|
Ian Macdonald introduced the item
and discussions covered:
·
Workforce
challenges are evident across the whole emergency management sector. There is
a shortage of experienced people and high staff turnover.
·
Current
staff are experiencing wellbeing issues including response fatigue.
·
Rising
workload demands on leadership to train and support incoming staff.
·
Level
of service expectations from the community continue to rise as does the
complexity (particularly technology and communications) and expense of
managing events.
·
NEMA staff
levels have grown from 50 to nearly 200. As NEMA activity levels rise, there
is an increasing expectation that CDEM Groups will be more involved in NEMA events,
projects, consultation etc.
·
When
the Emergency Management Bill comes into force there are likely to be
additional requirements and responsibilities placed at the regional level.
·
Relationships
with Iwi/mana whenua continue to be built and strengthened.
·
Natural
hazards – knowledge and understanding of risks has risen considerably
over the past decade. Consequently Group is involved in educating communities
about these. There is also a need to work strategically with councils as they
develop spatial plans and land use policies.
·
The
Group has a need for staff in the operational readiness, administration and
planning roles as well as in community engagement and long term risk
reduction areas. The need for a senior operational manager role has also be
identified – to provide cover for the Group Manager, be an alternative
Controller and to lead Group staff including Team Leaders.
·
Cyclone
Gabrielle has highlighted the need for greater community support,
particularly in rural areas. Councils (who are giving such support) also need
assistance from Group staff to coordinate and bolster their work.
·
Group
has a deficit in its reserves of close to $3m resulting from recent emergency
events. Repayment of this needs to be included in the HBRC funding
recommendation.
·
Financial
options for repayment of the deficit (incl. Cyclone Gabrielle review costs)
over a five year period were discussed. Likewise, details of how to fund the increase
in staff levels and to improve resources and better inform communities were
discussed.
·
The
impact of these funding requirements is that in the first year (2024/25)
costs rise by $215,000, in year two (2025/26) by $106,077, and in year three
(2026/27) by $119,896. All of these costs are cumulative ($440,973) and
ongoing.
·
Currently
the HBRC rates paid by the community to fund the Group are $43.97p.a. (incl.
GST) per rateable property. The projected rate level for 2024/25 year is
$66.84, 2024/25 year $67.63 and 2026/27 year $69.83.
·
The Joint
Committee’s input into the HBRC LTP process is to consider and confirm
that the operational changes being proposed are fit for purpose. HBRC will
then consider the funding recommendation/request from this meeting and make
its own decisions on the financial aspects involved including what the
repayment period for the deficit should be.
·
Concerns
were raised about the support received from NEMA during emergency events and for
general preparedness. There are several Cyclone reviews underway which will
enable councils to raise such issues with the relevant authorities.
·
Building
future resilience –past Group operational capacity has not been
sufficient. There is now a need to ensure that the changes and budgets being
presented at this meeting are truly sufficient for future needs.
·
Looking
ahead - it may be helpful to set out what the roles and responsibilities are
for the HB CDEM Group, all local Councils, tāngata whenua and NEMA.
These roles and responsibilities should then be correlated to each of the civil
defence ‘four Rs’ (Reduction, Readiness, Response, Recovery).
·
Group
is looking to build its relationship with mana whenua and is increasing its
capacity to do so. Mana whenua groups often do not have sufficient resources
themselves to engage with CDEM Group.
·
There
is a history of councils being left to meet the costs of policies and regulations
introduced by central government - civil defence is looking like being another
example. Cyclone Gabrielle was a National Emergency, with local councils acting
on behalf of the government during the response and recovery phases. Why
should councils be burdened with the costs involved? The various Cyclone
Gabrielle reviews now underway will be considering this aspect.
·
Group
should be empowering communities to act and use resources that they have available
to them, particularly in the first days of an event. There should not be a
‘command and control’ structure in place; this would signal to
communities that resources will be provided from a central point during an
emergency which is not the case.
|
