actions in this Plan. This support requires the integration of the Group Plan and work programmes into many existing aspects of emergency service business and is a responsibility of individual CEG members (refer to Section 9.2.2).

9. Leadership, Governance and Delivery



5. Group readiness

6. Response

7. Recovery

8. Our partners

Monitor,

evaluate

and

improve

105

Section 8: Partnership Arrangements




Membership on CEG

In accordance with the CDEM Act, the New Zealand Police, Fire and Emergency New Zealand, Waikato District Health Board and St John are members of CEG.

Welfare Coordination Group

The New Zealand Police and Waikato District Health Board (DHB) are members of the Waikato WCG.

Emergency Services Advisory Group

The Group will establish an Emergency Services Advisory Group or participate in an existing group to allow focused discussion on emergency services / CDEM matters.

Jurisdictional issues

For a number of emergency services, the Group encompasses several jurisdictions that all need to be taken account of in the design of group-wide arrangements (refer to Figure 8-1).

106




FIGURE 8-1: EMERGENCY SERVICES JURISTICTIONS ACROSS THE WAIKATO CDEM GROUP AREA

Waikato

Bay of Plenty

Central

Counties-Manukau

Region 2

Region 3

Region 1

Central

Northern

Police Fire

St John

Waikato

DHB

Lakes

Counties-Manukau

Pukekohe

Tuakau

Mercer

Pukekohe

Tuakau

Mercer

Pukekohe

Tuakau

Mercer

Awakino

Miranda

Kaiaua

Miranda

Kaiaua

Cambridge

Tirau

Mangakino

Mangakino

Tokoroa

Miranda

Kaiaua

107




Table 8-1 provides an overview of these issues.

Emergency service Jurisdictional issue Resolution

Fire and Emergency

New Zealand The Group includes the following NZFS Areas:

- Counties Manukau

- Waikato Area

- Eastern Waikato Area

- Central Lakes Area

To be resolved.

New Zealand Police The Group includes the following Police Districts:

- Counties Manukau

- Waikato

- Bay of Plenty

- Central

To be resolved.

Health The Group includes the following DHBs:

- Counties Manukau DHB

- Waikato DHB

- Lakes DHB

The Waikato DHB representative on the Coordinating Executive Group represents all DHBs.

St John The Group includes the following St John regions:

- Northern Region

- Central Region

The Central Region St John representative on the Coordinating Executive Group represents both regions.

TABLE 8-1: EMERGENCY SERVICES JURISDICTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS

Local Emergency Services Committees

Some territorial authorities have established committees or groups to support local coordination across emergency services, as follows.

Territorial authority Local coordination arrangement

Hamilton City Council

Hauraki District Council Eastern Waikato Emergency Services

Matamata-Piako District Council Eastern Waikato Emergency Services

Otorohanga District Council

South Waikato District Council Emergency Services Committee

Taupō District Council Emergency Services Committee

Thames-Coromandel District Council Eastern Waikato Emergency Services

Waikato District Council

Waipa District Council

Waitomo District Council

TABLE 8-2: LOCAL EMERGENCY SERVICES COORDINATION ARRANGEMENTS

8.3.3 Actions


Emergency Services / CDEM partnership opportunities

59. Develop a Terms of Reference for the Emergency Services Advisory Group.

2016/17

108




8.4 Welfare Services

8.4.1 Background

Welfare Services support individuals, families and whanau, and communities in being ready for, responding to, and recovering from emergencies. Welfare services are managed and delivered at the local level and coordinated and supported at the regional and national levels. Activities include registration, inquiry, needs assessment, care and protection services for children and young people, psychosocial support, household goods and services, shelter and accommodation, financial assistance and animal welfare. In accordance with the National CDEM Plan (Sections 62-75), a number of agencies provide welfare services to the Group in relation to reduction, readiness, response and recovery. The Group has established the Welfare Coordination Group (WCG), which in turn has adopted the Waikato WCG Plan (2016-2021) which outlines the responsibilities of a wide range of CDEM Partners and other agencies in the delivery of welfare services. Welfare services agencies support the delivery of the Group strategy and work programme through their participation in the WCG as well as their contribution to tasks and projects agreed by the development of an annual WCG Business Plan.


Group Welfare Manager

The Group maintains the appointment of a Group Welfare Manager, who is also a CDEM professional based in the Group Emergency Management Office and the Chair of the Waikato Welfare Coordination Group. Please refer to the Waikato CDEM Group website for the most up-to-date details on this appointment. The roles and responsibilities of the Group Welfare Manager are described in the Waikato CDEM Group Welfare Roles and Responsibilities Policy, along with the appointment process.

Waikato Welfare Coordination Group

The WCG is collective of welfare services agencies that are active at the CDEM Group level and/or the local level. The WCG provides a mechanism for collaboration and coordination between agencies, who work together to:

- Plan for and establish arrangements for the effective delivery of welfare services, and

- Develop welfare services work programmes The membership of the WCG includes those agencies named in the National CDEM Plan as having the responsibility for a welfare service:

- Waikato CDEM Group (household goods and services, registration, needs assessment, shelter and accommodation).

- New Zealand Police (inquiry).

- Waikato DHB (psychosocial support).

- Ministry of Social Development via Work and Income (financial assistance).

- Ministry of Social Development via Child Youth and Family (care and protection services for children and young people).

- Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (shelter and accommodation).

- Ministry for Primary Industries (animal welfare). These agencies named in the National CDEM Plan are supported in the Waikato Welfare Coordination Group by other support agencies. The WCG operates under the direction of the CEG in readiness, and the Group Controller during response. In recovery, the WCG will coordinate its activities with those of the Waikato CDEM Group Recovery Manager, and the work of any related recovery groups or teams.

109




Wider WCG membership also includes any of the agencies who support the welfare services sub-functions. It also includes representatives of community-based or volunteer organisations who are active at the regional or local level.

Waikato Welfare Coordination Group Plan

The Waikato Welfare Coordination Group Plan outlines:

1. The role and membership of the WCG.

2. The appointment and responsibilities of key welfare roles including Chair of the WCG, the Group Welfare Manager and Local Welfare Managers.

3. The responsibilities of individual agencies under the National CDEM Plan.

4. The arrangements necessary to provide a coordinated approach to the delivery of welfare services.

5. The focus of the WCG for the next 5 years.

Welfare Roles and Responsibilities

Following the National CDEM Plan Order 2015 coming into effect, the Group decided to align the appointment of alternate and local welfare managers with the structure of the Group, ie, use the same process to be used as for local controllers and recovery managers. The aim of the ‘Welfare Roles and Responsibilities’ Policy is to formalise the appointment process of welfare positions and identify the commitment and expectations for each position.

Waikato Welfare Coordination Group Business Plan

The WCG annual business plan describes projects and tasks for the coming year.

Welfare Coordination Group Protocols

These describe the welfare arrangements during response and recovery and are summarised in Section 6.7.2.

Local Welfare Managers

Each territorial authority within the Group area maintains the appointment of a Local Welfare Manager. The roles and responsibilities for the Local Welfare Manager are provided in the Waikato CDEM Group Welfare Manager Policy, along with the appointment process. Please refer to the Waikato CDEM Group website for the most up-to-date details of these appointments.

Local Welfare Committees

Each territorial authority within the Group area has established a Local Welfare Committee. The membership of each local welfare committee varies, but in general includes local representation of those agencies that are members of the Waikato Welfare Coordination Group. The exception to this is where share service arrangements are in place in which case:

- Thames-Coromandel District Council, Hauraki District Council and Matamata-Piako District Council have a combined local welfare committee.

- Otorohanga District Council and Waitomo District Council have a combined local welfare committee (noting that the Waipa District Council local welfare committee remains independent of this shared service arrangement).

Local Welfare Plans

Each territorial authority within the Group area maintains a local welfare plan. Each local welfare plan includes the following information:

- Professional development. - Roles and responsibilities. - Relationships and arrangements with other local areas. - Local welfare committee expectations from members. - Membership benefits. - List of core membership - 5 year goals - Terms of reference for Local Welfare Committee

110




Jurisdictional issues

For a number of welfare services, the Group encompasses several jurisdictions that all need to be taken account of in the design of group-wide arrangements.

8.4.3 Actions


Implementation of the WCG Plan.

60. Develop a business plan and report on progress against the WCG Plan.

Annual

61. Review the WCG Plan. 2021/22

62. Develop local welfare plans. 2017/18

111




8.5 Iwi

8.5.1 Background

The organisations that make up the Group have arrangements in place to ensure that iwi views and values are understood and integrated into all work that is undertaken, from strategic decision making to day-to-day operations. These arrangements extend to the work undertaken by these organisations as a member or partner of the Group. The sum of these organizational arrangements provides a comprehensive iwi liaison arrangement for the Group. In addition to the broad integration of iwi views and values into the work undertaken by the Group, the Group also has several arrangements in place to help build the resilience of iwi and marae. These arrangements acknowledge the important contribution that iwi and marae make to the overall resilience of communities.


Local Authority iwi liaison

Each local authority in the Group has arrangements with iwi to ensure their views and values are understood and integrated into all work that is undertaken. The nature and scope of these arrangements is varied, but as a sum provides a group-wide platform that ensures iwi views and values are also understood and integrated into the work undertaken by the Group.

Response liaison and advice

During an emergency, the response structure established within the Group (either group-wide or within an individual organization) includes an iwi liaison function in the Coordination Centre. This ensures the views and values of iwi are understood and taken into account by the emergency response.

Recovery liaison and advice

Following an emergency, the recovery structure established within the Group (either group-wide or within an individual organization) includes an iwi liaison function in the Recovery Office. In addition to this, some or all aspects of an event recovery may revert back to “business-as-usual” arrangements for organisations. Both these aspects ensure that the views and values of iwi are understood and taken into account during the recovery from an emergency.

Representation of the WCG

The Welfare Coordination Group brings together organisations that have a responsibility to provide welfare services for a community during an emergency, and undertakes work to improve coordination and develop targeted plans. The membership of the Welfare Coordination Group includes Te Puni Kokiri to ensure that views and values of iwi are integrated into the work undertaken by the Welfare Coordination Group.

Marae Preparedness Strategy

The Group (through the WCG) has created the Marae Preparedness Strategy, which provides a framework for the Group to work with iwi to help improve the understanding of the hazards that their marae are exposed to, along with actions that they can take to reduce the vulnerability and build the resilience of the marae to those hazards. This strategy acknowledges the important role that marae have in providing their broader communities with support during and after an emergency, along with providing a platform for marae focused discussions to build resilience before an emergency.

8.5.3 Actions


Engagement of iwi in Group activities

63. Report on iwi engagement across the Group on CDEM matters.

Annual

112




8.6 Lifeline utilities

8.6.1 Background

The CDEM Act (Schedule 1) details specific entities that are considered lifeline utilities. It also details certain business types where entities are also considered lifeline utilities, including:

- Producers, suppliers and distributors of gas.

- Generators and distributors of electricity.

- Suppliers and distributors of water.

- Providers of waste water and stormwater networks and disposal.

- Providers of telecommunications.

- Providers of road and rail networks.

- Producers, processors or distributors or petroleum products. The CDEM Act (60) requires that every lifeline utility must:

(a) Ensure that it is able to function to the fullest possible extent, even though this may be at a reduced level, during and after an emergency.

(b) Make available to the Director in writing, on request, its plan for functioning during and after an emergency

(c) Participate in the development of the national CDEM strategy and CDEM plans

(d) Provide, free of charge, any technical advice to any CDEM Group or the Director that may be reasonably required by that Group or the Director

(e) Ensure that any information that is disclosed to the lifeline utility is used by the lifeline utility, or disclosed to another person, only for the purposes of this Act.

The role of lifeline utilities is further described in the National CDEM Plan (Sections 57-61).


Waikato Lifeline Utilities Group (WLUG)

Lifeline utilities support the delivery of the Group Plan through their participation in the WLUG and their contribution to tasks and projects as agreed by the development through the annual WLUG Business Plan. The WLUG also maintains:

- The WLUG Charter, which outlines objectives, roles, relationships, expectations and approach to funding.

- The WLUG Annual Business Plan, which describes projects and tasks for the coming year, along with confirmation of funding arrangements as outlined in the Charter.

- The WLUG communication protocols which outline response and recovery arrangements between lifeline utilities and CDEM.

The WLUG’s role is primarily on reduction, and some readiness, activities. Lifeline utilities coordination arrangements are in place for the coordination of lifeline utilities and CDEM in response and recovery (refer Section 6.7.1).

Waikato Lifeline Utilities Group Chairperson

The WLUCG maintains the appointment of a chairperson. The role of the chairperson is described in the WLUG Charter, and includes representation of the WLUG on the CEG.

113




8.6.3 Actions


Maintain effective lifeline partnership arrangements.

64. Support capability development of lifeline utilities. (Refer ITF Section5.3).

65. Maintain and review the WLUG Charter and business plan and report progress to CEG.

Annual.

8.7 The CDEM Community

8.7.1 MCDEM and the national CDEM community

MCDEM provides national support to the CDEM sector, summarised as follows:

- Operation of the NCMC (refer Section 6.2) to lead national emergencies and support local CDEM operations;

- Provision of national coordination for recovery activities. The relationships between the National, Group and Local Controllers are outlined in Section 6.8. It is also acknowledged that a number of organisations are mandated through the National CDEM Plan to have a national role in CDEM. The engagement of the Waikato CDEM Group varies, depending on the involvement of those organisations in group-wide and national arrangements.

8.7.2 Neighbouring CDEM Groups and authorities

The Waikato CDEM Group borders the following CDEM Groups:

- Auckland

- Bay of Plenty

- Hawkes Bay

- Manawatu-Whanganui

- Taranaki Each territorial authority within the Group also has several neighbouring territorial authorities. In accordance with section 17(1)(f) of the CDEM Act, the Group will support other CDEM Groups in New Zealand. The basis of this support is built upon memoranda of understanding. The specific nature of support that the Group can provide during the response and recovery phases of an emergency will depend on the circumstances at the time and to what extent an emergency has affected each CDEM Group. The support will be conditional on a best endeavours basis having regard for all of the circumstances. The CDEM Act (2002) (s113) provides for the recovery of actual and reasonable costs associated with provision of assistance to other CDEM Groups. In addition to the above arrangements, the Waikato CDEM Group also works alongside neighboring CDEM groups where there are hazard or risk issues that require coordination. These arrangements are shown in Table 8-3.

Arrangement CDEM groups Scope

Caldera Advisory Group Waikato

Bay of Plenty

Management of the volcanic risk associated with the caldera volcanos to the south and east of the Waikato CDEM Group area.

Central Plateau Volcanic Advisory Group

Waikato

Manawatu-Whanganui

Management of the volcanic risk associated with the Central Plateau (Ruapehu, Ngaruahoe and Tongariro).

TABLE 8-3: CDEM PARTNERSHIP ARRANGEMENTS TO MANAGE RISK

114




8.7.3 Local arrangements

In addition to the general group-wide arrangements that are in place to support CDEM partnerships, the following specific local arrangements are acknowledged:

Territorial authorities Nature of arrangement

Scope

Taupō District Council

South Waikato District Council

Memorandum of Understanding

When mutually agreed, general cooperation across reduction, readiness, response and recovery, including:

- Joint exercising.

- Joint training.

- Observer rights at CDEM meetings.

- Sharing of information.

- Provision of electronic management support when requested (and when available).

Taupō District Council

Rotorua District Council

Memorandum of Understanding

When mutually agreed, general cooperation across reduction, readiness, response and recovery, including:

- Joint exercising.

- Joint training.

- Observer rights at CDEM meetings.

- Sharing of information.

Provision of electronic management support when requested (and when available).

TABLE 8-4: LOCAL CDEM PARTNERSHIP ARRANGEMENTS

8.8 Volunteering Partners

8.8.1 Background

The Group is proactive in the use of volunteers to support the response to an emergency, and has adopted the Waikato CDEM Group Volunteer Management Plan. An important aspect of this plan is the establishment of a number of partnership arrangements with groups that are either engaged in the coordination of volunteers and/or have an established volunteer network. These are discussed below.

8.8.2 Group-wide arrangements

Volunteering Waikato

The Group maintains a Memorandum of Understanding with Volunteering Waikato. The purpose of this is to define how the two organisations will work together to recruit, train and (in the event of an emergency) deploy volunteers to provide additional support to affected communities.

Volunteer organisations

The Group works alongside the following volunteer organisations to provide specific roles and skills:

- Lions

- Rotary

Amateur Radio Emergency Communications

The Group maintains a Memorandum of Understanding with Amateur Radio Emergency Communications. The Purpose of this is to define how the Group will work with amateur radio operations to provide additional lines of communication during an emergency.

115



9. Our Structure

9.1 Overview

9.1.1 The Waikato CDEM Group

The Waikato CDEM Group comprises the following:

- Joint Committee;

- Coordinating Executive Group (CEG);

- A number of advisory groups that focus on specific CDEM work areas.

- Group Emergency Management Office (GEMO);

- Local Authorities;

- Emergency services;

- Lifeline utilities (via the Waikato Lifeline Utilities Group); and

- Welfare services organisations (via the Welfare Coordination Group).

This section describes the structures that the Group has implemented to support their functions in relation to governance, leadership and delivery. In addition to describing these arrangements, this section also describes the interaction between these different structural aspects, which is outlined in Figure 9-1.

9.1.2 Goal

To provide leadership and governance to deliver effective CDEM outcomes. Achievement towards this goal is measured through the Capability Assessment Tool. The 2014 Capability Assessment Report highlighted a significant improvement in this area since the last Plan review. The target result is to sustain a mature level.


The following issues and opportunities have been identified:

a. Developing and resourcing work programmes: To ensure the achievement of objectives in this Group Plan.

b. Enhanced coordination and integration: The last five years has seen greater coordination of Group-wide

activities, however there are considered to be further opportunities to optimise CDEM outcomes and improve efficiencies through even stronger integration. In September 2015, the Joint Committee agreed to progress with the following, subject to more detailed analysis of the cost and implications for each individual local authority.


44% (2009)Advancing

Mature

87% (2014)

Mature

>90% (2019)


and Delivery



5 Group readiness

6. Response

7. Recovery

8. Our Parners

Monitor,

evaluate

and

improve

116

Section 9: Our Structure



The full integration of group-wide and local CDEM work programmes with locally imbedded staff, supported via a central core of specialists, and with the flexibility to cross-resource where required to meet a specific project challenge or an emergency. The work programme is established in concert with the local council and agreed to by both parties. A document is created that details the deliverables and expectations on each party. Metrics are then assigned that are used to track progress or identify issues. In determining the CDEM Model to align with the above, the following outcomes were defined as being important (see box to right).

9.2 Governance

9.2.1 Group-Wide Arrangements (Waikato CDEM Group Joint Committee)

Membership

The Joint Committee is established in accordance with the Waikato CDEM Group Constituting Agreement and is formed from one elected representative from each of local authorities in the Group. (CDEM Act, Section 13).

Objective

To provide leadership in the delivery of co-ordinated and collaborative arrangements for CDEM among member local authorities, partner agencies, clusters and communities within its group area. (National CDEM Plan, Section 6.2).

Functions

In accordance with the CDEM Act (Section 17), the functions of the Joint Committee are summarised as follows:

- Risk Management: Identify, assess and manage relevant hazards and risks. Consult and communicate on risks, and identify and implement cost-effective risk reduction measures.

- Planning for CDEM: Develop, implement, monitor and review the CDEM Group Plan. Participate in the development of the National CDEM Strategy and Plan.

- Delivering CDEM: Maintain and provide resources for effective CDEM, including equipment, materials, services, information and suitably trained and competent personnel, including volunteers, and response and recovery activities.

- Provide assistance to other CDEM Groups.

- Promoting and Monitoring CDEM: Promote and raise public awareness of the purposes and requirements of the Act and monitor and report on compliance with it.

Responsibilities

The Joint Committee is responsible for ensuring the Group fulfils its CDEM responsibilities and will:

1. Set the strategic direction of the Group via the Group Plan.

2. Approve the Group annual and long-term CDEM work programmes (as part of local authority long-term and annual planning processes).

3. Monitor the progress in implementing the Group work programme.

Desirable CDEM Model Outcomes

Develop CDEM work programmes, processes and relationships that:

- Align with agreed Group priorities.

- Identify local needs.

- Identify the necessary resources.

- Reflect local processes, procedures and plans.

- Define operational relationships.

- Facilitate the building of community resilience.

Implement and sustain what is developed, ensuring:

- The delivery of the broader Group priorities.

- The maintenance of local procedures and plans.

- The necessary level of operational capability.

- Administrative excellence, including specialist advice, monitoring and reporting.

- The optimisation of resources to support both group-wide and local priorities.

Integrate what is developed into all work undertaken by the respective organisation, with a particular focus on:

- Executive level championing of CDEM outcomes across organisations.

- The informed approval and resourcing of local CDEM work programmes.

- The consideration of how CDEM outcomes impact all aspects of business-as-usual.

- The use of applicable plans and processes.

- Reporting on the progress being made against local CDEM outcomes.

- Appointment and sustainment of key CDEM roles (e.g. controller, recovery manager and welfare manager).

117




4. Amend and approve the Group Plan as required.

5. Appoint CDEM roles as required.

The democratic arrangements are summarised in Table 9-1.

Chair of the Joint Committee

One of the Joint Committee Members’ representatives will be elected as chair for three years.

Nature of the Joint Committee

The Joint Committee is permanently established (under clause 30(7), schedule 7 of the Local

Government Act 2002) and is not discharged following triennial elections.

Voting The voting system is one vote per Member representative with the Chair having a casting vote.

Delegated Authority

Each Member’s representative has authority to vote and make decisions on behalf of that Member

without further recourse to that Member, subject to the decision being within approved budgets.

Standing Orders The standing orders for the Joint Committee are NZS9202:2003, except as may be varied by the Joint

Committee by resolution.

Quorum The quorum for the Joint Committee, as provided for in LGA Schedule 7, C30 (9B).

Meetings Meetings occur up to four times per year, or as required to fulfil the functions and duties required.

TABLE 9-1: DEMOCRATIC ARRANGEMENTS

Individual Member Representatives Roles

As stated in the Group constituting agreement, each Member confers full delegated authority on its representative, or in their absence the alternate representative on the Joint Committee, to exercise the functions, powers and duties of Members under the CDEM Act. The role of Joint Committee Member representatives within their local authority includes:

- Providing a point of contact for elected members relating to CDEM matters;

- Advocating CDEM development and delivery; and

- Liaising with CEG members to ensure that their local authority is delivering the outcomes of the Group Plan via its work programmes.

FIGURE 9-1: GROUP AND LOCAL REPORTING ROLES

118





In addition to the Group-wide arrangements for the governance of CDEM, each territorial authority has implemented local arrangements for the governance of their respective CDEM work programmes. The following arrangements are acknowledged:

Territorial authority Local governance arrangement

Hamilton City Council Hamilton City Council Civil Defence and Emergency Management Sub-committee

Hauraki District Council Thames-Valley Civil Defence Emergency Management Committee

Matamata-Piako District Council Thames-Valley Civil Defence Emergency Management Committee

Otorohanga District Council Otorohanga District Council

South Waikato District Council South Waikato District Council

Taupō District Council Taupō District Council Emergency Management Committee

Thames-Coromandel District Council Thames-Valley Civil Defence Emergency Management Committee

Waikato District Council Waikato District Council Strategy and Finance Committee

Waipa District Council Waipa District Council

Waitomo District Council Waitomo District Council

TABLE 9-2: LOCAL CDEM GOVERNANCE ARRANGEMENTS

9.3 Leadership

9.3.1 Group-Wide Arrangements (Coordinating Executive Group)

Background

Oversight and decision making in relation to strategic, planning, risk and accountability matters across the Group is led by the Coordinating Executive Group (CEG), operated under the CEG Terms of Reference. The appointment and functions of the CEG are in accordance with the CDEM Act (Section 20), with further information provided in the following sections.

Members of the CEG

The CEG comprises Chief Executive Officers, or a senior management representative acting on behalf of the Chief Executive Officer, from each of the 11 local authorities in the Group, the New Zealand Police, Fire and Emergency New Zealand and Waikato/Lakes District Health Boards (CDEM Act (Section 20(1)(a-d)). In addition to these statutory members specified in the CDEM Act, in accordance with the CDEM Act (Section 20(1)(e), the Joint Committee shall appoint or co-opt non-statutory CEG members as full CEG members and specialist advisors of the CEG (or their nominated alternate) as appropriate. For the Group, the following shall also be members of CEG:

- Waikato Lifeline Utilities Group Chairperson.

- A St John’s Ambulance representative. The Group Controller, Group Welfare Manager (who is also the Welfare Coordination Group Chairperson) and Group Recovery Manager have speaking rights but not voting rights. A representative from MCDEM is also accorded observer status.

119




Roles and Responsibilities

The CEG plays a pivotal role in coordinating and integrating CDEM Group strategy with local CDEM planning and implementation, and has the following prescribed functions in accordance with the CDEM Act (Section 20(2)):

- Providing advice to the Joint Committee and any subgroups or subcommittees;

- Implementing, as appropriate, the decisions of the Joint Committee;

- Overseeing the implementation, development, maintenance, monitoring, and evaluation of the CDEM Group Plan (refer Section 10 for more details on monitoring and evaluation role); and

- Responsibility for the preparation and implementation of the annual work programme and associated budget. As well as participating in CEG discussions and decision making, individual CEG members are also accountable for ensuring the duties assigned to their respective organisations by the CDEM Act (Sections 60 to 65), including the integration of CDEM into their respective organisation, including:

- Executive level championing of CDEM outcomes.

- Informed approval and resourcing of organizational work programmes.

- Consideration of how CDEM outcomes impact all aspects of business-as-usual.

- Integration of CDEM plans and processes across the organization.

- Reporting on the progress made against agreed organizational outcomes.

- Appointment and sustainment of key CDEM roles. In order for CDEM activity to be planned and delivered effectively, the CEG may establish CEG sub-committees with specific roles and these subcommittees will be chaired by a CEG member.


In addition to the group-wide arrangements leadership arrangements described above, the following local leadership arrangements are also acknowledged.

Territorial authority Local leadership arrangement

Hamilton City Council Hamilton City Council executive leadership team

Hauraki District Council Thames-Valley Coordinating Advisory Group

Matamata-Piako District Council Thames-Valley Coordinating Advisory Group

Otorohanga District Council Western Waikato Emergency Management Committee

South Waikato District Council South Waikato District Council executive leadership team

Taupō District Council Taupō District Council executive leadership team

Thames-Coromandel District Council Thames-Valley Coordinating Advisory Group

Waikato District Council Waikato District Council executive leadership team

Waipa District Council Western Waikato Emergency Management Committee

Waitomo District Council Western Waikato Emergency Management Committee

TABLE 9-3: LOCAL CDEM LEADERSHIP ARRANGEMENTS

9.4 Integration

9.4.1 Group-wide arrangements

Along with providing the Group with the necessary leadership and governance, the members of the Joint Committee and Coordinating Executive Group are also responsible for ensuring the decisions and priorities that are agreed for the Group are integrated into their respective organizations.

120




9.5 Delivery

9.5.1 Group-Wide arrangements

Group Emergency Management Office

To support the delivery of the Group strategy and work programme, the Group has established and maintains a Group Emergency Management Office (GEMO). The GEMO coordinates and facilitates the ‘day-to-day’ Group-wide planning and project work on behalf of the Joint Committee and CEG. The work programme and budget of the GEMO is overseen by CEG and Joint Committee, however GEMO staff are employees of Waikato Regional Council (WRC). The functions of the GEMO include:

- Advice and technical support to the CEG, the Joint Committee and Group Members.

- Project coordination and management for group-wide projects, including the ongoing development; implementation, monitoring and review of the Group Plan and supporting documentation.

- Coordination of Group policy development and implementation.

- Management of contracts entered into on behalf of the Joint Committee or CEG.

- Monitoring and responding to adverse effects of emergencies on behalf of the Group and disseminating warnings.

- Maintaining the GECC.

- External liaison with Group partners and stakeholders.

- Preparation (in consultation with CEG) of quarterly reports covering the Group performance with regard to work programme and budget.

- Representing (or facilitating representation of) the Group on national bodies and projects.

- Supporting CDEM professionals and individuals in named roles (e.g. Controllers) across the Group.

- Administrative services for CEG such as convening meetings, providing venues, organising agendas, providing minutes and catering.

- Where service level agreements exist, the GEMO provides direct delivery of local CDEM services through means of coordinators dedicated to (and in some cases imbedded with) specific territorial authorities.

The functioning of the GEMO is supported by the Waikato Regional Council, as defined by the Service Level Agreement with the Joint Committee. The services provided as part of this agreement are:

- Accountant for CDEM Group finances and budgets;

- Publishing the CDEM Group’s work programme, budget and performance (once adopted);

- Provision of the GECC; and

- Entering into contracts with service providers on behalf of the Group. The costs of undertaking these services are to be met in accordance with the CDEM Group financial policy. To ensure a coordinated approach across the Group the following approach is used when undertaking group-wide tasks and projects:

- CEG members task and direct the appropriate local authority or agency to carry out a Group Plan objective;

- The GEMO will call meetings of the Group CDEM professionals staff to ensure a regionally consistent approach to matters relating to CDEM; and

- Local CDEM staff work collaboratively with each other and GEMO staff and participate in GEMO meetings and initiatives as requested.

121




Administering Authority

In accordance with the CDEM Act (Section 23(1)), the WRC is the administering authority for the Group.

Local CDEM Work Programmes

Local authorities support the delivery of the Group strategy and work programme through their participation in the Coordinating Executive Group (refer to Section 9.3), various advisory groups established by the Group (refer to Section 9.6), as well as their contribution to tasks and projects (as agreed by the development of this Plan). Local authorities also maintain their respective Emergency Operating Centre (EOC) capability to support the overall response capability of the Group. Further information is provided under Response Arrangements (Section 1). This support requires the integration of the Group strategy and work programme into many existing aspects of local authority business.

Local Authority Shared Service Arrangements

The geographical extent, hazardscape and number of local authorities within the Group may lead to some of the territorial authorities adopting a shared services approach for delivery of readiness and response functions through Emergency Operating Areas (EOAs). Territorial authorities are able to establish and manage such shared services arrangements, but any new establishment or modification of arrangements must be advised to the Joint Committee. Shared services arrangements do not devolve each territorial authority’s responsibility for managing CDEM activities within its own area, providing support across the Group area as required, and for reporting to CEG on progress against the Group work programme. Governance, funding and operation of any shared services arrangement is the responsibility of the territorial authorities, including:

- Approval of annual work programmes and budgets.

- Establishing methods of control, organisation and communication to facilitate the coordinated deployment of resources and services.

- Review of and input into local and district emergency management plans.

- Planning, support for, and review of local exercises.

- Liaising with CEG on significant CDEM issues.

- Recommending appointments for Local Controllers to the Joint Committee.

9.6 Advisory Groups The Group will establish and or support groups whose purpose is to provide advice on specific CDEM work areas. The purpose of these advisory groups is to maintain an awareness of their respective operating environment and provide advice to the Coordinating Executive Group (CEG) with regard to:

- The capability of the Group in relation to the current operating environment.

- Any changes to the operating environment and any consequential changes to the approach taken for the CDEM work area.

- Strategic issues (both internal and external) that require the attention of the Group.

9.7 Financial Arrangements The activities of the CDEM Group incur costs as part of:

- Programmed Activities: Administrative and related services under s.24 of the CDEM Act 2002 and the approved

annual work programme.

- Emergency Expenditure: Expenditure incurred by the Group in the lead up to, during and immediately after a declared state of emergency (e.g. reimbursement for cost of specialist advice).

122




9.7.1 Programmed Activities

The Group is responsible for funding administrative and related services under s.24 of the CDEM Act 2002 and an agreed annual work programme. The Group has adopted a Charging Policy that sets out a clear, transparent and equitable framework for the allocation of costs associated with the operation of the Group and for Members involved in Group activities. The Policy is based on four guiding principles:

1. The operation of GEMO, and the administrative support provided to the Joint Committee and GECC (non-active status) are core Group activities, and therefore these costs are cover by a region–wide Targeted Rate. The level of resourcing for GEMO is determined by the work programme (and associated budget) approved by the Joint Committee.

2. The effective operation of the Group relies on the appointment of senior management staff to the CEG and elected members to the Joint Committee. The time and associated costs for these personnel fulfilling their responsibilities to the Group will be borne by the Member or Partner organisation.

3. Where a staff/elected member is appointed to a Group role, such as Controller, Recovery Manager, Public Information Manager, etc, the costs associated with such appointments will be borne by the Member or Partner organisation.

4. Where equipment, facilities or other non-personnel resources are specifically and solely required to support the operation of the GEMO/GECC, then those costs shall be borne by the Group and reflected in the Group budget.

The following table sets out how the charging principles will apply.

Role Situation Resourcing

Type Group Cost

Member Cost

Administering Authority staff & GEMO/GECC Manager/staff

Activities in accordance with approved work programme (including GECC administration/activation).

Approved training & associated costs (e.g. representing Group at recognised CDEM event).

Time

$

Key Appointment – Controller, Recovery Manager, Public Information Manager, etc (fulfilling all aspects of role – i.e. steady state and activation)

Staff of a member organisation.

External appointment.

Approved training & associated costs (e.g. representing Group at recognised CDEM event).

Time

$

$

CEG Member (Council & non-Council appointees)

Fulfilling responsibilities of a CEG member – attendance at meetings/workshops and related work. Includes costs relating to travel, training and upskilling.

Time

Joint Committee Member Fulfilling responsibilities of a JC member – attendance at meetings /workshops and related work.

Time

GECC Staff GECC training/activation. Time

Non-CDEM staff Periodic support of CDEM Group activities on an ‘as required’ basis.

Time

TABLE 9-4: GROUP CHARGING POLICY (DOC # 1796819)

Unless agreed otherwise, the costs of completing any specific agency actions as outlined in the annual work plan will be met by the local authority or agency concerned. There will be other occasions where charging to the Group is appropriate, but falls outside the scope of the policy. In such circumstances the decision shall rest with CEG where the matter is in general accordance with the approved work programme/budget. Other matters will be referred to the Joint Committee for consideration.

123




9.7.2 Expenditure in a Civil Defence Emergency

In an emergency, in the interim, costs will lie where they fall, or where a territorial authority requests a resource, the cost will lie with the relevant territorial authority. Where the Group Controller directs a resource, the cost will be apportioned by agreement until such time as a WRC-administered funding source is in place. In the lead up to, and during a declared emergency, the Group is responsible for funding:

- All costs associated with the resourcing, activation and operation of the GECC

- All reasonable direct expenses incurred by the Group Controller; and

- All reasonable direct expenses (such as travel, meals and accommodation) incurred by recognised technical advisors when they are requested to attend meetings to provide specialist technical advice.

Local authorities are responsible for meeting all costs associated with their own CDEM personnel, facilities and resources. Through their appointed response representative, local authorities take first line responsibility for dealing with the impact of disaster in their geographic and functional areas of responsibility. This includes the prior provision of the physical and financial resources needed for response and recovery. Each local authority is to be responsible for meeting all emergency expenditure incurred in its district or under its jurisdiction, and arising out of the use of its resources and services under the control of either a Local Controller (directed to carry out any of the functions or duties of, or delegated to by, the Group Controller), or the Group Controller. The Controller will ensure all costs are properly recorded and accounted for.

9.7.3 Recovering Costs in a Civil Defence Emergency

Upon termination of a declared emergency, the Group Controller will recommend to the CDEM Group which costs could reasonably be met by the Group. There may be circumstances where shared Group funding could be applied where there are widespread adverse regional impacts, and consequential regional benefits from localised response efforts to reverse these impacts. Claims for government assistance are to be made by the organisation incurring the expenditure. When a declaration involves more than one district, the CDEM Group will co-ordinate and check respective local authority claims, independently prepare a claim for agreed Group costs, and submit the consolidated application. Volunteers suffering personal injury or damage to or loss of property while carrying out emergency work under the control or authority of a Controller may also submit claims to the local authority employing the Controller, or in the case of the Group Controller to the CDEM Group (refer to sections 108 and 109 CDEM Act 2002).

9.7.4 Emergency Recovery Finances

Upon termination of a declared emergency, the expenditure management regime established for the response phase must be closed off and re-commenced for the recovery phase under the control of the Recovery Manager. The Recovery Manager will ensure all costs are properly recorded and accounted for. The Recovery Manager will recommend to the CDEM Group which recovery costs could reasonably be met by the Group, and which costs could be recovered from the government. Claims for government assistance are to be made by the organisation incurring the expenditure, or in the case where there are agreed Group costs, by the CDEM Group. Any central government involvement will be contingent upon the principles and conditions set out in Part 10 of the National CDEM Plan (2005) and section 26 of the Guide to the National CDEM Plan (2005). Central government assistance for recovery from damage to private property, business, etc, is only available if it can be shown that the risk was uninsurable and hardship can be demonstrated. If it becomes apparent that there will be a significant number of people suffering financial hardship and more immediate relief is required, Mayoral Relief Funds may be established.

124




9.8 Actions


1. Develop and resource work programme.

66. Establish CDEM Group-wide work programmes, including securing funding.

Annual

67. Agree financial delegations between the Group Controllers, Local Controllers and the Joint Committee.

2016/17

2. Enhance coordination and integration.

68. Review the CDEM delivery model to achieve greater coordination of work programmes.

2016/17

69. Consider the establishment of a Group Relief Fund. 2017/18

125



10. Monitoring and Evaluation

10.1 Overview Ongoing monitoring and evaluation provides assurance to the Group and Waikato communities that the Group is complying with its obligations, achieving its objectives and making progress towards its goals.

10.1.1 Goal

Monitor the Effectiveness of CDEM Delivery


The functions of the Joint Committee in relation to monitoring and evaluation are:

- Monitor and report on compliance within its area with this Act and legislative provisions relevant to the purpose of this Act (CDEM Act Section 17.1 (h))

- Develop, approve, implement, and monitor a CDEM Group Plan and regularly review the plan (CDEM Act Section 17.1 (j)).

- Monitor and evaluate the progress of strategic planning for recovery and ensure the actions, responsibilities and timeframes are recorded and reported on.


- Monitoring and reporting is currently largely input based (eg: hours committed to various work programmes) and focused on GEMO activities (as opposed to taking a “whole-of-group” approach that includes local work programmes).

- Lack of transparency and accountability in CDEM delivery: Some concerns have been expressed about the alignment of, and visibility of progress of, local CDEM work programmes. While flexibility in local CDEM delivery is important, delivery of Group Plan actions should be given priority where there are resource / funding constraints.

- New Responsibilities to monitor and evaluate planning for recovery: Groups to plan for and carry out recovery

activity (CDEM Act 2002 s 17(1)(e)). It is vital that a performance framework is established to enable monitoring and evaluation of progress towards achieving this.

10.1.4 Objectives

Progress towards the CDEM Group Plan objectives and outcomes is monitored across all Group Members and Partners.

10.2 Group-Wide arrangements

10.2.1 MCDEM Monitoring and Evaluation

MCDEM maintains a national monitoring and evaluation programme, which involves a 5-yearly review of the Group against a series of performance measures that are based on the CDEM Act, the National CDEM Plan and CDEM doctrine. The resulting capability assessment report is provided to the Group so that areas for improvement can be identified and implemented (with a corrective action plan submitted to MCDEM).

Monitor,

evaluate

and

improve


and Delivery



5 Group readiness

6. Response

7. Recovery

8. Our Parners

126

Section 10: Monitoring and Evaluation



The last capability assessment report was produced for the Group during 2014 and the results have been taken into account in the development of this plan. The next capability assessment report is expected in 2019 and will inform the next review of this plan.

10.2.2 Group Plan Monitoring and Reviews

An annual assessment will be conducted by the Group to ensure that the plan is still accurate and legislatively compliant. In addition, the Waikato CDEM Group Plan will be reviewed in accordance with the requirements of the CDEM Act (every 5 years).

10.2.3 Group Work Programmes

Each local authority and the GEMO develops work programmes which it leads and resources in support of the delivery of objectives and actions in this Plan. These will be monitored as follows:

- Quarterly reports provided to CEG will determine progress against the CDEM Group’s and territorial authorities annual work programme.

- An annual report against the annual local and Group work programmes and broad five year work programme will be provided by the CEG to the Joint Committee.

10.3 Actions

Issues Responses and Actions Timeframe

Monitoring and reporting is largely input-based and focused on GEMO activities.

70. KPIs established that are specific and measurable and each Member is required to report against these.

2016/17 then annually.

71. MCDEM Capability Assessment Review (including moderated assessments for each Waikato CDEM Group member)

2019

72. Waikato CDEM Group Plan review 2020

Lack of transparency and accountability in CDEM Delivery

73. Evaluation and reporting of achievement against all work programmes (aligned to actions and objectives in this Plan).

Annually

74. Develop a performance framework to measure and monitor progress towards strategic planning for recovery.

By Dec 2018

75. Establish reporting programme to provide oversight that CDEM Partners are meeting their responsibilities under the National CDEM Plan.

Annually

TABLE 10-1: MONITORING AND EVALUATION OBJECTIVES AND ACTIONS

127



Attachment 1: Our hazards

Guide to using this information

Name of hazard

Hazard hotspots within the Waikato CDEM Group

Risk associated with hazard if

present reduction is

ignored

Risk associated with hazard after present reduction is considered

How the risk associated with the hazard is reduced

Background information on the hazard and associated risk

The scenario assumed when

assessing the risk associated with

the hazard

Further details on how the risk is reduced. Note: This information covers items specific to each hazard, and is over and above the general work undertaken to provide organizational readiness and community resilience.

A historical example of the assumed scenario

128

Attachment 1: Our Hazards



Drought

Risk assessment

(BEFORE reduction) Risk reduction focuses on…

Risk assessment

(AFTER reduction)

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Haz

ard

Exp

osu

re

Vuln

erab

ility

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Possible Nation Very high Possible Nation Very high

BACKGROUND

Droughts occur when the rainfall deficit for a given period is more than the average rainfall deficit for the same period.

Historically, water shortage and potential drought within the Waikato CDEM Group area has not been as severe as in other areas

of New Zealand, though water shortage events have impacted our communities.

Areas in within the Waikato CDEM Group area that are particularly vulnerable to the consequences of drought are the Hauraki

Plains, lower Waikato Basin and Thames-Coromandel District.

SCENARIO

A meteorological drought with a 1 % AEP, resulting in little or no rainfall during summer across much of the North Island. Low

soil moisture reduces pasture growth and agricultural productivity, while low surface water flows and levels reduces the

availability of potable water throughout the community.

HISTORICAL EXAMPLE

2012/2013 drought that affected much of New Zealand and especially the North Island.

REDUCTION

1. The likelihood of the HAZARD occurring cannot be reduced as this is a natural hazard.

2. The likelihood of EXPOSURE to the hazard is not currently reduced, and it would be difficult to do so given the widespread

nature of the hazard.

3. The VULNERABILITY of the community to the hazard is reduced by:

- The use of alternative stock feed and water sources.

- Active management of potable water takes and consumption.

- The availability of alternative potable water sources.

! !

! !

!

129




Pandemic (animal)

Risk assessment


Risk assessment

(AFTER reduction)

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Haz

ard

Exp

osu

re

Vuln

erab

ility

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Almost certain Nation Extreme Possible Nation Very high

BACKGROUND

Animal pandemic relates to a range of animal diseases typically found in livestock such as Foot and Mouth Disease, Bovine

Encephalitis and Equine Influenza. A widespread animal pandemic has the potential for major consequences due to New

Zealand’s dependence on horticultural, agricultural and forestry industries. New Zealand has limited historical exposure to

disease, and is very susceptible to biological hazards.

SCENARIO

The widespread infection of livestock with Foot and Mouth Disease, impacting horticultural, agricultural and forestry industries

within the Waikato CDEM Group area and across New Zealand.

HISTORICAL EXAMPLE

No relevant historical event identified.

REDUCTION

1. The likelihood of the HAZARD occurring is reduced by:

- Biosecurity controls at the New Zealand border to prevent disease entering New Zealand.

2. The likelihood of EXPOSURE to the hazard is reduced given the widespread nature of the hazard:

- Disease surveillance and reporting to monitor activity and (where required) initiate containment and/or eradication.

- Procedures for the containment and/or eradication of outbreaks.


- Hazard-specific national response capability lead by MPI.

! !

! !

!

130




Pandemic (human)

Risk assessment


Risk assessment

(AFTER reduction)

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Haz

ard

Exp

osu

re

Vuln

erab

ility

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Almost certain Nation Extreme Possible Region Very high

BACKGROUND

The 2009 incidence of influenza A (H1N1), also known as “swine flu”, has demonstrated to the world the speed with which

modern transportation can facilitate the spread of disease. Since 2004, the potential of the H5N1 avian influenza virus to create

a pandemic has been the cause of concern to governments worldwide. Considerable research, planning and preparation has

been undertaken within New Zealand to prepare for response to a pandemic.

While the likelihood of a pandemic is uncertain, the consequences of a full-blown event would also certainly be significant for

the Waikato CDEM Group and for New Zealand.

SCENARIO

The widespread infection of the community with a disease such as one of the many strains of Influenza.

HISTORICAL EXAMPLE

1918, 1957 and 1968 influenza pandemics that affected New Zealand.

REDUCTION


- The New Zealand Influenza Pandemic Plan (keep it out)

2. The likelihood of EXPOSURE is reduced given the widespread nature of the hazard:

- The New Zealand Influenza Pandemic Plan (plan for it, stamp it out and manage it)


- The New Zealand Influenza Pandemic Plan (plan for it and manage it).

! !

! !

!

131




Tsunami

Risk assessment


Risk assessment

(AFTER reduction)

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Haz

ard

Exp

osu

re

Vuln

erab

ility

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Possible Nation Very high Possible Nation Very high

BACKGROUND

The tsunami hazard could affect the east and west coasts of the Waikato CDEM Group area. The sources for tsunami include:

- Distant sources such as South America (particularly southern Peru), and to a much lesser extent Cascadia (North America)

and the Aleutian Islands.

- Regional sources such as the Solomon Islands, and to a much lesser extent the southern New Hebrides (Vanuatu).

- Local sources, particularly the Tonga-Kermadec Trench to the north-east and the Hikirangi Trench off East Cape, and to a

lesser extent Mayor Island and the undersea landslides to the north of East Cape.

SCENARIO

An 8-9 magnitude earthquake on the Tonga-Kermadec Trench creates a 3-5 m tsunami that impacts the east coast of New

Zealand (with the area of impact within the Waikato CDEM Group area being the Coromandel Peninsula). Coastal communities

are inundated within 1 hour of the earthquake occurring, causing widespread damage and requiring the evacuation of

thousands of people from areas within the Waikato CDEM Group area, as well as neighboring CDEM Group areas (e.g. Bay of

Plenty).

HISTORICAL EXAMPLE

2011 Tohuku earthquake and tsunami that impacted Japan (the earthquake mechanism that caused this tsunami is similar to

the subduction zone off the east coast of New Zealand).

!

!

!

!

! !

132




REDUCTION


2. The likelihood of EXPOSURE to the hazard is reduced by:

- Tsunami-specific research to improve the understanding of this hazard and inform the management of the associated

risk.

- The use of district plans to restrict the use of land affected by a tsunami hazard (e.g. by avoiding critical support

services and ensuring changes to land use support emergency response planning).


- Tsunami-specific public education and awareness targeted at coastal communities (including self-evacuation based

on natural warnings).

- Pre-identified tsunami evacuation routes and safe-zones.

- The provision of tsunami advisories by the Pacific Tsunami Warning Centre to inform New Zealand decision making.

- The provision of tsunami advisories (watches and warnings) by MCDEM through the National Warning System.

- The dissemination of tsunami advisories to the community using public alerting tools.

133




Volcanic (ashfall only)

Risk assessment


Risk assessment

(AFTER reduction)

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Haz

ard

Exp

osu

re

Vuln

erab

ility

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Likely Region Very high Likely Region Very high

BACKGROUND

The Waikato CDEM Group area is vulnerable to a volcanic ashfall hazard from various sources both within and outside the area.

The primary source within the Waikato CDEM Group area is the Tongariro Volcanic Centre, which is the most active volcanic

centre in New Zealand and includes the recently active Mount Ruapehu, Ngauruhoe and Tongariro. The primary source outside

of the Waikato CDEM Group area is Mount Taranaki.

SCENARIO

The eruption of Mount Ruapehu, Ngauruhoe or Tongariro, coupled with strong winds from the south, result in ashfall across

parts of the Waikato CDEM Group area. Lifeline infrastructure (including electricity generation/transmission, roads and water

supplies) are impacted, along with agriculture.

HISTORICAL EXAMPLE

1995 eruption of Mount Ruapehu.

REDUCTION



and uncertain nature of the hazard.


- Research and monitoring to improve the understanding of the volcanic ashfall hazard that affects the Waikato CDEM

Group area.

- Ashfall-specific public education and awareness.

- Having infrastructure redundancies, where ashfall is expected to impact the level of service provided by that

infrastructure.

! !

!

134




Volcanic (caldera unrest)

Risk assessment


Risk assessment

(AFTER reduction)

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Haz

ard

Exp

osu

re

Vuln

erab

ility

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Likely Region Very high Likely Region Very high

BACKGROUND

There are a number of caldera volcanos within and adjacent to the Waikato CDEM Group area. These are:

- Taupo Volcanic Centre, which is a rhyolitic volcanic centre location in the south of the Waikato CDEM Group area and is

partially occupied by Lake Taupo.

- Maroa Volcanic Centre, which is a rhyolitic volcanic centre located to the north of Lake Taupo.

Unrest episodes have been recorded periodically across both these areas over the past century.

SCENARIO

The Volcanic Alert Level of Lake Taupo is raised to 1 (minor volcanic unrest) or 2 (moderate to heightened volcanic unrest),

resulting in unrest hazards such as steam eruptions, volcanic gases, earthquakes, landslides, uplift and subsidence. This unrest

raises the possibility of a significant volcanic eruption.

REDUCTION





- Monitoring of volcanic activity by Geonet to detect caldera unrest, along with the use of this information to provide

early warning information using the system of Volcanic Alert Levels.

- Research targeted at caldera volcanos to understand caldera unrest.

- Research to understand the broader implications of caldera unrest on the community so that it can be better planned

for and managed.

- A coordinated approach to managing this risk, supported by the Caldera Advisory Group.

!

!

135




Earthquake

Risk assessment


Risk assessment

(AFTER reduction)

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Haz

ard

Exp

osu

re

Vuln

erab

ility

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Possible Region High Possible Region High

BACKGROUND

New Zealand straddles the boundary between two tectonic plates; the Pacific Plate and the Australian Plate which move

towards each other by about 50 mm per year. The Waikato region includes some of the most seismically active parts of New

Zealand with four large active faults:

- The Kerepehi Fault within the Thames Valley

- The Ngangiho/Rangipo Faults in the southern part of the region

- The Wairoa North Fault in the northern part of the Waikato Valley

- The Taupo Fault Belt which extends between Taupo and Rotorua across the region’s boundary.

The area between Taupo and Rotorua is the most vulnerable part of the region for earthquakes. It contains many active fault

lines running in a north-east direction. Small earthquakes occur on a daily basis, though there are longer gaps between

larger earthquakes.

SCENARIO

A magnitude 6-7 earthquake, centered on either the Kerepehi, Ngangiho/Rangipo or Wairoa North faultlines, or within the

Taupo Fault Belt. Damage is sustained across the Waikato CDEM Group area.

HISTORICAL EXAMPLE

1987 Edgecumbe earthquake that was of a magnitude similar to what can expected from the Kerepehi Fault (as was also caused

by a similar faulting mechanism).

!

!

136




REDUCTION





- Research and monitoring to improve the understanding of the seismic hazard that affects the Waikato CDEM Group

area.

- The development and implementation of standards and regulations that relate to the seismic performance of

buildings and infrastructure.

- The monitoring, reporting and analysis of seismic activity by Geonet (while this does not provide an earthquake

warning, it does provide information that informs decisions after a major event, such as the expected nature of

aftershocks).

137




Infrastructure failure

Risk assessment


Risk assessment

(AFTER reduction)

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Haz

ard

Exp

osu

re

Vuln

erab

ility

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Almost

certain Region Extreme Possible Region High

BACKGROUND

Modern life is reliant on a range of services, including:

- Potable water supply, waste water treatment/disposal, and stormwater management.

- Electricity generation and supply.

- Telecommunications (including internet connectivity).

- Local and state highway road networks.

The infrastructure that provides these services is vulnerable to failure for a number of reasons, including the physical limitations

of the infrastructure, and a number of environmental factors that affect the infrastructure (e.g. natural hazards).

SCENARIO

An interruption in a service provided by lifeline infrastructure (e.g. roading, electricity, water or telecommunications),

impacting multiple districts for a period of days or weeks.

REDUCTION


- Lifeline utilities understanding the hazards their infrastructure is exposed to, the risks associated with that exposure,

and the implementation of measures to reduce that risk. This work is supported by the collective effort of the Waikato

Lifeline Utilities Group

2. The likelihood of EXPOSURE to the hazard reduced by

- Lifeline utilities understanding the extent of impact in the event of an interruption of service, and providing service

redundancies and/or contingencies. This work is also supported by the collective effort of the Waikato Lifeline Utilities

Group.


- Public education targeted at individuals and communities have contingencies in the event of an interruption of

service.

! !

! !

!

138




Land instability (long-term deformation)

Risk assessment


Risk assessment

(AFTER reduction)

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Haz

ard

Exp

osu

re

Vuln

erab

ility

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Almost certain Community High Almost certain Community High

BACKGROUND

New Zealand is located on the boundary of the Pacific and Australian plates. The movement at this plate boundary causes slow,

ongoing and permanent changes to natural ground levels (both rising and falling). The southern extent of the Waikato CDEM

Group area is affected by this hazard.

SCENARIO

Slow, ongoing, generally localized but permanent changes to natural ground levels due to tectonic plate movements, particularly

to the south of the Waikato CDEM Group area.

HISTORICAL EXAMPLE

Ongoing deformation currently being observed to the south-east of the Waikato CDEM Group area.

REDUCTION



nature of the hazard.


- Research and monitoring to improve the understanding of the land deformation hazard that affects the Waikato CDEM

Group area.

!

139




Marine oil spill

Risk assessment


Risk assessment

(AFTER reduction)

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Haz

ard

Exp

osu

re

Vuln

erab

ility

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Likely Nation Extreme Possible Region High

BACKGROUND

Numerous activities that occur both adjacent to and on the water have the potential to result in the discharge of hydrocarbons

(e.g. diesel, hydraulic oil and fuel oil) into the marine environment. This hazard is managed by Marine New Zealand, regional

councils and the operators of vessels through the Maritime Transport Act.

SCENARIO

The discharge of heavy fuel oil into the marine environment and the potential for further discharges, requiring a Tier 3

(national) response to be initiated.

HISTORICAL EXAMPLE

2011 grounding of the MV Rena and subsequent oil spill.

REDUCTION


- The requirements of the Maritime Transport Act, particularly the control of maritime operations to ensure the safe

passage of vessels and their cargo.

- The requirements of the Resource Management Act, including the regulation of activities that have the potential to

cause a discharge to the marine environment (e.g. shoreline refueling facilities).


- The requirements of the Maritime Transport Act, including the need contingency planning to minimize the impact of

a spill by containment and recovery.


- The requirements of the Maritime Transport Act, including the need contingency planning to minimize the impact of

a spill by containment and recovery.

! !

140




River flooding

Risk assessment


Risk assessment

(AFTER reduction)

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Haz

ard

Exp

osu

re

Vuln

erab

ility

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Likely Region Very high Possible Region High

BACKGROUND

Frequent, heavy rain and the steep gradient of many rivers means the region is prone to flooding from severe weather patterns,

especially tropical cyclones and depressions. River flooding is therefore the most frequent and widespread natural hazard

within the region.

The Kaimai/Coromandel Ranges and the catchments to the east of Lake Taupo typically have short, steep catchments, and rivers

and streams that have a high sediment load and are highly active and unpredictable with typically short warning times. The

lower reaches of the major river systems, the Waikato/Waipa, Waihou and Piako Rivers, have a lower gradient and are more

predictable during flood events.

The main areas subject to a river flood hazard within the Waikato CDEM Group area are:

- The Coromandel rivers and streams

- The Waihou and Piako river systems

- The Lower Waikato River (from Ngaruawahia north)

- The Waipa River

- Lake Taupo and tributaries.

SCENARIO

Repeated widespread and heavy rainfall across saturated catchments during winter, leading to river flows that have a 1 % AEP

in both the Waikato River and Hauraki Plains systems. Peak river levels persist for a number of weeks, restricting the operational

of land drainage systems and placing flood protection infrastructure (stopbanks, ponding areas and pump stations) under

operational pressure.

HISTORICAL EXAMPLE

1998 flood event in the Waikato River and Hauraki Plains.

! !

!

!

141




REDUCTION



- Research and monitoring to improve the understanding of the river flood hazard that affects the Waikato CDEM Group

area.

- The use of district plans to restrict the use of land affected by a river hazard (e.g. by not allowing dwellings to be

constructed).

- The provision of flood protection infrastructure to contain flood waters.


- The use of the Building Act to ensure building floor levels are raised appropriately.

- The use of district plans to restrict the use of land affected by a river hazard (e.g. by placing requirements on land

use where exposure to the hazard cannot be avoided).

- The provision of land drainage infrastructure to expedite the drainage of flood waters in order to reduce damage.

- The provision of rainfall forecasting by the Metservice.

- The provision of real-time river level and rainfall information by the Waikato Regional Council and Metservice.

- The provision of flood forecasting by the Waikato Regional Council.

142




Severe storm

Risk assessment


Risk assessment

(AFTER reduction)

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Haz

ard

Exp

osu

re

Vuln

erab

ility

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Likely Region Very high Likely District High

BACKGROUND

The Waikato CDEM Group area is vulnerable to severe storms due to its northern geographical location (meaning that it is

vulnerable to storms of tropical origin). The future effects of climate change is also likely to exacerbate its effects.

Severe storm events occur across the Waikato CDEM Group area, but tend to severely impact the Thames Valley area and low-

lying areas in other parts of the region. However, other severe weather events, including wind, tornados, thunder cells and

snowfall, can impact any part of the Waikato CDEM Group area, with severe wind events particularly common in the north-

east area.

SCENARIO

Rapidly deepening low pressure system moves across the Waikato CDEM Group area from the north west, bringing intense

rainfall, strong winds and a storm surge due to a combination of low atmospheric pressure and strong on-shore winds.

HISTORICAL EXAMPLE

2002 “weather bomb” that affected the Coromandel Peninsula, Hauraki Plains and South Waikato.

REDUCTION



- Those measures referred to for “river flooding” and “coastal”.


- Those measures referred to for “river flooding” and “coastal”.

- Building standards for other environmental factors (e.g. high winds).

- The provision of severe weather forecasting by the Metservice before and during an event (e.g. wind speed,

atmospheric pressure and tide level).

- The provision of real-time environmental information by the Waikato Regional Council and the Metservice (e.g. wind

speed, atmospheric pressure and tide level).

!

!

!

143




Volcanic (caldera eruption)

Risk assessment


Risk assessment

(AFTER reduction)

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Haz

ard

Exp

osu

re

Vuln

erab

ility

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Rare Nation High Rare Nation High

BACKGROUND

There are a number of caldera volcanos within and adjacent to the Waikato CDEM Group area. These are:

- Taupo Volcanic Centre, which is a rhyolitic volcanic centre location in the south of the Waikato CDEM Group area and is

partially occupied by Lake Taupo.

- Maroa Volcanic Centre, which is a rhyolitic volcanic centre located to the north of Lake Taupo.

While eruptions from these types of volcano are infrequent (millennia apart), their magnitude make them nationally (and even

internationally) significant.

SCENARIO

Eruption of Lake Taupo.

HISTORICAL EXAMPLE

The historically significant 180AD eruption of Lake Taupo.

REDUCTION


2. The likelihood of EXPOSURE to the hazard cannot be reduced given the widespread nature of this hazard.


- Monitoring of volcanic activity by Geonet, along with the use of this information to provide early warning information

using the system of Volcanic Alert Levels.

! !

! !

!

144




Volcanic (eruption)

Risk assessment


Risk assessment

(AFTER reduction)

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Haz

ard

Exp

osu

re

Vuln

erab

ility

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Likely Region Very high Likely District High

BACKGROUND

The Waikato CDEM Group area is vulnerable to a number of volcanic hazards from various sources both within and outside

the area. The most widespread, frequent and likely volcanic hazard is ashfall, and this is covered separately in this

document. This information relates to near source volcanic hazards such ballistic projectiles, lahars, lava flows, pyroclastic

flows and surges and debris avalanches.

The primary source of volcanic threat from within the Waikato CDEM Group area is the Tongariro Volcanic Centre (the most

active volcanic centre in New Zealand includes the recently active Mount Ruapehu, Mount Ngauruhoe and Mount Tongariro).

The primary sources of volcanic threat from outside the Waikato CDEM Group area are:

- Mount Taranaki: situated within the Taranaki region to the south-west of the group.

- Okataina Volcanic Centre: situated within the Bay of Plenty region to the east of the group.

- Mayor island: located offshore from the east coast of the Coromandel Peninsula.

- Auckland Volcanic Centre: located within the Auckland region to the north of the group.

SCENARIO

Eruption of either Mount Ruapehu, Tongariro or Ngauruhoe.

HISTORICAL EXAMPLE

The most eruptions of Mt Ruapehu (1995), Tongariro (2012) and Ngauruhoe (1974).

!

145




REDUCTION



- Restricting land uses in the immediate vicinity of active volcanoes (noting that these are located entirely within the

Tongariro National Park).

- Restricting the use of facilities within the Tongariro National Park where elevated unrest is detected.


- Monitoring of volcanic activity by Geonet, along with the use of this information to provide early warning information

using the system of Volcanic Alert Levels.

- The provision of eruption detection systems.

- The provision of early warning systems and evacuation procedures for the Whakapapa and Turoa ski fields.

- Restricting the use of facilities within the Tongariro National Park where a volcanic eruption is in progress.

- A coordinated approach to the management of this risk, implemented through the Central Plateau Volcanic Advisory

Group.

146




Coastal (surge/flood/erosion)

Risk assessment


Risk assessment

(AFTER reduction)

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Haz

ard

Exp

osu

re

Vuln

erab

ility

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Possible District High Possible Community Moderate

BACKGROUND

The Waikato CDEM Group area includes coastline on both the east coast and west coast of the North Island. Both coastlines

are varied (sandy beaches, rocky shorelines, sheltered harbours and tidal estuaries) and are also very dynamic.

From a short-term perspective, the coastlines are subject to changing weather and coastal marine conditions that can rapidly

lead to the erosion of the coastline, along with the inundation of low lying coastal land.

From a longer-term perspective, the coastlines are subject to a range of coastal processes that result in gradual erosion or

aggradation that is either progressive or cyclic.

SCENARIO

An ex-tropical cyclone moves in over the Waikato CDEM Group area from the north of New Zealand, leading to heavy seas and

a storm surge with a 1% AEP due to the combination on strong on-shore winds, low atmospheric pressure and a king tide.

HISTORICAL EXAMPLE

1938 coastal flooding event in the Firth of Thames that impacted the Hauraki Plains (before the existing coastal defences were

constructed).

!

!

!

!

! !

147




REDUCTION



- Research and monitoring to improve the understanding of the coastal hazard that affects the Waikato CDEM Group

area.

- The use of district plans to implement coastal setback lines as a basis for the control of land use (e.g. a requirement

for structures to be set back from the coastline).

- The provision of coastal protection infrastructure to either contain coastal flooding or reduce erosion.

- The provision of other solutions to increase the resilience of the coastline to erosion (e.g. coastal planting and the

rehabilitation of dune systems).


- The use of district plans and the Building Act to require minimum floor levels for dwellings based on coastal flood

levels.

- The forecasting of marine and coastal conditions by the Metservice and other organisations.

- The provision of real-time tide gauge information by the Waikato Regional Council and other organisations.

148




Dam break

Risk assessment


Risk assessment

(AFTER reduction)

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Haz

ard

Exp

osu

re

Vuln

erab

ility

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Possible Region High Rare Region Moderate

BACKGROUND

The Waikato CDEM Group area includes a number of large hydro-electric dams on the Waikato River that are operated by

Mercury. These dams are located upstream of several urban areas that are located adjacent to the Waikato River, including

Cambridge, Hamilton, Ngaruawahia and Huntly.

SCENARIO

The structural failure of the Karapiro Dam, causing a flood wave to travel down the Waikato River, with the resulting peak river

levels causing inundation in parts of Cambridge, Hamilton, Ngaruawahia and Huntly.

HISTORICAL EXAMPLE


REDUCTION


- Ensuring the Karapiro Dam (and the other dams in the Waikato Hydro Scheme) meet relevant engineering standards.

2. The likelihood of EXPOSURE to the hazard is not reduced.


- The undertaking of dam break research to improve the understanding of this hazard and inform the management

of associated risk.

!

!

149




Fire (structure)

Risk assessment


Risk assessment

(AFTER reduction)

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Haz

ard

Exp

osu

re

Vuln

erab

ility

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Almost certain Community High Likely Community Moderate

BACKGROUND

The Waikato CDEM Group area includes a number of urban areas that include a range of residential, commercial and industrial

land uses.

SCENARIO

A large structure fire in an urban area that requires the widespread evacuation due to the spreading of the fire or the

involvement of hazardous materials.

HISTORICAL EXAMPLE


REDUCTION


- Ensuring the compliance of various land and building uses with requirements that relate to fire safety (e.g. the control

of potential sources of ignition and the use of hazardous substances).

- Public education (e.g. raising awareness of potential sources of ignition).


- The emergency response service provided by Fire and Emergency New Zealand.

- Public education (e.g. the promotion of sprinkler systems, smoke alarms and evacuation planning).


- The emergency response service provided by Fire and Emergency New Zealand.

- Public education (e.g. the promotion of sprinkler systems, smoke alarms and evacuation planning).

! !

! !

!

150




Fire (vegetation)

Risk assessment


Risk assessment

(AFTER reduction)

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Haz

ard

Exp

osu

re

Vuln

erab

ility

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Almost certain District Very high Likely Community Moderate

BACKGROUND

The Waikato CDEM Group area includes a number of large forested areas, both indigenous forests and plantations (e.g. pine)

SCENARIO

A large vegetation fire in that threatens an urban area and requires the widespread evacuation.

HISTORICAL EXAMPLE


REDUCTION


- Public education (e.g. raising awareness regarding the potential for ignition from certain activities).

- Controlling the intentional setting of fires through the issuing of permits and enforcing fire bans.


- The emergency response service provided by the New Zealand Rural Fire Authority and Fire and Emergency New

Zealand.


- The emergency response service provided by the New Zealand Rural Fire Authority and Fire and Emergency New

Zealand.

! !

! !

!

151




Hazardous substance incident

Risk assessment


Risk assessment

(AFTER reduction)

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Haz

ard

Exp

osu

re

Vuln

erab

ility

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Almost certain District Very high Likely Community Moderate

BACKGROUND

The Waikato CDEM Group area includes a variety of industries that require the storage and use of hazardous substances for

day-to-day operations. The area also includes a number of significant transport routes that connect Auckland with Tauranga,

New Plymouth and further south to Wellington, and as a result involve the transportation of hazardous substances.

SCENARIO

A large release of a hazardous substance that requires the widespread evacuation of an urban area.

HISTORICAL EXAMPLE


REDUCTION


- Ensuring the transport, storage and use of hazardous substances complies with relevant regulations and standards.


- The emergency response service provided by various emergency services.


- The emergency response service provided by various emergency services.

! !

! !

!

152




Land instability (subsidence)

Risk assessment


Risk assessment

(AFTER reduction)

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Haz

ard

Exp

osu

re

Vuln

erab

ility

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Likely Community Moderate Likely Community Moderate

BACKGROUND

The Waikato CDEM Group area includes several areas that a vulnerable to subsidence due to the natural environment (e.g.

the karst landscape in the south-west of the area) and the built environment (e.g. underground mine operations in Waihi

and Huntly).

SCENARIO

The localized collapse of an abandoned mine operation, impacting one or two homes.

HISTORICAL EXAMPLE

2001 collapse of old gold mining tunnels in Waihi that impacted existing residential land use.

REDUCTION


- Ensuring that potential sources of subsidence are identified and stabilized (the built environment only).


- The undertaking of research to improve the understanding of this hazard and inform the management of associated

risk.

- Avoiding vulnerable land uses on land that may be affected by subsidence (and, where appropriate, retiring existing

land uses that are found to be vulnerable).

3. Other than general work undertaken to provide organizational readiness and community resilience, the VULNERABILITY of

the community to the hazard is not reduced.

! !

!

153




Land instability (landslide)

Risk assessment


Risk assessment

(AFTER reduction)

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Haz

ard

Exp

osu

re

Vuln

erab

ility

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Possible Community Moderate Possible Community Moderate

BACKGROUND

The Waikato CDEM Group area includes several areas that a vulnerable to landslides due to the natural environment.

Examples include:

- The Coromandel and Kaimai ranges, which are vulnerable to landslides and debris flows during periods of heavy

rainfall.

- The active Hipaua landslide to the south of Lake Taupo, which is driven by a combination of geothermal activity, seismic

activity and heavy rainfall.

SCENARIO

The mobilization of the Hipaua landslide due to a combination of seismic activity and heavy rainfall, impacting the community

of Little Waihi, leading to casualties, damage to buildings and infrastructure.

HISTORICAL EXAMPLE

Previous landslides in 1780, 1846 and 1910 that impacted Waihi Village.

REDUCTION


2. The likelihood of EXPOSURE to the hazard is not reduced.


- The ongoing monitoring and analysis of this active landslide feature (e.g. ground levels and thermal imaging) and

providing the community with this information.

- Public education and preparedness with a focus on this particular hazard.

- Monitoring of the broader environment and the incorporation of that information in the management of the risk

(e.g. rainfall forecasts and observations by Metservice, seismic activity by Geonet, and the combination of that

information to help inform when the likelihood of movement may be higher).

!

!

!

154




Mass casualty incident (land/air/sea)

Risk assessment


Risk assessment

(AFTER reduction)

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Haz

ard

Exp

osu

re

Vuln

erab

ility

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Likely Community Moderate Possible Community Moderate

BACKGROUND

The mass transportation of people occurs within or adjacent to the Waikato CDEM Group area, including on land, air and sea.

SCENARIO

A transport accident, resulting in mass casualties.

HISTORICAL EXAMPLE


REDUCTION


- Enforcing relevant transport safety regulations and standards (for land, air and sea).

- Improving the safety of transport corridors.

- Public education with a focus on transport safety.


- Controlling other uses around transport corridors.


- The emergency response services provided by the New Zealand Police, Fire and Emergency New Zealand and St John.

! !

! !

!

155




Terrorism

Risk assessment


Risk assessment

(AFTER reduction)

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Haz

ard

Exp

osu

re

Vuln

erab

ility

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Rare Region Moderate Rare Region Moderate

BACKGROUND

The Waikato CDEM Group area (as with the rest of New Zealand) may be impacted by a domestic or international terrorism

incident.

SCENARIO

A domestic or international terrorism incident.

HISTORICAL EXAMPLE


REDUCTION


- Various pieces of legislation.

2. The likelihood of EXPOSURE to the hazard is not reduced:

- Various pieces of legislation.


- The emergency response services provided by the New Zealand Police, Fire and Emergency New Zealand and St John.

! !

! !

!

156




Geothermal ground activity

Risk assessment


Risk assessment

(AFTER reduction)

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Haz

ard

Exp

osu

re

Vuln

erab

ility

Like

lihoo

d

Con

seq

uen

ce

Ris

k

Likely Individual Low Likely Individual Low

BACKGROUND

The Waikato CDEM Group area includes several areas of geothermal ground activity.

SCENARIO

A geothermal eruption, impacting a localized and undeveloped area.

HISTORICAL EXAMPLE

2005 geothermal eruption near Reporoa.

REDUCTION



- Research and monitoring to improve the understanding of the geothermal ground activity hazard that may affect the

Waikato CDEM Group area.

- The use of district plans to restrict the use of land affected by geothermal ground activity (e.g. by not allowing

dwellings to be constructed).

3. Other than general work undertaken to provide organizational readiness and community resilience, the VULNERABILITY of

the community to the hazard is not reduced.

!

!

157



Attachment 2: Action Plan The delivery of this Action Plan will require the coordinated efforts of all Group Members and Partners. Annual work plans are expected to be established showing how each Member/Partner will contribute to the following Action Plan with annual reporting to CEG / Joint Committee on achievements. The actions below indicate where primary responsibility for the actions will rest with the GEMO (G), local CDEM work programmes (L) or a combination (C).

CDEM Plan

Section Actions

Year (1 = 16/17)

A = Annual

1 2 3-5 A

All 0. C: Develop a project plan for delivery of major projects, including scope, deliverables, resources/costs.

Section 2:

Understanding and Communicating

Risks

1. C: Collation of hazard and risk information, gap analysis and data improvement programme.

2. G: Ongoing development of the regional multi-hazard lifeline utilities vulnerability assessment project..

3. C: Ongoing implementation of the hazard and risk data improvement programme..

4. Identify the consequences for recovery of the top 5 priority hazard risks.

5. G: Develop a platform for collection, collation and sharing of hazard and risk information (Waikato Hazards Database).

6. C: Promote the availability of hazard and risk information to CDEM Partners, stakeholders and the community.

7. Local authorities to utilise risk consequence information to communicate with local communities to assist them to understand the possible consequences on their community and identify their risk tolerance level

8. Local authorities to develop strategic planning for recovery processes to better inform reduction, readiness, response and recovery (immediate, medium and long term)

Section 3:

Coordination of risk reduction

initiatives.

9. Audit the hazard risks identified in the Waikato Regional Policy Statement, Regional Plans, District Plans and Long Term Plans and report their effectiveness as a CDEM mechanism for risk reduction.

10. G: Review risk reduction reporting requirements to CEG to support a more coordinated approach across all agencies.

11. G: Implement the risk reduction framework to facilitate a consistent approach to risk reduction across the Group.

12. C: Review processes for integrating local authority planning with other CDEM resilience building activities.

13. G: During the next review periods, review the effectiveness of the planning documents (eg: RPS) as a CDEM mechanism for defining acceptable risk.

14. Collate data from local authority preparation for recovery with local communities to understand risk tolerance.

Section 4: Being

Ready – Our Communities

15. L: Incorporate hazard and risks (including infrastructure risks) as part of community response and recovery planning.

16. C: Use Waikato Hazard and Risk database to prioritise community response and recovery planning and vice versa.

17. G: Develop and implement a community engagement strategy with a focus on coordinating initiatives amongst key partner agencies.

18. Engage with other CDEM groups to identify their approaches to strategic planning for recovery.

19. L: Develop a prioritised programme for development and updates of CRPs.

20. L: Test, review and maintain community resilience plans.

158

Attachment 2: Action Plan



CDEM Plan Section

Actions

Year (1 = 16/17)

A = Annual

1 2 3-5 A

21. Review the CRP framework post the pilots for recovery planning and assess ‘the fit’ of combining response and recovery planning with local communities.

22. G: Develop a programme to measure community resilience outcomes.

23. L: Establish and sustain communication processes between communities and CDEM.

24. L: Complete a stock take of CDC facilities and plan for removal / development.

25. L: Implementation of CDC plan.

26. G: Establish standardised arrangements for CDC administration and communication arrangements.

27. C: Implementation of CDC arrangements Group-wide.

28. L: Promote CDC locations appropriate to community requirements.

29. G: Establish and sustain protocols with volunteer groups for the oversight and mobilisation and coordination of community volunteer capability.

30. C: Develop and deliver a programme for CDEM trained volunteers in partnership with our preferred volunteer coordination partner.

31. G: Establish CDEM relationships with large scale businesses.

32. G: Establish CDEM relationships with professional bodies and institutions.

33. C: Promote and build business engagement with CDEM (eg: Waikato Hazard and Risk Information).

34. G: Establish and sustain protocols with businesses for the oversight and mobilisation of skills and assets during an emergency response and recovery

35. C: Develop evaluation framework to measure the effectiveness of regional and local business engagement by CDEM.

Section 5: Being

Ready – The Group

36. C: Develop situational awareness processes.

37. C: Implementation and exercising of EMIS and other ICT solutions.

38. C: Improve and align all Group standard operating procedures based on an agreed minimum requirement.

39. G: Identify and implement a plan addressing the accommodation arrangements for the GEMO/GECC.

40. C: Support the development of the Integrated Training Framework (ITF). Include training for Recovery Managers.

41. C: Develop and implement a training exercise programme to deliver the ITF.

42. C: Develop the professional capability of professional CDEM staff through goal setting, reviews, training opportunities.

43. G: Develop protocols for sharing of CDEM staff resources across the Group and maintaining key positions during a prolonged activation, including recovery.

44. G: Establish a Group business continuity forum for members to review

organisational resilience and identify collective areas for improvement. As a first step in the establishment of this forum, members are to provide a copy of their current business continuity arrangements/plans in order to establish a baseline for future improvements.

45. C: Implement the Warning Systems Strategy

46. C: Improve and sustain interagency operational communications protocols (including the principles of consistent messaging).

47. G: Establish and sustain the coordination of interagency public information and social media management.

159




CDEM Plan Section

Actions

Year (1 = 16/17)

A = Annual

1 2 3-5 A

48. C: Review resource requirements for a major Group response.

49. C: Develop a Group Logistics Plan for use of the resources.

Section 7:

Recovery Arrangements

50. C: Educate the Group in respect of the requirements of the 2016 amendments to the CDEM Act 2002 and the ‘Strategic Planning for Recovery’ Director’s Guideline which require local authorities to prepare communities for recovery.

51. G: Complete an audit of the Group Recovery arrangements against the legislative requirements and relevant recovery related Director’s Guidelines and information.

52. L: Update Local Recovery Plans in line with the legislation and Group Plan. A work programme for strategic planning for recovery activity must be set.

53. L: Report on achievements against Recovery Plan actions.

54. G: Develop protocol for Controllers and Recovery Managers to transition from response to recovery.

55. C: Review Group and local authority capacity to staff and sustain recovery over an extended timeframe and document reciprocal arrangements.

56. C: Train Local Recovery Managers in their role and responsibilities.

57. C: Promote the inclusion of strategic planning for recovery as a key aspect of an integrated approach to community engagement across all aspects of council business.

58. G: Develop guidelines that support local authorities to document their local recovery arrangements.

Section 8:

Partnerships 59. G: Develop a Terms of Reference for the Emergency Services Advisory Group.

60. G: Develop a Welfare Coordination Group (WCG) business plan and report on progress to CEG.

61. G: Review the WCG Plan.

62. L: Develop local welfare plans.

63. C: Report on iwi engagement across the Group on CDEM matters.

64. G: Support capability development of lifeline utilities.

65. G: Maintain and review the Waikato Lifelines Utilities Group (WLUG) business plan and report on progress to CEG.

Section 9: Our

Structure 66. G: Establish CDEM Group-wide work programmes, including securing funding.

67. C: Agree financial delegations between the Group Controllers, Local Controllers and the Joint Committee

68. C: Review the CDEM delivery model to achieve greater coordination of work programmes

69. G: Consider the establishment of a Group Relief Fund.

Section 10:

Monitoring and Evaluation

70. C: KPIs established and reported on by each Member. Evaluation and reporting of achievement against all work programmes.

71. C: MCDEM Capability Assessment Review (including moderated assessments for each Waikato CDEM Group member)

72. C: Review CDEM Group Plan

73. C: Evaluation and reporting of achievement against all work programmes (aligned to actions and objectives in this Plan).

74. Develop a performance framework to measure and monitor progress towards strategic planning for recovery.

160




CDEM Plan Section

Actions

Year (1 = 16/17)

A = Annual

1 2 3-5 A

75. G: Establish reporting programme to provide oversight that CDEM Partners are meeting their responsibilities under the National CDEM Plan.

161



Attachment 3: Glossary Term Definition

4R’s The four parts of emergency management, being reduction, readiness, response and recovery:

a. Reduction: identifying and analysing long-term risks to human life and property from natural or non-natural hazards; taking steps to eliminate these risks if

practicable, and, if not, reducing the magnitude of their impact and/or the likelihood of their occurring.

b. Readiness: developing operational systems and capabilities before a civil defence emergency happens, including self-help and response programmes for the

general public, and specific programmes for emergency services, lifeline utilities, and other agencies.

c. Response: actions taken immediately before, during, or directly after a civil defence emergency to save lives and property, and to help communities recover.

d. Recovery: the coordinated efforts and processes used to bring about the immediate, medium-term, and long-term holistic regeneration and enhancement of a

community following an emergency.

(the) Act Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002.

Administering authority Means, in relation to the CDEM Group, the administering authority appointed under section 23 of the CDEM Act (refer section 8).

Area In relation to a Civil Defence Emergency Management Group. –

a. means all the districts of the local authorities that are members of the Group; and

b. extends to –

a. the landward boundary of the territorial authorities in the Group; and

b. the seaward boundary of the regions of regional councils for unitary authorities in the Group

Capability a. An organisation’s ability to undertake functions, such as provide a service or fulfil a task; and

b. The effectiveness of co-operation and coordination arrangements across agencies for the delivery of resources in the event of an emergency.

Capacity The adequacy of resources in terms of quantity and suitability of personnel, equipment, facilities and finances.

CDEM Group (the Group): The consortia of local authorities, emergency services, lifeline utilities, welfare services organisations, Government departments and non-government organisations

with a role in CDEM in the region.

CDEM Group Members The local authorities within the Waikato area.

CDEM Partners Those organisations that are part of the wider ‘CDEM Group’ as defined above, excluding CDEM Group Members.

Civil Defence Emergency

Management (CDEM)

Civil Defence Emergency Management (cf. s.4).

a. The application of knowledge, measures, and practices that:

i. Are necessary or desirable for the safety of the public or property; and

ii. Are designed to guard against, prevent, reduce, or overcome any hazard or harm or loss that may be associated with any emergency; and

b. Includes, without limitation, the planning, organisation, coordination, and implementation of those measure, knowledge and practices.

Civil Defence Centre (CDC) The CDEM Group’s local centres for direct involvement with the public for:

The provision of advice and information about an emergency;

162

Attachment 3: Glossary



Controller – Group A person appointed under s. 26 of the Act to exercise the functions and powers of the Group Controller or those functions and powers delegated by the CDEM Group

during a state of local emergency within the Group for which they are appointed.

Controller – Incident Usually the senior first responder to an incident. Incident control may transfer based on statutory or agreed responsibilities for control at particular incidents.

Controller – Local A person or persons appointed under s. 27 who may exercise the powers of a Controller or the functions and powers of the Group Controller if so delegated during a

state of local emergency within the Group for which they are appointed.

Coordinated Incident

Management System

(CIMS)

The New Zealand Coordinated Incident Management System. An agreed method of incident management to be employed by emergency responders for efficient

incident management.

Coordinating Executive

Group (CEG)

Coordinating Executive Group established under s. 20 of the Act, comprising representatives from the Joint Committee Member local authorities, Police, Fire and

Emergency New Zealand, Ambulance, District Health Boards and the Ministry of Civil Defence Emergency Management.

Distal Far from the area, ie, distal tsunami are typically generated from America and have a travel time > 8-10 hours. Distal volcanos are typically > 50km from the

referenced area.

Emergency Means a situation that:

a. Is the result of a happening, whether natural or otherwise, including without limitation, any explosion, earthquake, eruption, tsunami, land movement,

flood, storm, tornado, cyclone, serious fire, leakage or spillage of any dangerous gas or substance, technological failure, infestation, plague, epidemic, failure

of or disruption to an emergency service or lifeline utility, or actual or imminent attack or warlike act; and

b. Causes or may cause loss of life or injury or illness or distress or in any way endangers the safety of the public or property in New Zealand or any part of New

Zealand; and

c. Cannot be dealt with by emergency services, or otherwise requires a significant and coordinated response under the Act.

National CDEM Act 2002.

Emergency Management

Office (EMO)

Offices established at local and Group level to coordinate CDEM activities (see also GEMO).

Emergency Operations

Centre (EOC)

The CDEM Group’s local Emergency Operations Centres in local authorities, for the coordination of local response activities, the management of local civil defence

centres, and the care of local communities.

Emergency services The New Zealand Police, Fire and Emergency New Zealand, National Rural Fire Authority, rural fire authorities, and hospital and health services, (i.e. District Health

Boards).

National CDEM Act 2002.

Temporary shelter for evacuees;

Registration of evacuees and relocation to accommodation; and

The provision of aid to affected communities.

NB the Guide makes reference to Reception Centres, Evacuation Centres and Assembly Areas. The general trend of CDEM Group and the Ministry now is to refer to Civil

defence centres.

163




Evacuation The temporary relocation (either spontaneous or organised) of all or part of a particular population or geographical region from a location that has been or is about to

be affected by an emergency, to a place considered to be safe.

Evacuee A person unable or unwilling to stay in their usual place of residence as a result of an incident or emergency.

Geographic Information

System (GIS)

A Geographic Information System (GIS), or geographical information system, captures, stores, analyses, manages, and presents data that is linked to location.

Group Emergency

Coordination Centre

(GECC)

The CDEM Group’s Emergency Coordination Centre for the coordination of regionally significant events and/or the management of critical resources during a local

emergency.

Group Emergency

Management Office

(GEMO)

An office established to coordinate CDEM activities on behalf of the Joint Committee.

Hazard Has the same meaning as in section 4 of the CDEM Act and means something that may cause, or contribute substantially to the cause of, an emergency.

Joint Committee Means a joint standing committee established under section 12 of the CDEM Act comprising the Regional Council and Territorial Authorities within the Waikato region.

The joint standing committee is formed under clause 30(1)(b) of Schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002.

Lead agency The organisation with current responsibility for managing an emergency.

Lifeline utility An entity named or described in Schedule 1 of the Act. These include Radio New Zealand, Television New Zealand, Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch

International Airports, specific provincial airports, specific port companies, gas industry, electricity industry, water industry, waste water and sewerage industry,

telecommunications industry, roads industry, fuel industry and rail industry.

Local authority (LA) Means a Regional Council or Territorial Authority (TA).

Local emergency A state of local emergency declared under section 68 or 69 of the Act.

Local Transition Period Means a local transition period notified under section 94B of the Act

National significance Includes, without limitation, any case where the Minister of Civil Defence or the Director of Civil Defence Emergency Management considers that:

a. There is widespread public concern or interest; or

b. There is likely to be significant use of resources; or

c. It is likely that the area of more than one CDEM Group will be affected; or

d. It affects or is likely to affect or is relevant to New Zealand’s international obligations; or

e. It involves or is likely to involve technology, processes, or methods that are new to New Zealand; or

f. It results or is likely to result in or contribute to significant or irreversible changes to the environment (including global).

National Transition

Period

Means a national transition period notified under section 94A of the Act

Recovery Manager -

Group

Appointed by the CDEM Group to give effect to Group coordination of recovery during and following an emergency.

164




Recovery Manager - Local Appointed by a Territorial Authority or Emergency Operating Area to give effect to local coordination of recovery during and following an emergency.

Regional significance Due to the magnitude or geographic spread of the incident, one or more EOC’s has been activated to manage the emergency, which now requires ECC coordination of

critical resources; or

A warning of a significant event that will have a regional impact has been received; or

Coordinated assistance is required to support an adjoining CDEM Group.

Response The actions taken immediately before, during, or directly after a civil defence emergency to save lives, protect property and to support communities in the transition to

recovery. Response starts prior to an emergency being declared and lasts until the immediate threats to lives, safety and property are over, and systems and

processes are in place to manage the recovery process.

Resilience The capacity to survive a crisis and thrive in an uncertain world

Risk The uncertainty relating to achievement of objectives, measured in terms of the combination of likelihood and consequences of a risk event occurring.

SoP Standard Operating Procedure.

State of emergency Has the same meaning as in section 4 of the CDEM Act and means a state of national emergency or a state of local emergency.

State of local emergency Has the same meaning as in section 4 of the CDEM Act and means a state of local emergency declared under section 68 or section 69.

State of national

emergency

Has the same meaning as in section 4 of the CDEM Act and means a state of national emergency declared under section 66.

Territorial Authority (TA): A City Council or District Council.

WCG Welfare Coordination Group

165

Doc # 11949552


Date: 15 March 2018



Subject: Appointment of Local Controllers


Purpose 1. To provide the Joint Committee with an opportunity to consider the appointment of Local and Group

Controllers.


1. That the report Appointment of Local Controllers (Doc # 11949552 dated 15 March 2018) be received, and

2. That the Joint Committee endorse the recommendation of the Controller Appointment Sub-Group and appoint Doug Wilcox as a Local Controller, and 3. That the Joint Committee endorse the recommendation of the Controller Appointment Sub-Group and appoint Terrena Kelly as a Local Controller, and 4. That the Joint Committee endorse the recommendation of the Controller Appointment Sub-Group and appoint Andrew BuBear as a Group Controller, and 5. That the Joint Committee endorse the recommendation of the Controller Appointment Sub-Group and appoint Mark Bang as a Group Controller, and 6. That the Joint Committee accept the resignation of Chris McLay as a Group Controller.

Background 2. The Controller Appointment Sub-Group was convened to evaluate two Local Controller and two Group

Controller (alternative) candidates in order to address vacancies at the Waitomo and Taupo District Councils and to provide greater redundancy at the Group Level. The Sub-Group comprises the Group Controller/Manager to evaluate competence/experience, a representative from NZ Police to evaluate aptitude for working across agencies, the Chief Executive of the respective council (or the administering authority in the case of a Group Controller) and a representative from the CEG to ensure that the candidate meets the professional expectations of local government.

3. All four candidates were unconditionally endorsed by the Sub-Group for appointment by the Joint

Committee. One candidate was identified as requiring further experiential opportunities for their development in a Controller context but, noting their other engagement and leadership skills, it was not felt that this should hinder their appointment.

4. The following is a brief outline of each candidate.

166

Doc # 11949552 Page 2

Local Controller Candidates Candidate 1 – Doug Wilcox, Taupo District Council Applicable emergency management experience 5. Doug was hired as a contractor by Taupo District Council in July 2017 to carry out a number of CDEM

related activities to include an EOC review, risk assessment and a technology/software fit for purpose review. He was also responsible for reviewing a number of Memoranda of Understanding. This, combined with his existing knowledge of the local area and involvement with Iwi, has provided Doug a solid grounding in the requirements and challenges for CDEM across the community.

6. From 2014-2016, Doug was appointed as the CDEM Community Emergency Manager for the Gisborne CBD area while employed at Eastern Institute of Technology (EIT) Tairawhiti. While there he established a MOU partnership and provided EIT facilities for the Gisborne District Council EOC during their office building rebuild project. As Community Emergency Manager, Doug was involved in a number of non-declared (mainly weather based) events.

7. Between 2005-2007 EOC Doug was a member of Far North District Council where he was an EOC team member working Planning and Intelligence. He is CIMS4 qualified and has participated in a number of exercises.

Leadership 8. Doug has held a Manager position at the Eastern Institute of Technology and was the CEO of Poverty Bay

Rugby Football Union.

Appointment Sub-Group Comments

9. Doug researched the role and understood its demands. Past work history would indicate that he can work with different people, make decisions and manage the requirements of the role. He has a good link to local Iwi. In addition, he understands local issues, hazards and the broader local community. He demonstrated a number of leadership traits that would support the role.

10. Doug is keen to take on additional training over and above what is required. He also had the support of

the CEO and the CEO’s commitment to the requirements of the role, to include his use as a Controller in other areas when suitably experienced.

11. The Sub-Group endorses this candidate.

Candidate 2 – Terrena Kelly, Waitomo District Council Applicable emergency management experience 12. During her time in local government, Terrena has been involved in Emergency Operating Centre (EOC)

roles, including more recently the EOC Intelligence Manager role. Terrena has also worked as a volunteer Ambulance Officer for St John Ambulance for approximately 20 years, working as a qualified Emergency Medical Technical (EMT) on front line ambulances. Through this role Terrena has a well-established relationship with the local emergency services.

Leadership 13. Terrena has worked in Local Government for 16+ years in RMA planning and public policy roles, and is

currently the Group Manager Compliance at Waitomo District Council. Terrena holds the qualifications Bachelor of Social Sciences (Geography), Honours in Geography (First Class), Post Graduate Diploma in

167

Doc # 11949552 Page 3

Resources and Environmental Planning, and Masters of Public Policy; and has recently completed the (Massey University and MCDEM) residential component of the Civil Defence Controller course.

Appointment Sub-Group Comments 14. Terrena is a confident and capable individual with support of the local emergency services. She

demonstrated a solid understanding of the expectations surrounding the role, particularly in the area of urgent decision making. Her understanding of the operations of council and the local environment, to include adjoining council environments, would aid her significantly in the role.

15. The CEO appears to have a high degree of confidence in Terrena and her leadership abilities. In addition,

Terrena regularly engages with council as part of her BAU and demonstrates acumen in this area.

16. The Sub-Group endorses this candidate.

Group Controller (alternatives) Candidate 3 – Andy BuBear, GEMO Applicable emergency management and leadership experience 17. Andy joined the Ministry of Transport (MOT) as a Traffic Officer in 1986, working in Christchurch and

Auckland. In July 1992 when the MOT and Police merged he was in Central Auckland and moved immediately to General Duties Policing. In 1995 he was assigned to a Criminal Investigation Unit and in 1996 commenced training as a Detective in the Criminal Investigation Branch (CIB) working on numerous squads and a number of high profile cases.

18. In 1999 he moved to Thames as a Detective, responsible for all facets of serious crime prevention and

investigation across the Coromandel Peninsula before moving to Cambridge in 2002. He remained in the CIB and was assigned to various squads such as Law Enforcement Team, Child Abuse Team and General CIB. He promoted to General Duties Sergeant in 1995 and returned to front line policing in Hamilton leading a team of first responders, then promoted to Detective Sergeant in 2006. He led various CIB Teams and started the first Family Violence Unit in the Waikato in 2008. In 2009 he completed a six month UN Peacekeeping and Mentoring mission in Timor Leste.

19. He remained a Detective Sergeant at Hamilton Central leading numerous teams until returning to uniform

and leading multiple teams of first responders across the Waikato District. He has held assignments as The Waikato Strategic Planning and Operations Manager, Hamilton City Response Manager, Waikato Deployment Manager and Waikato Highway Patrol and Strategic Traffic Unit Team Leader.

20. He left the Police in February 2017 after 31 year service and joined the GEMO team as the Hamilton City

Council Emergency Management Planning and Strategy Coordinator. He held this position until January 2018 when he was appointed to his current role as the Waikato GEMO Team Leader - Operations.

Appointment Sub-Group Comments 21. Andy BuBear is clearly a very competent and experienced operator in emergency environments. He has

also demonstrated a natural ability to engage at all levels from Minister to community. He has quickly developed an understanding of the CDEM environment and the challenges it presents. Though little experience to date with council practices he keen to learn more and has gone out of his way to do so.

22. Andy has demonstrated his ability to quickly fit in and be recognised as an authority figure/leader at the

Local emergency level. His interpersonal skills are such that he is able to do this with ease. 23. The CEO has the necessary confidence in the individual and the Group Controller sees the individual as

fully competent in the role of Group Controller (alternative) today. He has recently completed the (Massey University and MCDEM) residential component of the Civil Defence Controller course.

168

Doc # 11949552 Page 4

24. The Sub-Group endorses this candidate. Candidate 4 – Mark Bang, GEMO Applicable Emergency Management and Leadership Experience 25. Mark Bang held the position of Civil Defence Manager and Principal Rural Fire Officer for Timaru District

Council for ten years. Prior to this he was employed by the council in resource planning. During this time Mark engaged in the following:

Led the roll out and delivery of training for Level 2 & 4 CIMS across South Canterbury Local Authorities and Emergency Services.

Lead the response to 2006 South Canterbury snow storm (un-declared). EOC was full staffed for a week, and partially for the next 3 weeks. The leadership and advice resulted in effective multi-agency coordination of local, Group and National resources (including Armed Forces) across all 3 South Canterbury Local Authorities to restore engineering lifelines, psycho-social support and public information to the community.

Lead the coordinated multi-agency responses to several flooding events in South Canterbury.

Member of National Incident Management Team for Rural Fire (Planning / Intelligence Manager). Incident Controller of several fires requiring Incident Control Point set-up, aerial and ground attack and prolonged mop up activity requiring rotation of people and resources.

Deployed, as Crew Boss, to USA as a member of an International Fire Force to support wildfire management in Washington State and Northern California.

26. In 2008 Mark moved on to hold several positions with Fonterra to include leadership over a number large

projects. Even though unrelated to his role, Mark went on to lead the Fonterra response to the second Christchurch Earthquake. This entailed providing emergency water stations (vats) to communities and the logistics of keeping them full, using the fleet of Milk Tankers. Later supported City Care in trucking water to City reservoirs and organising trains of water to come from North Island.

27. Mark recently joined the GEMO team as Team Leader – Group Services.

Appointment Sub-Group Comments 28. Mark is very capable manager with excellent interpersonal skills. His previous CDEM experience leading

responses and coordinating logistics for some complex and challenging environments will be an asset. He has a detailed understanding of Local Councils but has demonstrated he also has the ability to operate at the more strategic Group level.

29. The CEO has confidence in the individual and the Group Controller believes that Mark’s previous

experience provides a solid foundation for being a Group Controller (alternative). 30. The Sub-Group endorses this candidate. Resignation from Duties Chris McLay has fulfilled the role of alternative Group Controller for a number of years. The Waikato CDEM Group acknowledge his dedication and sacrifice in occupying this position during this period and thank him for his service. Chris will be formally removed from the register of appointed Group Controllers.

Legislative Context 31. Section 27 (1) of the CDEM Act 2002 states:

27 Appointment of Local Controller (1) A Civil Defence Emergency Management Group may appoint 1 or more persons to be a Local

Controller, and direct that person or persons to carry out any of the functions and duties of, or delegated to, that Group's Group Controller and to exercise the powers of Controllers in the area for

169

Doc # 11949552 Page 5

which the Group Controller is appointed, including, but not limited to, the powers in sections 86 to 94.

32. Section 26(2) of the CDEM Act 2002 states:

26 Appointment of Group Controller (2) A Group must appoint, either by name or by reference to the holder of an office, at least 1 suitably qualified and experienced person to be the person or persons who are to perform the functions and duties and exercise the powers of the Group Controller on the occurrence of a vacancy in the office of Group Controller or the absence from duty of the Group Controller for any reason, for the duration of the vacancy or absence.

170

Doc # 11951502


Date: 16 March 2018



Subject: Appointment of Group Public Information Manager (PIM)


Purpose 1. To provide the Joint Committee with an update on staffing arrangements for the Group Public

Information Manager (PIM).


1. That the report Appointment of Group Public Information Manager (PIM) (Doc # 11951502 dated 16 March 2018) be received for information.

Background 2. Following the resignation of the previous Group PIM, Stephen Ward, there is a need to appoint a

new Group PIM. The role of Group PIM requires an individual with establish relationships or the ability to form strong relationships across the Group communications/PIM staff. It also requires an understanding of communication channels and public messaging, and the ability to manage a team of individuals in a high stress environment.

Nominated candidate 3. Nicola Chrisp has been identified by the Group Controller/Manager as a suitable candidate for

the role. Nicola is currently employed by Waikato Regional Council (the Council) as the manager of communications and engagement. This role requires management of a group of six teams working across education, partnerships, customer engagement, communications, digital and marketing. Prior to working for the Council, Nicola worked in a variety of roles across the private sector, local government and for not for profit organisations. This roles have developed her strategic planning, marketing, public relations and stakeholder management skills. Her leadership qualities were recognised by SOLGIM in 2016 when she was awarded the SOLGIM emerging leader of the year award.

4. Nicola’s appointment has been endorsed by the Coordinating Executive Group.

171

Doc # 11952382


Date: 16 March 2018



Subject: Group Controller’s Update


Purpose 1. To provide the Joint Committee with an update on progress with the new GEMO/GECC facility,

and an overview of recent personnel deployments.


1. That the report Group Controller’s update (Doc # 11952382 dated 16 March 2018) be received for information.

New GEMO/GECC Facility Status 2. The move to the new facility is complete. The GEMO BAU area is fully operational to include all

Duty Officer situational awareness systems thanks in particular to the efforts of Derek Phyn (WRC GIS) and Caleb Gabbie (WRC IT). The ‘hot’ Operations Centre is awaiting some minor cosmetic work such as fitting radios on shelves, installing white board covering to walls and hanging signage. The ‘ready state’ computers, monitor wall and radio antennas are activation-ready subject to system testing and staff training.

3. The training and conference rooms are complete with computer linked monitors and projectors

operational. Wireless routers with both standard WRC and direct to internet connections are online along with computer/phone ports for coordination centre expansion into these rooms. The adjoining media briefing/social media monitoring/multi-media workshop area is also fully operational with both TV and computer monitor feed capability.

4. At this time there are a few outstanding items but nothing outside what would be expected

during start-up. The facilities access control administration, though secure, is still undergoing system modification to meet all operational requirements. For example, the requirement for card access to the top floor needs to be removed from the building management system and after-hours access override arrangements for city Safe single-operator safety needs to be programmed. The redundant satellite system for internet access still needs to be routed to the server room along with the flood gauge telemetry back-up system. Finally, building signage is being produced for both indoor and parking area. These matters should be completed within two weeks of this report if not sooner.

5. As far as the structural aspects of the building, a number of items have been identified for

repair/modification/completion as part of the sign off process. Again, nothing beyond what would be expected. These include such things as lose door handles, inappropriately positioned

172

Doc # 11952382 Page 2

thermostats, etc. One area of focus has been the sliding door between the ‘hot’ Operations centre and the Conference room. The door is not operating smoothly nor has it been secured as per specifications. Similar issues have occurred in the Genesis offices so the matter is being addressed through the contractors as a supplier quality issue. No time frame for addressing this issue has been identified as of yet.

6. In summary, the facility is fully operational from a BAU perspective with only system testing and

staff training required to bring the coordination centre online at optimal performance (we can function operationally in the BAU if required at this time). All forthcoming meetings have been scheduled at the centre along with a number of training courses. The training area will not be fully utilised until the new Capability Development person is on board.

Deployments January 7. GEMO staff were deployed to support the high tide event which impacted Thames Coromandel,

Hauraki and Waikato District Councils. The staff assumed positions within the Thames Valley EOC structure, under the direction of the Local Controller, to assist in establishing processes and to address initial staffing shortfalls caused, in part, by the holiday period. Staff included:

Irving Young – Supported Welfare Manager Andy BuBear – Assumed Operations Manager role Drew Merhtens – Assumed PIM role Gary Talbot (employment brought forward) – Group Recovery Manager Greg Ryan (WRC) – Established Intel processes 8. Danielle Kruger supported logistics (human resource requests and deployment) remotely from

the GECC. Broader Waikato Group resources were also deployed including:

Taupo NZRT under Ian Connon (4)

Building inspectors from HCC (3)

PIM support from WDC (1)

Social Media support (remote) WRC (1)

9. In addition, the Ruapehu District Council NZRT was also deployed from our neighbouring region. February 10. GEMO and HCC deployed staff to relieve the Taranaki GEMO staff responding to Ex Tropical

Cyclone Gita. Offers of assistance were also received from a number of other Waikato Group members to include Hauraki, Thames Valley EOA, South Waikato and Waipa District Councils. Staff included:

Drew Mehrtens – Assumed Group PIM role Danielle Kruger – Assumed Group Logistics Manager Irving Young – Assumed Group Response Manager/Welfare Manager Nigel Ward (HCC) – Assisted PIM function.

173

Doc # 11963681


Date: 16 March 2018



Subject: Technical Advisory Group review


Purpose 1. To provide the Joint Committee with the findings of the Technical Advisory Group (TAG) review

and provide an overview of planned actions.


1. That the report Technical Advisory Group review (Doc #11963681 dated 16 March 2018) be received for information.

Background 2. Following a number of events, including the response to the Kaikoura earthquake and the Port

Hills fires, the Acting Minister of Civil Defence at the time, Gerry Brownlee, initiated a cross-party review of the response to disasters. The report was due for release towards the end of last calendar year, but its release was delayed due to the elections. On 18 January 2018, the Minister made the findings of this review public in the report titled better responses to natural disasters and other emergencies in New Zealand.

TAG Recommendations 3. GEMO staff have had a preliminary review of the content of this report and whilst they are mostly

supportive of the recommendations in the report, some would have strong negative impacts on the Group, and some may require additional resourcing to implement.

4. Feedback on the recommendations is currently being sought from the CEG advisory groups and other subject matter experts. This feedback will be compiled into a report outlining the potential impacts of the review and recommended next steps for the Group.

5. All opportunities to provide feedback to the implementation team, both formal and informal, will be taken.

References Better responses to natural disasters and other emergencies in New Zealand https://www.dpmc.govt.nz/our-business-units/ministry-civil-defence-emergency-management/ministerial-review-better-responses

174

https://www.dpmc.govt.nz/our-business-units/ministry-civil-defence-emergency-management/ministerial-review-better-responses

https://www.dpmc.govt.nz/our-business-units/ministry-civil-defence-emergency-management/ministerial-review-better-responses

Doc # 11960674 Page 1


Date: 16 March 2018



Subject: Waikato CDEM Group Controller Policy


Purpose 1. To provide the Joint committee with an opportunity to consider the Waikato CDEM Group

Controller policy.


1. That the report Waikato CDEM Group Controller Policy (Doc # 11960674 dated 16 March 2018) be received, and

2. That the Joint Committee approve the proposed Waikato CDEM Group Controller Policy

Background 2. This policy establishes the appointment, structure and financial arrangements for the Waikato

Region CDEM Group (the Group) with regard to Local and Group Controllers. The purpose of this policy is to ensure the consistent application of arrangements across the CDEM Group in order to support the most efficient and effective use of Controller resources.

Assessment of Significance 3. Having regard to the decision making provisions in the LGA 2002, the CDEM Act 2002 and

Council’s Significance Policy, a decision in accordance with the recommendations is not considered to have a high degree of significance.

Policy Considerations 4. To the best of the writer’s knowledge, this decision is not significantly inconsistent with nor is

anticipated to have consequences that will be significantly inconsistent with any policy adopted by this local authority or any plan required by the Local Government Act 2002 or any other enactment.

Attachments Waikato CDEM Group Controller Policy (Doc # 11366638)

175

Doc # 11366638 Confidential

Waikato CDEM Group

Controllers Policy

Lee Hazlewood Approved xx

Review

176

Contents 1 PURPOSE...................................................................................................................... 1

2 BACKGROUND .............................................................................................................. 1

3 SCOPE ......................................................................................................................... 1

4 CONTROLLER DESIGNATION ............................................................................................ 1

4.1 Local Controller ...................................................................................................... 1

4.2 Group Controller and Deputy Group Controller ........................................................... 2

5 TIERS OF CONTROLLERS .................................................................................................. 2

6 CONTROLLER POOL ........................................................................................................ 2

6.1 Minimum Capacity .................................................................................................. 2

6.2 Inter-Regional Support/Surge Capacity ....................................................................... 3

7 INITIAL SELECTION AND APPPOINTMENT OF CONTROLLERS ................................................. 3

7.1 Candidates ................................................................................................................ 3

7.2 Considerations for role exclusion .................................................................................. 3

7.3 Process ..................................................................................................................... 3

7.3.1 All Controllers ..................................................................................................... 3

7.3.2 Tier 2 Controllers................................................................................................ 4

7.3.3 Tier 1 Controllers................................................................................................ 4

8 CAPABILITY DEVELOPMENT ............................................................................................ 4

8.1 Initial Training ....................................................................................................... 4

8.2 Experiential training (subject to further development) ................................................. 4

8.2.1 Exercises ........................................................................................................... 4

8.2.2 Experience ........................................................................................................ 4

8.2.3 Local Authority familiarisation .............................................................................. 5

8.2.4 Other training .................................................................................................... 5

8.2.5 Other requirements ............................................................................................ 5

9 REVIEW OF CONTROLLERS ............................................................................................. 5

10 SUPPORTING ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS .......................................................................... 5

10.1 Controller Financial Delegations ............................................................................... 5

10.2 Expenditure Reporting Thresholds ............................................................................ 6

10.3 Crisis/Emergency Threshold Guidance ........................................................................ 7

10.4 Determination and Notification of Non-Declared CDEM Emergency ............................... 9

10.5 Exigent Circumstances ............................................................................................ 9

11 Controller Protocols ...................................................................................................... 9

12 Review ....................................................................................................................... 10

177

1 11366638

1 PURPOSE This policy establishes the appointment, structure and financial arrangements for the Waikato Region CDEM Group (the Group) with regard to Local and Group Controllers. The purpose of this policy is to ensure the consistent application of arrangements across the CDEM Group in order to support the most efficient and effective use of Controller resources.

2 BACKGROUND

The CDEM Act 2002 requires the appointment of a Group Controller and permits the appointment of Local Controllers at the discretion of the CDEM Joint Committee. The Group has elected to adopt further classifications of controller for the purpose of:

Enhancing professional competency by focusing resources on a limited number of controllers,

authorised to work across administrative boundaries of the Group

Establishing levels competency for operating at the local, inter-local or group level

In addition, the Group has established a number of administrative enhancements to:

Ensure selection and appointment of the most appropriate candidate for Controller

Provide clarity regarding the use of controllers and supporting financial arrangements

3 SCOPE

This policy applies to all local authorities within the Waikato Region CDEM Group supporting the requirements set forth in the Response Arrangements section of the Waikato Region CDEM Group Plan 2016-2021. This policy does not apply to the controller arrangements for other partners or stakeholders within the Group (e.g. emergency services).

4 CONTROLLER DESIGNATION

4.1 Local Controller Controllers are designated as either the ‘Local Controller’ or ‘Deputy Local Controller’ for a specific event. The term “Deputy” is applied to the Controller that runs the shift in the Coordination Centre (ECC/EOC) when the primary Controller is off-shift. Deputies are obligated to follow the ‘controllers intent’ established by the primary Controller unless changes are dictated by the response. Any significant changes must be reported to and, where practical, approved by the primary Controller. This approach ensures consistency in direction and leadership. It can be best equated to the relationship between a ship’s captain and their first officer, in which the captain is always accountable (The relationship between these roles is further detailed in the Controller’s Protocol document). It should be noted that all Local Controllers are qualified to be the primary Local Controller. The designation of Deputy determines their status in a particular event and may be dictated by nothing more than who is immediately available from two equally qualified individuals currently rostered.

178

2 11366638

All rostered Local Controllers are automatically the controller for their Local Authority unless they are not available (e.g. injury, family commitments, out of area, etc.) or the Group Controller, in consultation with the CEO, deems otherwise for one of the following reasons:

Based on the hazard or community involved it is deemed that a more suitable qualified controller

should be appointed in that particular instance.

The rostered Local Controller is likely to be compromised due to personal proximity to the event

(physical or social).

The Local Controller requires (either on assessment of the Group Controller or on request of the Local

Controller themselves) a break from the assignment.

The Group Controller will identify an appropriate replacement and will facilitate that individual’s mobilization.

4.2 Group Controller and Deputy Group Controller The Waikato CDEM Group Controller/Manager is automatically the Group Controller unless they are not available (e.g. injury, family commitments, out of area, etc.) or the Joint Committee Chair deems otherwise for one of the following reasons:

The Group Controller/Manager is likely to be compromised due to personal proximity to the event

(physical or social)

On the recommendation of the National Controller or by request of the Group Controller/Manager

themselves to allow a break from the assignment

5 TIERS OF CONTROLLERS

On appointment, each controller will be assigned to a tier based on their preference, level of competence (training and experience), and their Chief Executive’s approval. Note: Upon adoption of this policy, competence will be based upon criteria established by the Group Manager/Controller. More objective requirements will be established by a committee as the programme matures and National Controller guidance develops. Tier 1 - Controllers approved to act a Controller for all Local Authority and as Group Controller. Tier 2 - Controllers approved to act as Controller for any Group member Local Authority. Tier 3 - Controllers approved to act as Controller for specified Local Authority only. Tier 4 - Candidates for succession planning. Eligible to act as Deputy Controllers for their employing Local

Authority with limited delegated responsibilities based on the assessment of the Local Controller.

6 CONTROLLER POOL

6.1 Minimum Capacity Emergency events can continue for extended periods of time and require 24 hour operations. Established international best practice requires that we assume a standard 8-hour shift pattern as soon as practical in order to maintain peak staff performance and sound decision making. Though the Waikato Group area has the potential for a region wide-event (e.g. ex-tropical cyclone), it is likely that only a limited number of the Group’s 10 EOCs will fully activate for support/coordination purposes. The remainder are more likely to be operating at the lower activation mode of Monitoring. When monitoring,

179

3 11366638

coordination centres need not have a Controller present but rather a suitable Response Manager answerable to a Controller covering multiple districts or even directly to the Group Controller.

To this end, the Waikato CDEM Group will maintain a sufficient number of controllers to cover 3 shifts (24 hours) for 4 concurrently activated EOCs and the Group ECC, with additional capacity of 2 more controllers to address absences.

Tier 1 5 3 GEMO and 2 from wider Group

Tier 2 12 Waikato wide pool

Tier 3 - Determined by individual Local Authority

Tier 4 - Determined by individual Local Authority

TOTAL = 17 Minimum Capacity

Table 1. Desired End State

6.2 Inter-Regional Support/Surge Capacity Selected Group Controllers from around the country may be appointed in advance by the Joint Committee to support the Waikato CDEM Group at times of urgent need. Note: This surge capacity is based on a mutual support philosophy between Group Manager/Controllers and will likely be replaced by a nationally coordinated ‘flying squad’ policy at some future date.

7 INITIAL SELECTION AND APPPOINTMENT OF CONTROLLERS

7.1 Candidates A baseline of desirable skills, competencies, experience, community status and ability to commit time to the role of controller will be used by the Waikato CDEM Group when ultimately deciding to appoint controllers. Guidance outlining this baseline is available for Chief Executives to help in their initial candidate selection.

7.2 Considerations for role exclusion Given the other duties that elected members, CEOs and local authority response staff need to perform during emergencies, they should not be appointed as Waikato CDEMG controllers unless they can demonstrate the ability to provide adequate and sustained backfill.

7.3 Process If a new controller is required to maintain the minimum pool the following selection and appointment process must be followed:

7.3.1 All Controllers

1. The Local Authority employing the individual leaving the Controller pool (or that does not have one at time

of adoption) must initiate the process to either replace the Controller, or enter into a broader shared service

arrangement to fund a replacement.

2. The Local Authority identifies the replacement against the selection criteria and requests the GEMO schedule

an appointment with the Controller Appointment Committee of the CEG.

3. Potential candidate is interviewed in company with the relevant CEO.

180

4 11366638

4. The relevant council[s] then endorse the candidate for appointment and forward a submission to the Joint

Committee for approval.

5. CEO formally notifies the successful candidate of their appointment as a Local Controller to the applicable

council[s].

7.3.2 Tier 2 Controllers

1. The Group Manager/Controller, where appropriate, will commence processing the new Controller through

the Tier system for consideration of Tier 1 or 2 assignment.

2. A biography and supporting endorsement statement for each Tier 2 candidate (consolidated) will be

provided to all member councils for their formal endorsement.

3. Upon formal endorsement by all member councils the Tier 2 candidate will be forwarded to the Joint

Committee for final approval as a Tier 2 Controller.

7.3.3 Tier 1 Controllers

1. Group Controller candidates may be drawn by the Group Manager/Controller from the Waikato CDEM Group

Tier 2 Controller Pool, suitably experienced Waikato CDEM GEMO staff1 or from selected Group Controllers from

other regions. In addition, competent and high calibre candidates from the community may be considered

for direct entry upon recommendation of the Controller Appointment Committee.

2. Candidates for alternative Group Controller will be presented, in person, to the Joint Committee for final

approval to act as Deputy Group Controller or, in the absence of the Group Manager/Controller, Group

Controller.

8 CAPABILITY DEVELOPMENT

8.1 Initial Training As soon as is practicable but no later than two years after appointment, new controllers must attend the national Controller Course run by MCDEM. Appointees who are unable to undertake the training after three course dates have been provided by the Group Controller will be reported to the CEG for consideration of recommending removal of appointment to the Joint Committee. Local Authorities will be provided an opportunity to appeal the recommendation via the CEG chair. To acquire an understanding of ECC/EOC operations and the activities of their staff, controllers must attend the ITF Intermediate Course within the first year of appointment.

8.2 Experiential training (subject to further development)

8.2.1 Exercises

All controllers will be required to act in the capacity of controller in at least one exercise within two years of appointment and attend at least one exercise per year thereafter. Exercises of any type are acceptable. In addition, the GEMO will provide appropriate opportunities on a regular basis.

8.2.2 Experience

Tier 2 controllers will be provided the opportunity to attend emergency service responses involving significant incident coordination or CDEM responses nationwide as and when available. Controller Meeting

1 GEMO staff will still need to be recommended by the Controller Appointment Committee of CEG.

181

5 11366638

The quarterly Controller meetings will include at least two table top exercises a year specifically aimed at the nuances of working as a controller (Controllers must attend at least one of these exercises per year).

8.2.3 Local Authority familiarisation

To ensure forward development of Controllers pool all Controllers must attend at least one Local Authority familiarisation tour a year (provided by the Local Authority). Every second Controller meeting will be held in a local area to facilitate this requirement, in addition to hazard tours arranged by the GEMO or individual councils/agencies.

8.2.4 Other training

As members of the CDEM group, controllers are entitled to take part in any of the regional or national training made available, most of which is free of charge or includes a nominal fee for administration. Controller succession planning candidate

Any candidate named for succession planning is eligible to attend MCDEM delivered Controller Training Course, subject to availability of spaces allocated to the Waikato Group for the course.

8.2.5 Other requirements

As the National controller programme develops there will be additional experiential and possibly operational assessment requirements established post-course. The Waikato region will review inclusion of these into the criteria for Tiers 1 and 2 at a future date. Should the timeline for the development of the afore described activities not meet the needs of the Waikato CDEM Group, the Group will establish its own assessment criteria in addition to that outlined above.

9 REVIEW OF CONTROLLERS Controller appointments should be reviewed every 5 years to ensure mutual satisfaction with the role between controllers and territorial authorities on whose behalf they act.

10 SUPPORTING ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS

10.1 Controller Financial Delegations The existence of a declaration of an emergency is not necessarily an indication of the size or complexity of an emergency, merely the fact that certain powers may be required by the Controller. Noting this, reimbursement of costs from the national government for certain response actions (e.g. provision of welfare) does not require a declaration of a state emergency nor does the lack of a declaration negate the appointment of a Controller to manage the emergency. When formally acting in the role of Controller, the Controller is accountable for the actions carried out and the expenses incurred, regardless of whether they are using the powers conferred upon by the CDEM Act 2002 or not. Consequently, where formerly placing a Controller in control of a CDEM emergency, declared or otherwise, the council must also provide the Controller with adequate financial arrangements to adequately manage the situation. As per section 6.8.8 Group Plan 2016/2021 all controllers (except Tier 4) must be provided an uncapped financial delegation in the event of a declared emergency or an emergency falling under the classification of ‘CDEM emergency - out of declaration’ (see Table 3. Crisis/Emergency Threshold Guidance below for clarity on application

182

6 11366638

of delegation). This does not limit the right of a council to impose a lower delegation for the individuals business as usual function.

10.2 Expenditure Reporting Thresholds To ensure oversight of expenditure during an emergency, each controller is required, over and above any local finance protocol, to report total expenditure to the applicable CEO and also, in the case of Local Controllers, to the Group Controller at the following increments agreed by each Local Authority:

183

7 11366638

Local Authority: Incremental reporting threshold declared emergency:

Incremental reporting threshold non-declared emergency:

Hamilton City Council $500,000 $250,000

Hauraki District Council

Matamata Piako District Council

Otorohanga District Council

South Waikato District Council

Taupo District Council

Thames District Council

Waipa District Council

Waikato District Council

Waitomo District Council

Waikato Regional Council

Table 2. Expenditure Reporting Thresholds.

10.3 Crisis/Emergency Threshold Guidance Section 17.1(d) states that the function of the Group is to…”respond to and manage the adverse effects of emergencies in its area.” This is commonly coordinated by the Local Controller on behalf of the council. However, greater clarity needs to exist regarding when an emergency, other than a declared emergency, exists and what authority or mandate the Controller has in such cases. Official notification from the Local Authority CEO that a specified Controller is carrying out the coordination of a local emergency and has their mandate to direct council resources is not a common practice. Nor is it clear when a person appointed as a controller by title is acting in such a role or is simply acting as coordination advisor to council. This creates uncertainty for the Controller as to their responsibilities and their accountability. In addition, this can cause confusion with partnering agencies as to whether there is a ‘Control’ function in place or simply BAU council management. To provide greater clarity to all parties the following guideline is provided. Local Authorities may adopt more specific requirements if this helps clarify their particular arrangements further but the maintenance of three distinct thresholds must be implemented as a minimum.

Table 3. Crisis/Emergency Threshold Guidance

Threshold Indicator Explanation

1. Council Crisis/Limited Emergency Response Council led through normal BAU arrangements. CDEM Emergency Financial Requirements DO NOT Apply.

1.1 Incident can be managed by council staff, though internal secondment may be required and

Emergency services may be involved but as part of their normal role (i.e. no coordination is required). Violent person or fire alarm for example.

1.2 No danger to life and no or minimal impact to property and

i.e. The incident is primarily an issue of inconvenience to the public.

1.3 Lifeline utilities are still functioning or will resume within a period that will not have welfare or psychosocial implications to any part of the community, particularly vulnerable or at risk parties and

1.4 Communication coordinated through normal communication protocols.

No alternative means of communications required or use of emergency alerting tools held by CDEM.

Note: Individual who normally acts as Controller and CDEM staff maybe involved but only for the purposes

In this case the individual that normally acts as Controller is neither accountable nor responsible for any activities, nor should they

184

8 11366638

of facilitating engagement or coordinating council activities as incident management subject matter experts.

be referred to as Local Controller when acting in this support capacity.

2. CDEM Emergency (Non-Declared) Authorised by CEO. Controller assigned - CDEM Emergency Financial Requirements Apply. S17(10)(d) CDEM Act 2002) “…respond to and manage the adverse effects of emergencies in its area” applies. Also referred to as ‘out of declaration’ emergency in Response Guidelines.

2.1 Situation that is the result of any happening, whether natural or otherwise

2.2 including, without limitation, any explosion, earthquake, eruption, tsunami, land movement, flood, storm, tornado, cyclone, serious fire, leakage or spillage of any dangerous gas or substance, technological failure, infestation, plague, epidemic

2.3 failure of or disruption to an emergency service or a lifeline utility (welfare or psychosocial implications to any part of the community, particularly vulnerable or at risk parties)

2.4 or actual or imminent attack or warlike act

2.5 and causes or may cause loss of life or injury or illness or distress

Distress includes psychosocial support.

2.6 or in any way endangers the safety of the public or property

2.7 and cannot be dealt with by emergency services ( i.e. A request is made from the emergency services for support in some capacity).

For the purposes of this guideline threshold this should not be taken to imply that CDEM would be requested to take the lead, only that due to lack of human resource, technical knowledge or specialised resources, the emergency services require support.

2.8 or otherwise requires a significant and co-ordinated response.

For example: Resources from multiple council, government or NGOs are required and normal BAU channels will not suffice.

Resource requests made by any party are such that prioritisation must be made on who receives a limited resource.

The community has self-mobilised and are carrying out actions that may result in further harm or coordination is required to optimise their efforts and they are willing or are seeking to engage.

Coordination of responders is required due to magnitude or complexity of event - Must be done in consultation with them and then most likely as a result of a prior arrangement through a plan or similar arrangement (i.e. By mutual agreement rather than authority).

3. State of emergency declared by

3.1 CDEM emergency, as defined above, applies and the powers of the controller are required.

Note the following differences:

185

9 11366638

authorised member of governance – Controller assigned with all powers and authority either provided directly by the CDEM act or delegated through the Group Plan. CDEM Emergency Financial Requirements Apply.

In this context, where it states “And cannot be dealt with by emergency services” CDEM is likely to be the lead coordinating agency (not to be confused with command).

In this context, where it states above “requires a significant and co-ordinated response,” coordination of responders is an obligation, not necessarily something that requires prior agreement. Regardless, integrated response implies, if not demands, a collegiate/consultative approach to major emergency coordination.

10.4 Determination and Notification of Non-Declared CDEM

Emergency Acting upon the advice of the Group Controller, Local Controller and/or the Local CDEM professionals, the local relevant authority CEO makes the determination as to when a CDEM emergency – out of declaration exists. In the case of the Group Controller, this determination is made by the Chair of the CEG or, in their absence, the CEO of WRC. If the CEO determines that a CDEM emergency – Non-declared exists, the CEO must provide notification to the Mayor and all staff (and contractors where appropriate):

A Local Controller has been activated and is responsible for coordinating the emergency on behalf of

the Local Authority

The appropriate Controller delegation and reporting expenditure thresholds apply.

10.5 Exigent Circumstances In the event of a fast onset emergency which meets the threshold set out in the guidance above, the Group or Local Controller is authorised to determine that a non-declared CDEM emergency is or may occur and can carry out all actions as if authorised by the CEO. The CEO must be notified at the earliest appropriate time.

11 Controller Protocols

All controllers must adhere to the instructions set out in the Waikato CDEM Group - Controller Operational Protocols. These protocols set out the ‘how to’ of responding to an emergency within the Waikato Region, with emphasis on the relationship between the various levels of controllers, Coordination Centre obligations and the standard management processes to be used. The Waikato CDEM Group - Controller Operational Protocols is an operational level document developed in concert with the Controller Advisory Group and maintained by the Group Controller. The document is limited to operational matters with final approval of its contents the sole purview of the Group Controller as the accountable party for the region’s response capability.

186

10 11366638

12 Review

This policy will be reviewed every three years or upon the release of legislation relating to the role of the controller.

187


Date: 16 March 2018

Author: Julian Snowball, Manager/Controller – Thames Valley EOA


Subject: Response to January Event


Purpose 1. To provide an overview of the TVEOA readiness and response activities related to the Firth of

Thames storm surge on 05th January 2018; focussing on local authority performance and key learnings. Where relevant, this report also aims to compare the experiences of the storm surge response against the recently published Ministerial Review, “Better Responses to Natural Disasters and other emergencies”. It should be noted that the Ministerial Review was not released until after this storm surge event and therefore the details within the review had no direct bearing on the decisions made and subsequent performance of the agencies during the actual response.


1. That the report Response to January Event (Doc # 11951812 dated 16 March 2018) be received for information.

8.1 Context of the report

2. This scale of this event has been described by officials at Waikato Regional Council as “one of the biggest events that have occurred in the Firth of Thames in recorded history”, exceeding the previous biggest storm tide event on the Hauraki Plains in 1938. Mayor John Tregidga (Hauraki District Council) has stated this was the worst flood damage he had seen to the community in his 30 years on Council.

3. At least 391 properties were damaged across the Hauraki and Thames Coromandel District

Council areas, of which 81 were described as having moderate damage and being only partially habitable. Thirteen (13) properties sustained heavy damage and were totally uninhabitable. Over 20 kilometres of State Highway 25 was severely impacted.

4. The third partner of the TVEOA, Matamata-Piako District Council (MPDC), was not directly

affected by the event, but provided staff to assist in the emergency response, including EOC staff, building inspectors and welfare outreach.

5. Officials from central and local government were very complimentary of the quality of the

readiness and response activities relating to this storm surge event.

188

6. Much of this report is intentionally written as a critical review, focussing mainly on the key learnings of the response. However, the report needs to be viewed in the overall positive context, of well delivered, effective, Civil Defence coordinated, Readiness, Response and Recovery Operation. The communities, agencies and staff involved in this operation performed well in difficult circumstances.

8.2 Pre-storm surge activities

7. On 04th January 2018, the Thames-Valley Emergency Operating Area (TVEOA) Emergency Operating Centre (EOC) was open in monitoring mode for a foreseeable risk of Coastal inundation, brought about by a forecast of heavy rain and wind coinciding with a King Tide on that evening (2203 hours 04/01/18). The high tide on the evening 04/01/18 passed without significant incident.

8. The Councils undertook outreach activities, which appeared effective, in the prelude to the

forecast storms. The effectiveness of the outreach was evident in the social media coverage of the storm, where there was evidence of people and communities taking on board the preparedness advice and in some cases, people amending their holiday plans.

9. Thames Coromandel District Council (TCDC) and Hauraki District Council (HDC) operated different

approaches to the pre-event community outreach. HDC deployed dedicated council staff directly into the at-risk communities: TCDC used council staff to contact key community members via phone, or tasked partner agencies, such as Fire Emergency New Zealand, to visit camp grounds and other at-risk areas.

10. Councils made good use of their respective in-house communications team. The public

messaging was very effective. 11. There was some feedback that suggests the telephone outreach approach employed by TCDC

was not as effective as the face-to-face approach employed by HDC. However, it is recognised that TCDC were reaching out to multiple communities that are dispersed over a wide geographic area.

12. There may be some merit in considering the creation of TVEOA CDEM Outreach team(s), made

up of staff from all three EOA councils, which could be deployed for face-to-face outreach in the Readiness activities of future emergencies in any of the EOA Councils. This is not to be confused with a New Zealand Response Team (NZRT) who are often deployed in Response.

8.3 The storm surge

13. At 0700 hours on 05th January 2018 the TVEOA EOC activated again, in monitoring mode, for the morning high tide at 1037 hours. Shortly after 0840 hours, nearly 2 hours before high-tide, a deepening sub-tropical low to the west of New Zealand brought heavy rain and strong winds to most of the North Island.

14. A combination of the strong winds, low atmospheric pressure and the king tides resulted in an

abnormally high tide that inundated several low lying coastal communities around the Firth of Thames. These conditions also combined with rough seas and caused significant damage to the Thames-Coast Road (SH25) and compromised its structural integrity and that of coastal defences: Consequently, the State Highway was closed to public.

189

15. Numerous dwellings, on both sides of the Firth of the Thames, received significant flood damage. The main communities impacted were Kaiaua, Miranda, Waikawau, Te Puru and Tararu. Other inland roads were also impacted by slips and fallen debris.

16. The activation status of the TVEOA EOC escalated from Monitoring mode to Coordination mode,

in response to the above impacts on the Hauraki and Thames-Coromandel Districts.

8.4 The initial response

17. The initial EOC response was not as a unified TVEOA. Whilst there were staff from both TCDC and HDC in the EOC, the limited number of staff from HDC present in the EOC were a legacy of the previous days rostering for the monitoring phase. The focus of the EOC was TCDC.

18. The council staff called into the TVEOA EOC for the initial response were predominantly

individuals who had been pre-identified as the EOC First Response team (TCDC), due to a combination of their proximity to the TVEOA EOC and their commitment to CDEM. Not everyone on the EOC First Response Team had relevant training and/or experience.

19. The rapid on-set nature and magnitude of this event, along with a limited knowledge of CIMS,

created significant challenges for many of the council staff deployed to the TVEOA EOC. 20. Additionally, this response highlighted some limited examples of the pre-identified Council EOC

staff also having an operational business-as-usual role requirement, necessary to deliver the Council’s operational response to the emergency. Consequently, they were not available for the EOC.

21. Albeit there were many examples of high levels of commitment, with staff responding to the EOC

off their holidays / leave; it was evident the general availability of staff from all agencies, including Council EOC First Responders, was negatively impacted by the Christmas / New Year holidays.

22. Given the magnitude of the event, the clear similarities of impact upon communities, and the

foreseeable need to ask for support from the Waikato CDEM Group and beyond; the TVEOA Controller required the HDC response activities to be coordinated from the TVEOA EOC.

23. Early support was requested and promptly provided by MCDEM, the wider Waikato CDEM Group

(including GEMO), the New Zealand Defence Forces and Red Cross. 24. The support from MCDEM and the insertion of the CDEM Professionals into CIMS Incident

Management Team (IMT) roles brought much needed structure to the EOC and the response in general. The capabilities and potential of councils’ EOC staff was evident once they had suitably experienced function managers (CDEM Professionals) leading the functional areas.

25. As the staffing levels increased, the size and design of the TVEOA EOC facility did not support

effective and efficient response coordination. The TVEOA EOC was relocated to the TCDC Council Chambers.

The positive impact on EOC performance, of having access to MCDEM support and inserting CDEM Professionals into CIMS Incident Management roles, supports the recommendation in

the Ministerial Review for the creation of “fly-in Teams”.

190

26. Availability of ICT solutions for printing and other EOC resources, such as display boards /

whiteboards were an issue when the EOC relocated and expanded in size. 27. Immediately prior to the Christmas holidays, TVEOA had commenced a move from a server based

EOC IT system, to a cloud-based approach. Consequently, there were initial inefficiencies in the EOC due to a lack of awareness and training on the new cloud-base system. The benefits of the Cloud-based IT approach were evident as the event progressed. EMIS was not used in this response: Current TVEOA staff are not trained in the use of EMIS.

28. A particular success, during the initial phase of this event, was the level of resilience added to the

emergency response by the Te Puru Community Response Group (CRG). The CRG was set up using the Waikato CDEM Group Community Response Plan process, supported by TCDC and TVEOA staff. The CRG did exactly what it was set up to do, looking after the immediate needs of the community, and also tourists. The CRG was an effective focal point for communications between the EOC and the Te Puru Community.

29. There are opportunities to highlight the success of this CRG as a promotion / encouragement for

other communities, particularly those at risk of isolation, to undertake community response planning.

8.5 The ongoing response

30. There was no emergency declaration for this event. The proportionality and necessity for an emergency declaration was considered and kept under regular review, but ultimately not requested by the TVEOA Controller. The decision not to request an emergency declaration was based on an assessment that there was no intelligence available to indicate the emergency powers of the CDEM Act were necessary to deliver the objectives of the emergency response.

31. Command and Control for this event had the TVEOA Manager assume the role of overall EOA

Controller, supported by the Local Controllers for TCDC and HDC. The Local Controllers operationally delivered the EOA Controllers objectives within their own council area. This is similar to the CDEM Group Structure. It should be noted that albeit the title of Local Controller was being used, the individuals were not utilising the powers of Local Controllers for the purpose of the CDEM Act. These CDEM Act powers are only available to Local Controllers when an emergency declaration in place.

32. A conscious decision was made to have the Local Controllers be the focal points for the media

and public communications. This was intended to reassure communities through demonstrating clear local knowledge and local focus to response activities.

33. The aforementioned command and control approach was effective for the purpose of the

overarching EOA response being able to access, unhindered, all the necessary resources and services from each council, through the Local Controllers. It also allowed for the delivery of the

The above reference to local levels of Command and Control should be cross referenced to the Chapter six of the Ministerial Review, which states:

“In many instances, protocols, relationships, and local knowledge about expertise assisted a good response”.

191

overall TVEOA Controller’s objectives in a way that was compatible with the differing cultures and approaches of both councils.

34. There was evidence during the response, and subsequent feedback from staff, that the command

and control approach sometimes created confusion. Specifically, there was sometimes a lack of clarity within each council as to who was in Command of the event and feedback from staff in the EOC stated that there were “too many chiefs”. This experience is partly influenced by the local controllers fronting the media and also the fact both the HDC and TCDC Local Controllers have high levels of professional competence and the confidence to operate unilaterally.

35. It should be noted that there is no evidence to suggest any of the decisions or activities of the

Local Controllers were inconsistent with the EOA Controller’s objective or indeed hampered the response.

36. The confusion, and feedback of too many chiefs, could be addressed, in future events, through

improved communication with staff regarding the roles of the EOA Controller and Local Controllers.

37. Although the EOC was now coordinating a unified TVEOA response, some key different business

approaches of HDC and TCDC created significant inefficiencies. For example, each council had different GIS systems and differing approaches to, and different forms for, building assessments.

38. The use of different building inspection forms created the biggest inefficiencies, ultimately

requiring large numbers of staff to interpret handwriting and manually input data into the GIS. 39. A common approach to building inspection data requirements could have been supported using

an ICT based mobile data entry process; with assessments completed by the building Inspectors on-scene and automatically uploaded to the GIS platform. There was considerable resistance to this common approach and also the use of mobile data entry.

40. On a similar note, manual entry was required for the Welfare Outreach forms. In the case of the

Welfare Outreach, the main issue was the lack of inter-operability of the data-capture platforms used by some agencies and the GIS systems used by Councils. There was also resistance to the use of mobile data entry.

Cross reference the GIS experience at 1.7 above, with Chapter 7 of the Ministerial review, which states, “all the key response agencies gather essential information – yet current systems

do not link easily to enable a full situational report”.

The reference at 1.8 to confusion about Command and Control should be cross referenced to the Chapter six of the Ministerial Review, which states:

“Within the Group structure, command authority can also be unclear. Currently when a state of emergency is declared, the appointed Local Controllers have the same power as Group

Controllers. It is not a delegated authority (although Local Controllers are subject to direction from the Group Controller during a state of emergency). As a result there are at times both Local and Group Controllers making decisions over the same matters. This can be confusing,

inconsistent, and hamper effective responses”.

192

41. Although HDC and TCDC operate separate procurement systems, the decision was made to use a single point of contact, acting as the finance officer for both councils (albeit with separate purchase order systems). This was very positive.

42. This unified approach to finance ensured a consistent approach to financial recording, which

supported efficient dialogue with, and support from, MCDEM in relation to the requirements for post-event audit and subsequent claims to central government.

43. As the response progressed beyond day two, the number, and availability, of trained staff was

highlighted as a concern. Issues with staff availability saw frequent changes in personnel in function manager roles, such as Welfare Manager and Response Manager; this was not helpful to the continuity and efficiency of the response. Work is required to review the number of staff currently trained to intermediate ITF level, and above, and address any gaps in resilience.

44. A gap was identified in CDEM capability: Specifically, the TVEOA had to request the support of

CDEM Response Teams (including NZRT) from Taupo and Ruapehu. These teams not only provided much needed physical support, such as undertaking outreach and moving contaminated furniture for vulnerable members of the community; they also enhanced the CDEM brand, being seen operating in the communities in CDEM uniforms.

45. There may be some merit in considering the creation of a Northern Waikato CDEM Response

Team (NZRT), which would increase the resilience of the CDEM Group, as well as the TVEOA, for Response activities of future emergencies in the northern part of the Waikato Region.

8.6 Public information management

46. Similar to the Command and Control approach at 1.8 above, the Public Information Management was coordinated centrally by a PIM and delivered operationally by the local communications staff for TCDC and HDC, supported by communications staff from across the region and MCDEM.

47. High levels of good quality public engagement, both in readiness and during the response, was a

highlight of this emergency response.

8.7 Governance

48. The TVEOA Controller engagement with Governance was limited during this response. 49. Local elected officials and executives predominantly received their individual briefings from their

respective Local Controllers. Whilst this did not appear to have a direct impact on the quality of the response, this approach increases the risk of unilateral activity that is inconsistent with the overall objectives of the TVEOA Controller:

The above reference to Governance engagement should be cross referenced to the Chapter six of the Ministerial Review, which states:

“We also found that the authority of a Group Controller during an emergency was not always well understood or respected. Within councils, Controllers may face a conflict of interest with senior council managers, Chief Executives or elected officials expecting to direct operations or

decisions during a response”.

193

8.8 Iwi

50. There was no obvious engagement with Iwi during the response phase. On reflection, the TVEOA Controller believes there would have been benefit from Iwi engagement immediately prior to, and during, the emergency works phase of the response.

51. Research by the TVEOA Controller leads him to believe there are Maori Heritage sites on both

coast lines of the Firth of Thames, including 1Tararu, Kaiaua and Miranda. 52. It should be noted that the TVEOA CDEM Committee Terms of Reference (TOR) have already been

reviewed (Dec 2017). Consequently, Iwi representation on the committee is being addressed.

8.9 Peripheral issues

i) Power supply played a significant role in the response, with power-outages and power supply continuing to properties that were inundated with salt water. The absence of utilities liaison in the EOC was detrimental to efficient coordination of the initial response and detrimental to effective communications with the affected communities. Work is underway to ensure the presence of utilities in the EOC, where required.

ii) The community of Miranda is within the Waikato District Council (WDC) area, however forms

a very small part of the Firth of Thames coastline; geographically located between two sections of the Coastline administered by HDC. For this event, the TVEOA Controller, in consultation and agreement with WDC, incorporated the affected properties within Miranda into the TVEOA response. Pragmatic and sensible agreements were made regarding costs and liabilities. The TVEOA Controller recommends closer collaboration between the TVEOA and WDC and more formalised and considered protocols regarding Command, Control and costs relating to future CDEM events in Miranda.

iii) Current operating practice has the primary TVEOA EOC located in Thames. The nature of this

event meant there was a recurring discussion, regarding access to and from Thames potentially being compromised due to the ongoing risk of flooding on SH25 (Kauaeranga Spillway). For a shared service response that may draw over two-thirds of its resources from outside Thames, the risk of isolation in Thames compromises the resilience and therefore effectiveness of the response. A more agile approach to TVEOA EOC operating practices has been previously identified. This work needs to be prioritised.

1 McEnteer J & Turoa T: 1993

Cross reference the Iwi reference above, with Chapter 4 of the Ministerial review, which states, “We received many submissions from iwi and others regarding iwi who responded

rapidly to community needs but were excluded from operations discussions or included so late that they felt insulted. Iwi expect to be involved because they know the locality and people in it. In some recent emergencies iwi were not consulted during the local planning or response

phases even though 80% of the affected population identified as Māori”.

194

8.10 Summary

53. The Firth of Thames storm surge in January 2018 was a significant event in the recent history of the TVEOA. The preparation for, and response to, the storm surge successfully addressed the immediate needs of the communities impacted. The responsiveness and commitment of all the agencies and staff concerned was excellent. Irrespective of the success, there were lessons learned and potential vulnerabilities & opportunities identified for the TVEOA:

There is more work needed to move closer to a ‘one-team’ culture for CDEM activities in the TVEOA. Linked to the one-team culture, there is a need to better align some of the councils’, and agencies, processes and systems, such as outreach, GIS, building inspections, data capture and staff recognition; all of which will feature in future events.

The number of staff trained to ITF intermediate level and above needs reviewing, and a reassessment undertaken of TVEOA’s ability to staff an EOC for the first three days of an emergency.

The EOC facilities and resources needs to be reviewed. Also, the previously identified need to have a more agile approach to TVEOA EOC locations, should be prioritised.

Work is required to ensure appropriate representation from agencies in the EOC, priority focus being Iwi and Lifeline Utilities (electricity).

The potential of council staff, in the EOC, was increased when there was a better structure, provided by the fly-in team of CDEM Professionals. Fly-in teams may not always be available or appropriate. As a priority, work is required to upskill a CIMS IMT across the TVEOA: this will require additional staff resource investment by councils, in the short-term, to allow increased exposure and training for the IMT. It should be noted that limited ITF training courses, beyond Intermediate level, create a challenge for IMT development.

Having the EOA Controller as lead, supported by the Local Controllers with geographic responsibility, worked well. This approach should be adopted as the norm in the event of an emergency impacting two or more councils within the EOA. This approach will require adequate numbers of Controller’s to be appointed across the EOA to be fully effective. The approach also requires work to ensure clarity of Controller roles for all staff and elected members.

Consideration should be given to the creation of a Northern Waikato CDEM Response Team.

Closer, more formal, collaboration to be considered between the TVEOA and Waikato District Council regarding Miranda.

The experiences of the Te Puru Community Response Group should be used to positive effect in promoting the value of community response planning.

195

Doc # 11952383


Date: 16 March 2018

Author: Gary Talbot, Group Recovery Manager


Subject: Thames Valley EOA Recovery – Firth of Thames storm surge 5 January 2018

Section: A (Committee has delegated authority to make decision) Purpose 1. To provide the Joint Committee with an overview of the recovery activity undertaken to date by

Hauraki, Thames Coromandel and Waikato District Councils following the emergency which occurred as a result of the storm surge event that affected coastal communities on the Firth of Thames on Friday January 5, 2018.


1. That the report Thames Valley EOA Recovery – Firth of Thames storm surge 5 January 2018 (Doc # 11952383 dated 16 March 2018) be received for information.

Background 2. On Friday January 5, 2018 a culmination of the highest king tide for 2018 (4.4 metres) in the Firth

of Thames, strong to gale force winds and several days of heavy rain, further compounded by warmer sea temperatures with low barometric pressure, resulted in sea inundation around the shoreline of the Firth of Thames. The severest impacts were experienced by coastal communities along the western shore of the Coromandel Peninsula between Thames and Manaia as well as the Kaiaua community and coast on the western side of the Firth of Thames.

3. A number of coastal communities had homes and local business severely damaged by the sea surges which lasted for over an hour in Kaiaua. Access to these communities was compromised by significant damage to State Highway 25 on the Thames Coast and the East Coast Road on the Kaiaua Coast. Communities on both coasts were isolated for several hours until assessments of the road damage could be undertaken to determine what types of vehicles could negotiate the roads safely. SH25 remained closed to the public for 3 days until repairs were sufficient enough to enable the passage of controlled convoys under the supervision of NZTA contractors.

4. The response to the emergency was coordinated through the Thames Valley Emergency Operating Area emergency operations centre (TVEOA EOC) and the response phase was maintained from Friday January 5, 2018 through to the Wednesday afternoon of January 10, 2018. No declaration was made under the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002 for the emergency, and it was determined by the Mayors and Chief Executives of the Hauraki, Thames Coromandel and Waikato District Councils that each Council would transition to recovery and take responsibility for their own recovery activities.

196

Doc # 11952383 Page 2

5. It was also determined that no Transition Powers or Notices would be needed under the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002. Due to the level of impact on the Kaiaua community and the wider Kaiaua Coast, Hauraki District Council opted to establish a formal recovery team headed by their local recovery Manager Mr Peter Thom. Thames-Coromandel and Waikato District Council were confident that they could manage their recovery through their normal business channels.

6. Hauraki District Council engaged proactively with their urban and rural communities on the Kaiaua Coast with daytime and evening information evenings to support the members of the communities. These events were well supported by other Government and Non Agencies as well as the Insurance Council of New Zealand, Earthquake Commission (EQC) and the insurance industry providers. Waikato Rural Support Trust supported by the farming sector, Waikato Regional Council and Hauraki District Council provided a lunch time BBQ with information sessions on the effects of salt water inundation of productive land and the recovery of that land.

7. Thames-Coromandel worked closely with their affected residents with this work been coordinated by their Emergency Management Unit Officer, Pamela Balt. Liaison is also occurring with the New Zealand Transport Authority (NZTA) to ensure SH 25 is fully restored as soon as is practicable. Significant damaged occurred for approximately 25 km of the coast road and foreshore.

8. Waikato District Council had 3 farm owners affected and have provided support to them as required. A unified approach by Hauraki and Waikato District Councils was taken with these affected farmers during the response and the initial recovery phase.

Recovery framework 9. The Waikato CDEM Group Recovery Plan (2013) and local recovery plans provide a framework

for recovery that ensures consideration is given to a number of aspects of our communities (refer Figure 1 below).

197

Doc # 11952383 Page 3

Overview of current recovery

10. As stated previously, each Council is managing its own recovery across the four recovery environments of Built, Economic, Natural and Social. Figure 2 highlights the subsets within each environment1.

1 MCDEM Focus on Recovery – A Holistic Framework For Recovery in New Zealand – Information For The CDEM Sector [IS5/05]

Figure 1Waikato Group Recovery Model

198

Doc # 11952383 Page 4

Figure 2: RECOVERY MODEL Built Environment - Rural 11. Waikato CDEM Group acknowledges the significance contribution of the rural sector across the

Region and as a result the Built Environment is consider under the broad groups of Urban and Rural. The Waikato Rural Support Trust has worked in closely again with the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) and the Councils to provide support to the primary industries sector which was also severely impacted by storm events in 2017.

12. MPI has advised that this event has been classified as a localised event under the Primary Sector Recovery Policy (Ministry for Primary Industries) so no additional funding is available from Ministry for Primary Industries. Fortunately the Enhanced Task Force Green programme for assistance on farms was running from the flood events in 2017 so the Ministry for Social Development (MSD) has allowed the farmers affected by the January 2018 event to access the

199

Doc # 11952383 Page 5

programme. There are 3 – 4 farms registered. Rural Support Trust is funding the registration, job size and close out activities.

13. Waikato Regional Council has also undertaken assessments and provided guidance to the rural sector regarding the salt water inundation of paddocks along the Kaiaua coast. Although maize crops were lost within days of the flooding the general consensus of the soil science specialist and the field pasture cropping experts is that the pastures will recover quickly. A fallow period has been forced on the farmers and with reasonable rainfall along with the correct applications of Roundup© weed killer, grass should be able to be sown in March 2018 with a high level of success. The farmers have expressed appreciation for the support provided by the Waikato Regional Council.

Built Environment – Urban 14. The Thames Valley Emergency Operating Area reported that in total of 391 properties were

damaged across the Hauraki and Thames Coromandel District Council areas, of which 81 were described as having moderate damage and being only partially habitable. Thirteen (13) properties sustained heavy damage and were totally uninhabitable. Over 20 kilometres of State Highway 25 was severely impacted.

15. Table 1 is taken from the Hauraki District Council Recovery Action Plan which is continually been reviewed and updated as information becomes available and is validated.

16. Thames Coromandel District Council advised that of 76 insurance claims in their area, 29 Claimants are displaced into alternative accommodation fully paid for 6 months. There has been no request for services.

Table 1: HDC Measures Built Environment – Public Buildings & Assets 17. Hauraki and Waikato District Councils reported no significant damage to public buildings and

assets. Thames-Coromandel District Council reported the following impacts:

200

Doc # 11952383 Page 6

Table 1: TCDC built environment impacts Economic Environment 18. Detailed economic impacts are not available at this time. The rural primary industries sector will

have had further economic impacts placed on them following the storms of 2017. For example, the loss of maize crops will have an effect on winter feed supplies.

19. Residential economic impact will include, for those insured, loss of any insurance excesses and the loss of personal items not covered by insurance. For the uninsured the loss will have to be completely absorbed.

20. Business affected across both Councils (in addition to the farming sector) include the food retail

and catering space, transportation (milk, marine and forestry) due to weight restrictions on SH25 creating longer travel times and distances to markets.

21. The Coromandel Mussel Farming Association have indicated that the road closure and wait restriction have created an increase in costs such as increased driving times, driving hours, mileage and motel costs for driver stand down.

Natural Environment 22. Biodiversity and Ecosystems – Waikato Regional Council soil scientists are sampling and

monitoring the effects of salt inundation on the Kaiaua Coast farm production land.

23. Amenity Values – The Thames-Coromandel District Council has on going work to repair recreational amenities such a BBQ shelters and public picnic tables at Waiomu. The Hauraki Rail Trail was temporarily closed.

201

Doc # 11952383 Page 7

24. Waste & Pollution – Both Hauraki and Thames-Coromandel District Council have incurred additional costs associated with the provision of Jumbo Bins to remove flood damaged household goods and other materials. Both Councils also committed to cleaning septic tanks for those households classified as permanent residents.

25. Natural Resources – There is no indication from the aquatic marine agriculture industries on the Firth of Thames that any damage has occurred to marine stocks. Some damage did occur to the mussel farm infrastructure.

Social Environment 26. The Thames Valley Welfare Committee is monitoring for any changes in the current psychosocial

wellbeing of the impacted communities through its member agencies. Government agencies such as Ministry of Social Development and Housing New Zealand have not received any requests to date for new or additional services. Waikato District Health Board have also indicated that there is no unusual demand for psychosocial support in the Thames valley.

27. It needs to be remembered that many pressures do not come on to people for several months after an emergency has occurred. This can be for a variety of reasons such as been out of their own home for long periods, dealing with insurance complexities and possible ongoing financial pressures and/or losses.

Coordination of recovery 28. Noting that the emergency did not require a Declaration under the Civil Defence Emergency

Management Act 2002, it was determined during the transition from response to recovery that there was no requirement at the time to enact the transition powers available under the same Act. Each District Council (Hauraki, Thames-Coromandel and Waikato) was, and remains, comfortable with managing their own recovery activities at the locally led level with support from the Group Recovery Manager as required.

29. Hauraki District Council established a recovery team headed by Peter Thom (Group Manager – Planning and Environmental Services). The Hauraki District Council has proactively worked with the communities of the Kaiaua Coast to identify their needs and to ensure support through the establishment of community meetings, coordination of a community hub information evening and worked closely with the Waikato Rural Support Trust to ensure the farming community concerns.

30. Thames-Coromandel District Council determined that the impacts to their coastal communities would not require a structured recovery approach and the levels of restoration required could be managed as part of business as usual.

31. Waikato District Council also managed their own recovery as part of business as usual. All Councils maintained a social media presence through their various media tools.

Waikato Group Emergency Management Office 32. At the Waikato Group-level, the Group Recovery Manager worked primarily with the Local

Recovery Manager for Hauraki District Council in consultation with the Senior Regional Emergency Management Advisor from the Ministry Civil Defence Emergency Management (Suzanne Vowles) to ensure a comprehensive recovery plan and communications plan was implemented.

202

Doc # 11952383 Page 8

33. The Waikato CDEM Group Recovery Manager will continue to liaise with the Councils until such time as it is determined that a local recovery response is no longer necessary.

Strategic Recovery Planning From 1 June 2018, the Waikato CDEM Group Plan 2016 – 2021 will include four measurable elements for strategic planning for recovery:

1. Strategic actions to support recovery preparedness and recovery management; 2. Priorities for action; 3. Timeline for implementation; and 4. Methods intended to monitor and evaluate progress and improvement.

34. The purpose of strategic planning for recovery is to determine what CDEM Groups and each

member need to do to ensure their communities are well-placed and supported to recover from any emergencies from the hazards and risks identified in the Waikato CDEM Group Plan. Supported by continuous monitoring and evaluation strategic planning for recovery focuses on five strategic areas2; 1. Understanding of communities’ values and priorities for recovery, 2. Clearly defined recovery vision and outcomes, 3. Fully understand the consequences and opportunities from specific hazards and risks, 4. Build capacity and capability through strong collaboration and leadership, and 5. Enable the prioritisation and implementation of strategic recovery actions

The application of these five strategies aims to achieve the following outcomes:

• Comprehensive understanding of: what is needed to support communities to overcome the consequences from specific hazards and risks, and to build on the opportunities to reduce risk and strengthen resilience;

• Communities are engaged, have an enhanced ability to adapt, and decision-makers understand what is important to the communities;

• Immediate, medium-term and long-term recovery outcomes, and a community recovery vision, are defined;

• Recovery risks are identified and managed through additional reduction, readiness, response and recovery measures;

• Local and regional capacity and capability to prepare for, manage and deliver recovery (across a range of emergencies) is readily accessible, with a clear understanding of the local, regional and central government roles and responsibilities;

Waikato CDEM Group opportunities 35. Coastal communities located on the coastlines of the Waikato Region provide an opportunity for

enhancing immediate recovery planning post an emergency by incorporating initial recovery actions, post response to emergencies, into community response plans. This particular event highlights the need to also look to the intermediate and long term strategic recovery planning that needs to be undertaken with coastal communities. This area of emergency management work moves from the facts and data sets of emergencies and into the arena of decisions based on obligations, values and choices (Zack, 2009). The reality is that the issues of coastal erosion are going to keep compounding for the region, possibly complicated further by the challenges of

2 MCDEM Strategic Planning for Recovery – Director’s Guideline for Civil Defence and Emergency Management Groups [DGL 20/17] Zack, N. (2009). Ethics for disaster. lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, INC.

203

Doc # 11952383 Page 9

reinsuring, aging populations on limited incomes who may not have the capacity to continually recover from repeat events and Councils with limited rating bases continually needing to respond to aid the recovery of their communities.

References MCDEM Focus on Recovery – A Holistic Framework For Recovery in New Zealand – Information For The CDEM Sector [IS5/05] Zack, N. (2009). Ethics for disaster. lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, INC.

204

Doc # 11950721


Date: 16 March 2018



Subject: Waikato Regional Council Long Term Plan 2018/2028 Update


Purpose 1. To provide the Joint Committee with an update on the Long Term Process used to secure funding

for the GEMO’s work programmes.


1. That the report Waikato Regional Council Long Term Plan 2018/2028 Update (Doc # 11950721 dated 16 March 2018) be received for information.

Background 2. At the Joint Committee Meeting in November 2017, budget increase requests and supporting

business cases were presented for consideration. Whilst Joint Committee members were supportive of the proposed level of service increases, there were concerns expressed around the fiscal impact any budget increases would have on the community. The Joint Committee identified a tolerable rates increase level and directed the Group Controller/Manager to prioritise budget requests accordingly.

Budget adjustments 3. In order to meet the budget limit, reductions have been applied to the following business cases:

I. Recovery contracted services for research and review of the recovery plan

II. Capability development – removal of request for portable projector and speaker,

reduction in funds for training contractors and printing of training take home material

III. Marketing budget removed

IV. Welfare forum hosting moved to 2021/22 financial year

V. Social media coordinator start date moved to year 6

VI. Group Controller professional development removed.

4. The final requests have been notified for public consultation. Level of Service 5. The reduction in the budget requests will not prevent delivery of the Group Plan work

programme, nor will it impact on the GEMO’s ability to deliver on the status quo. However, certain initiatives promised in the business cases will no longer be possible.

205

Doc # 11950721 Page 2

6. With no additional marketing budget, councils will continue to be responsible for funding their own outreach/marketing campaigns, as there will be no centralised budget for resources and no opportunity to harness “group buying power” in procurement opportunities.

7. The reduction in capability development budget will result in less engagement with businesses

and a requirement for local councils to contribute to certain training costs (food, printing, etc.). This may also result in a longer time required to reach capability targets as the number of proposed classes is reduced.

8. Capability Development is an area of particular focus for the Group Manager/Controller and is,

in his opinion, the most critical aspect to improving how the sector delivers upon its CDEM obligations. Consequently, effort will be put into seeking sponsorship and other offset opportunities to fund training delivery.

9. The reduction in recovery budget will decrease the funding available for engagement

opportunities and provide more office based work for the appointed individual around research and development of the new Group Recovery Plan.

10. There will similarly be more requirement for staff time to be dedicated to review of plans such as

the Group Plan and the Group Evacuation Plan due to a reduction in the total contracted services budget requested.

Conclusion 11. As per the request of the Joint Committee, the LTP budget increase request has been reduced.

Whilst this decrease will mean some of the initiatives in the business cases will not be delivered, staff are confident it will not impact on the Group Plan deliverables.

206

Doc # 11952195


Date: 16 March 2018



Subject: GEMO Update


Purpose 1. To provide the Joint Committee with an update on the activities undertaken by the Group

Emergency Management Office (GEMO).


1. That the report GEMO Update (Doc # 11952195 dated 16 March 2018) be received for information.

2. GEMO Update 2.1. Status of Management Arrangements

There are a number of arrangements in place to support the management and governance of the Waikato CDEM Group. The status of this arrangement is summarised as follows:

Key to status of arrangements

Sustaining Establishing/improving Help needed

Arrangement Comment

Joint Committee

CEG Advisory groups established, with the exception of the Business Advisory Group and Recovery Group

GEMO 1 in interview status. 1 advertised. 1 awaiting sizing review.

CEG/WRC SLA

WCDEMG appointments Recovery Manager to be formally appointed at Joint Committee

2.2. Joint Committee Under section 12(1) of the CDEM Act 2002, “every regional council and every territorial authority within that region must unite to establish a Civil Defence Emergency Management Group for the purposes of this Act as a joint standing committee”. The Group has legal accountability for Civil Defence activities.

207

Doc # 11952195 Page 2

Overview of Joint Committee membership

Organisation Name

Waikato Regional Council Councillor Hugh Vercoe (Committee Chair)

Hamilton City Council Councillor Leo Tooman (Committee Deputy Chair)

Hauraki District Council Councillor Phillip Buckthought

Matamata-Piako District Council Brian Hunter

Otorohanga District Council Mayor Max Baxter

South Waikato District Council Councillor Thomas Lee

Taupo District Council Mayor David Trewavas

Thames-Coromandel District Council Councillor Rex Simpson

Waikato District Council Councillor Noel Smith

Waipa District Council Councillor Judy Bannon

Waitomo District Council Mayor Brian Hanna

2.3. Coordinating Executive Group (CEG) Under section 20(1) of the CDEM Act 2002,”a Civil Defence Emergency Management Group must establish and maintain a Civil Defence Emergency Management Coordinating Executive Group” (CEG). The CEG have legal responsibility for Civil Defence activities. Overview of CEG membership

Organisation Name

Hamilton City Council Blair Bowcott

Hauraki District Council Langley Cavers

Matamata-Piako District Council Dennis Bellamy

Otorohanga District Council Andrew Loe

South Waikato District Council Sharon Robinson

Taupo District Council Brian Fox

Thames-Coromandel District Council Garry Towler

Waikato District Council Sue O’Gorman

Waikato Regional Council Neville Williams

Waipa District Council David Hall

Waitomo District Council Helen Beever

Ministry of CDEM Suzanne Vowles

NEW NZ Police Karl Thornton

NZ Fire Service Roy Breeze

St John Stuart Cockburn

Waikato DHB Trevor Ecclestone

WCG (Chair)/Group Welfare Manager Irving Young

208

Doc # 11952195 Page 3

WLUG (Chair) Liam Ryan

Group Controller Lee Hazlewood

NEW Group Recovery Manager Gary Talbot (Appointment to be made at JC)

CEG Advisory Group Update

Advisory Group Status of Group Total members Status

Recovery

Managers

Established 10 Local Recovery

Managers and 1 Group

Recovery Manager.

Review of ToR

underway

Business

Advisory Group

(new)

Under development. Potential members being

identified.

Draft ToR developed.

Volunteer

Coordination

Group

Under development. Potential members

identified, challenges

experienced in identifying

appropriate meeting times.

Advisory Group

established, ToR

approved

2.4. Group Emergency Management Office (GEMO) The Group Emergency Management Office (GEMO) is responsible for the delivery of Civil Defence activities. These activities are divided into three key streams – administration, group services and operations.

Role Name

Group Controller/Manager Lee Hazlewood

NEW Group Recovery Manager Gary Talbot

Administration Team

Role Name

Emergency Management Coordinator - Administration

Jenny Bouwer

Business Support Officer (part time) Megan Thomas (fixed term appointment)

Group Services Team

Role Name

NEW Team Leader Group Services Mark Bang

Group Welfare Manager/Recovery Coordinator Irving Young

Emergency Management Coordinator

– Community Engagement

Drew Mehrtens

Emergency Management Coordinator

– Strategic Planning/ICT

Danielle Kruger

Emergency Management Coordinator Vacant (Currently advertised)

209

Doc # 11952195 Page 4

– Capability Development

Operations Team

Role Name

NEW Team Leader Operations Andrew BuBear

NEW WDC Local CDEM Coordinator Kelly Newell (recently returned from parental leave)

NEW HCC Local CDEM Coordinator

– Operational Readiness

Vacant (currently shortlisitng)

HCC Local CDEM Coordinator

– Community Engagement

Justin Douglas

NEW HCC Local CDEM Coordinator

– Strategy and Planning (fixed term contract)

Stephanie Courtney

GEMO Recruitment

The GEMO are pleased to have welcomed several new staff in the early part of this year. Andy BuBear, previously employed in the HCC Strategy and Planning position, has accepted the role of Team Leader Operations. Prior to his time with the GEMO, Andy was a Senior Sergeant with NZ Police and also filled the role of police liaison to CDEM. Stephanie Courtney has been employed as the HCC Strategy & Planning position to replace Andy. Recruitment is currently underway for the HCC Local CDEM Coordinator – Operational Readiness.

Gary Talbot commenced his role as Group Recovery Manager one week earlier than anticipated, allowing him to provide support and advice to Thames Coromandel and Hauraki during the weather and king tide event in January. Confirmation of statutory appointment as the Group Recovery Manager will be sought from the Joint Committee at the meeting in March. Gary joins the GEMO from MCDEM where he was a Regional Emergency Management Advisor. Prior to this he held the position of Manager for Thames Valley Emergency Operating Area and prior to that Fire Chief. His strong relationships across emergency services and local government should serve him well in his new role.

Mark Bang has been appointed as the Team Leader – Group Services. Mark joins the GEMO from Fonterra where he held various project management roles over the last ten years. Prior to this, Mark was the Civil Defence Manager at Timaru District Council.

The Emergency Management Coordinator – Capability Development position has been successfully rebanded, and recruitment for this position is underway.

2.5. GEMO Labour and Finances GEMO work programme

The GEMO have contracted Ellen Thomas to undertake a review of the work programme outlined in the Group Plan. This review will include aligning it to the actions outlined in the 6 Year CDEM Strategy and development of the operational/tactical application of the strategy. Timeframes will also be analysed and a plan of action developed.

There is also an ongoing project to review metrics, charge code structure and level of effort reporting to produce more meaningful information for today’s needs and that reflects performance across the entire Group. This work will likely change the reports presented

210

Doc # 11952195 Page 5

below. This information will be available for implementation during the first quarterly cycle of the new financial year.

Level of effort

A monthly overview of the allocation of GEMO labour time is provided below. It covers the second quarter of the 2017/2018 financial year:

It should be noted that readiness was combined with BAU several months ago. Now focusing the metric more on areas of concern regarding GEMO management, to match the change of focus in the M&G.

Areas include:

Activity Indicates (and some of the changes under consideration)

Response Overall impact of response, if any, on work programme

Recovery BAU effort and post-event recovery effort by any staff this metric in particular is under review

Lifelines Is the GEMO delivering the agreed amount of time this metric is going to be separated out to reflect % of agreed time allocated

Projects Time spent on definitive time span projects

BAU Time spent on liaison, planning, on-going (no defined end) projects, readiness, maintenance and sustainment duties, Duty officer, Quarterly reporting cycle, other administration, etc.

Management Management time including line staff time in management (e.g. reports, GEMO meeting, etc.)

211

Doc # 11952195 Page 6

WRC Administration Time cost of being part of WRC (WRC staff meetings, corporate activities, organisational development activities, HR processes, reports, strategy planning, LTP workshops, etc.) this metric is going to be reassessed, moving anything that would be required regardless of the form of administration of GEMO to management or other admin code. For example, time sheet and performance are currently included in this metric. The future metric would then serve more accurately as an indicator of none value added time (in terms of the CDEM Group). The M&G will then be able to monitor that this stays within reasonable parameters.

An overview of the GEMO expenditure for the second quarter of the 2017/2018 financial year, is provided in the following table:

Key to status of GEMO budgets

On plan Off plan Help needed

Expenditure Actual (YTD) Budget (YTD)

Full year budget

% of FY spent Forecast

Labour (raw) $257,501 $345,882 $691,764 37% 100% 1

Direct costs $94,507 $145,867 $291,733 32% 100%

Allocated costs $200,194 $300,502 $601,003 50% 100%

GEMO TOTAL $552,202 $792,250 $1,584,500 36% 100%

Notes:

1. The forecasts remain at 100% expended, as underspend in labour budget will be converted to contracted services budget.

The following commentary is provided regarding these second quarter results: - Labour: Expenditure remains below budget due to vacancies being carried by the GEMO.

It is anticipated that these savings will be fully utilised by the end of the financial year due to the rebanding of the training and recovery manager positions.

- Direct costs: Expenditure remains below budget due to a strong focus on internal projects including the Long Term Plan which has drawn resources away from the Group Plan projects. Vacancies within the team have also limited the direct cost spending. As contractors are brought on line and the new staff are brought up to speed, expenditure on support of certain projects will increase as projects are closed out. Training classes and various forums are now starting to be delivered at the new facility which will also see an increased rate of direct cost expenditure as the year closes.

An overview of expenditure throughout the second quarter is provided in the following charts:

212

Doc # 11952195 Page 7

2.6. Waikato CDEM Group appointments

Overview The following table provides an overview of key appointments within the Waikato CDEM Group:

Key to status of Waikato CDEM Group appointments

Attention required* Potential issue* No issues

*Refer below for further discussion.

Role Name Status

Joint Committee Chair Hugh Vercoe

CEG Chair Langley Cavers

CEG Deputy Chair Blair Bowcott

Group Controller Lee Hazlewood

Group Recovery Manager Gary Talbot – Awaiting Appointment.

Group Welfare Manager Irving Young

NEW Group Public Information Manager (PIM) Wendy Valois (interim arrangement)

NEW Controllers 2 Local and 2 Group candidates to be presented for Joint Committee appointment.

Local Recovery Managers

213

Doc # 11952195 Page 8

Public Information Manager Wendy Valois, Deputy Group PIM, has been acting as the Group PIM following the resignation of Stephen Ward from Waikato Regional Council. Nicola Chrisp has been appointed as the new Group PIM for an initial trial period of one year, after which the arrangements will be revisited.

Local Controllers

Two councils have nominated candidates for appointment as local controllers. In addition, with the resignation of Julian Snowball (Team Leader – Operations/Deputy Group Controller), there is a requirement to appoint additional Group Controllers to serve as deputy Group Controllers. Mark Bang and Andrew BuBear have been nominated by the Group Manager/Controller as suitable candidates for this role.

Group Recovery Manager Confirmation of Gary Talbot’s appointment as Group Recovery Manager will be sought from the Joint Committee at their next meeting.

2.7. Function Update – Training

While the Christmas break saw a reduction in training courses, 114 personnel undertook CDEM training between October and December 2017 (refer Table 1). ITF Development Updates

The following ITF courses are in various stages of development:

Online Foundation: Launched but not generally used because of the preference for using the face-to-face version

ITF Intermediate: Reviewed and several pilot course completed with Waikato Region delivering its first updated course in early March 2018.

ITF Logistics: Final review stage

ITF PIM: North Island pilot 27 February 2018 at Waikato GEMO Capability Development Advisory Group (CDAG)

The face to face CDAG meeting on 21 February 2018 has been postponed due to Cyclone Gita.

CDAG has made available a number of Unit Standard-based training, funded by the Adult Community Education Fund (ACE), for CDEM volunteers in all 16 regions. This was to be a major point of discussion at the meeting because of funding implications. Unit Standards have a $30 one off course fee and up to $6 per unit standard point. Clarification is needed regarding who pays this.

CMAT and Training Calendar

Training course dates have been set up until July 2018 with:

Course Type Month Number of

courses

CIMS 2 and 4 March, May, June 3

ITF Foundation Monthly to July 9

ITF Intermediate March, April, May 6

Welfare CC Function May 1

PIM Pilot February 1

214

Doc # 11952195 Page 9

The GEMO are currently waiting for further development of Takatu as a learning management tool so we can transition from the current CMAT tool which was not designed as a learning management tool.

Figure 1: Total % of Capability achieved – end of December 2017

215

Doc # 11952195 Page 10

Course Region Number of Trainees*

CC Foundation Hamilton City Council 11

Thames Valley (EOA)** 10

Waikato District Council -

West Waikato (EOA)** -

Waikato Regional Council 9

Ministry Of Education 1

University of Waikato 14

Te Puni Kōkiri 1

EMIS Welfare Registration Hamilton City Council -


Waikato District Council -


CC Intermediate Hamilton City Council 16


Waikato District Council 5



Waikato District Health Board 5

Horizons Regional Council 1

Horowhenua District Council 1

Department of Conservation 1

Delivery of Welfare Services in a CDC -

CIMS 2 and 4 Hamilton City Council -


Waikato District Council 6



Waikato District Health Board -

Taupo District Council 11

Fire and Emergency NZ 3

CC Welfare Function -

Total number of staff trained 114

Table 1: Total number of people trained during period October – End of December 2017 *These figures relate to the number of trainees in attendance in the identified area. All training sessions, if not most, had participants from various councils, support agencies and emergency services. ** Emergency Operating Area

2.8. Function Update – Community Engagement

Development on EpiCentre, the Community Response Group website, has been completed. Initial user acceptance testing is underway, with a public launch planned after completion of this activity. Membership benefits include a fortnightly newsletter with videos and stories from other groups in the region, access to a brand package just for Community Response

216

Doc # 11952195 Page 11

Groups, behind-the-scenes information shared with group members and invitations to exclusive events.

2.9. Function Update – ICT

GEMO staff have completed their training on the Emergency Mobile Alert system and concerns initially expressed in the legally binding MOU between MCDEM and the Group have been resolved with a renegotiation of the terms and conditions around use of the system. Since its initial launch, the system has been used a number of times in other areas to issue an alert, most recently during the response to Ex-Tropical Cyclone Gita. This usage has highlighted some issues with the system, as well as some learnings from each message. Any formally recorded learnings will be reviewed by the ICT coordinator and corrective actions applied to the GEMO duty officer processes and the activation SOPs. Following the announcement that MCDEM will no longer be progressing the EMIS 3.0 project, the Group ICT Coordinator is conducting an assessment of the EMIS 2.0’s suitability as a permanent EOC/GECC information system.

217

Doc # 11951227


Date: 16 March 2018



Subject: Warning Systems Strategy update


Purpose 1. To provide the Joint Committee with an update on activities relating to the Waikato CDEM Group

Warning System at both the Group and Local level.


1. That the report Warning Systems Strategy update (Doc # 11951227 dated 16 March 2018) be received for information.

Background 2. In September 2014 the Waikato CDEM Joint Committee approved the WCDEMG Warning

System Strategy (the strategy). The strategy was developed as it was recognised that warning systems are not consistently implemented around the Group and in recognition of the fact that there is a need to continuously improve warning systems, raise public awareness and work towards an integrated system.

3. The Warning System Strategy identified 5 goals and 17 objectives as follows: Goal 1: Evaluate existing warning systems Obj 1.1: Document existing systems used by all Group members Obj 1.2: SWOT existing systems Goal 2: Decide on optimal suite of public alerting systems Obj 2.1: Prepare for public alerting workshops Obj 2.2: Conduct public alerting workshops and deliver recommendations Obj 2.3: Identify suitable suppliers Obj 2.4: Compare recommended systems against existing systems Obj 2.5: Decide on optimal suite of public alerting systems for each TA Goal 3: Implement agreed public alerting systems Obj 3.1: Develop and action implementation plans Goal 4: Increase public awareness and understanding Obj 4.1: Investigate, recommend and implement ideas to build more public interest in CDEM Obj 4.2: Integrate public alerting and appropriate responses into public education plan Obj 4.3: Integrate agreed public alerting systems and appropriate responses into community response plans Goal 5: Build warning system resilience Obj 5.1: Develop an initial Group Warning System SoP

218

Doc # 11951227 Page 2

Obj 5.2: Establish and participate in a national warning systems forum Obj 5.3: Encourage Group Warning System SoP to be considered in Community Response Plans Obj 5.4: Develop and/or integrate warning systems into training and exercises Obj 5.5: Implement ongoing monitoring of warning systems research Obj 5.6: Develop and implement a regular program of operational warning system reviews

Progress against goals 4. Since the approval of the strategy, much progress has been made towards achieving the

objectives set. A SWOT analysis was undertaken of existing systems and gaps, a comprehensive understanding of access and hazards was developed and GNS Science were commissioned to provide an assessment of suitable systems. The alerting report compiled by GNS Science identified two methods with particularly high effectiveness scores – “mobile alerts” and “mobile app”. In addition “radio activated devices” scored very highly as an in-fill device in areas with high risk and low cell reception and limited wifi connectivity. In response, the Group began investigating options for implementing these systems for use in the Waikato.

5. The Emergency Mobile Alerts solution was launched by MCDEM at the end of 2017 and has been implemented in the Waikato, with GEMO staff trained and authorised to use it for matters of life safety.

6. The Red Cross Hazards App provided an opportunity to deliver warnings via a mobile application without any cost to the Group. The Waikato CDEM Group were one of the first CDEM Groups in the country to adopt the app for alerting, and continue to represent the views of the Waikato on the national working group.

7. At the time of publication of the GNS Science options report, there was only one supplier capable of providing radio activated devices. The Waikato CDEM Group, Bay of Plenty CDEM Group and Auckland CDEM formed a working group to work with the supplier to develop a product that would suit their collective needs. This initiative sparked a lot of interest from other Groups and MCDEM was approached by the working group to undertake a due diligence assessment on behalf of the sector. Unfortunately there were multiple problems with the business case developed by the supplier and ultimately MCDEM advised against the use of these devices.

8. The growth of the Group’s Facebook following has provided a valuable method to deliver not only warnings, but a comprehensive public information solution that helps deliver preparedness messages and helps educate the public about reducing their risks.

Developments Kaikoura Earthquake 9. The Kaikoura earthquake on the 14th November 2016 provided an opportunity for a number of

learnings in the warnings space. Gaps in the public’s understanding of the need to respond to natural warnings prompted MCDEM to launch the “long or strong, get gone” public education campaign to improve this understanding.

10. The delay in updating each warning system gained a lot of negative media coverage for some Groups, particularly one group who took twenty minutes to update their website after triggering their sirens. This delay was caused by the very manual processes required to trigger sirens, update social media, edit websites and send Hazards App alerts. The GEMO is currently evaluating options for creating greater efficiency in this process.

11. The use of sirens created a great deal of confusion. Whilst the national tsunami siren standard, which will become compulsory in 2020, attempts to remedy this confusion, sirens are still not a recommended approach to delivering warnings.

12. Although many coastal residents in the Bay of Plenty have subscribed to receive text alerts for tsunamis, many did not receive the notification as they keep their phone in the next room whilst they sleep due to health concerns.

219

Doc # 11951227 Page 3

Bay of Plenty Options assessment 13. A similar GNS warnings system investigation commissioned by the Bay of Plenty CDEM Group in

2017 has identified that there are now a number of suppliers capable of producing radio activated alerting devices for infill and that there is a need for this technology across the east coast due to transient communities with limited access to cell reception, low wifi connectivity and a high tsunami risk.

Collaborative approach 14. Due to the similar challenges faced by Thames Coromandel District Council and Tauranga City

Council, similar risk profile and the large number of people regularly commuting between the two districts, a collaborative approach between these councils and the Waikato CDEM Group and Bay of Plenty CDEM Group has been identified as the best way forward.

15. A working group comprising representatives from each of the parties has developed an action plan which has been adopted by both CEGs. This action plan is outlined below:

Action Who When Outcome

Phase 1 Actions

Reports / presentations to CEG and Joint Committee

TCC / TCDC February / March 2018

Agreement received to resolutions.

Form joint Project team CEGs / TCC, TCDC, Group CDEM staff

February / March 2018

Project steering and project delivery team implemented

Reports to Councils TCC / TCDC March / April 2018

Councils updated on project / outcomes of CEG and Joint Committee

LTP consultation TCC / TCDC March – April 2018

Reports to Councils on consultation

LTP determination TCC / TCDC June 2018 LTPs adopted

Activation method and network Project team

June 2018 Method to activate in home system defined

In home device specification Project team

July 2018 Device specification defined

Ownership, deployment and system / device management

Project team

August / September 2018

Finalise ownership, deployment, management and maintenance issues

Alerting elements Project August / September 2018

Project team ensure that system meets the key alerting elements

Regulatory Project team


Consenting and regulatory defined and known

220

Doc # 11951227 Page 4

Action Who When Outcome

Cost and viability Project team


Finalise costs and viability of system

Decision Point – proceed to next phase

CEG / Joint Committee / Councils

October 2018

Reports back to CEG, Joint Committee and Councils for consideration and agreement to proceed.

Phase 2 Actions

Initial system testing Project team

November 2018

Test successful

Detailed design – system and device

Project team

November / December 2018

Final system and device specifications

Deployment and management Project team

November / December 2018

Final deployment, management defined

Procurement BOPLASS January / February 2019

Tender for device and activation system awarded

Decision Point – Procure and Deploy

CEG / Joint Committee / Councils

February / March 2019

Decision made to deploy in home and public PA systems.

Phase 3 Actions

Regulatory Project team

April / June 2019

Consents applied for, received

Deployment Contractors / BOPLASS / Councils

July / December 2019

Successful deployment

Public test CDEM Groups / Councils

January 2020

Successful test.

16. It is important to note that whilst this is not a compulsory system for TAs to invest in, should any TA make the decision to invest in a form of in-fill device they must use the infill device identified by this process to ensure regional consistency.

221

Documents

Notice of Meeting€¦ · 5 Minutes of Previous Meeting Doc# 11461758 Minutes of the previous meeting of Waikato CDEM Group Joint Committee. 9‐15 6