Part 2: The Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group Plan

2.1
In this Part, we discuss:

• the administrative arrangements for emergency management in the Auckland region;
• the strategic direction and goals of the Group Plan;
• the framework for action set out in the Group Plan;
• progress on implementing the framework for action; and
• the need to review and update the Group Plan and framework for action.

2.2
The Council has a critical role in emergency management, which it must carry out in partnership with many other agencies and organisations. To ensure that this activity is well co-ordinated, the Council needs a clear strategy and implementation plan.

2.3
We wanted to understand what strategies and plans had been prepared, how they were prepared, and whether they were fit for purpose. We expected the Council to have:

• a clear strategy that guides its emergency management activities, is aligned with the national emergency management framework, and is informed by an understanding of the particular challenges that Auckland's diverse communities face;
• developed the strategy in partnership with emergency management organisations in the region;
• translated the strategy into a multi-year implementation plan, with specific and prioritised work aimed at achieving the strategy, and clear accountabilities for carrying out this work;
• ensured that work has clear deliverables and milestones and is resourced appropriately; and
• defined measures of success to track progress against the strategy.

Summary of findings

2.4
The Group Plan provides strategic direction for emergency management activities in the Auckland region and is aligned with the national emergency management strategy. Relevant organisations and the community were involved in the Group Plan's development. However, the framework for action that was designed to support implementing the Group Plan was in our view too ambitious and, therefore, unrealistic.

2.5
Continued restructuring and staff turnover in Auckland Emergency Management before 2019 had eroded institutional knowledge and impacted its progress to implement the Group Plan.

2.6
In 2019, we found that little progress had been made against the actions set out in the Group Plan. Since 2019, the Covid-19 pandemic and other emergency events have further impeded progress. Implementing the Group Plan is far from complete and it is overdue to be updated.

2.7
The Council recently started updating the Group Plan and now intends to complete it in January 2024. We encourage the Council to complete this work as soon as possible.

Auckland Council's role in emergency management

Regional emergency management groups

2.8
Central and local government's emergency management work is governed by the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002 (the Act) and regulations.

2.9
The Act requires local authorities to establish civil defence emergency management groups to be responsible for emergency management at a regional level. Civil defence emergency management groups involve regional, city, and district councils working with local and regional organisations to co-ordinate emergency management planning.

2.10
There are 16 regional civil defence emergency management groups. Each must prepare and approve a civil defence emergency management group plan. These plans set out how each group will co-ordinate emergency management for its region.

2.11
The plans have many requirements, including setting out the hazards and risks that each group needs to manage and how it will manage them.

The Auckland Civil Defence Emergency Management Group

2.12
There are five principles that underpin the Auckland CDEM Group's role:

• promote the sustainable management of hazards;
• empower communities to achieve acceptable levels of risk;
• provide planning and preparation for responding to, and recovering from, emergencies;
• co-ordinate programmes and activities and encourage co-operation and joint action between agencies for the "4 Rs" framework and resilience;⁶ and
• provide the basis for integrating local and national emergency management policies, processes, and operations.

2.13
When we started our review in 2019, the Auckland CDEM Group was responsible for overseeing the Council's emergency management work. The Auckland CDEM Group is a statutory committee set up under the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act. The Auckland CDEM Group is intended to be Auckland's strategic forum for civil defence and emergency management planning and policy, including providing direction and leadership to the Council and the other emergency management organisations it works with. It was meeting quarterly at that time.

2.14
The Auckland CDEM Group's members were the Mayor and Deputy Mayor of Auckland, six councillors, and up to two representatives from the Auckland Independent Māori Statutory Board. Representatives from relevant organisations could attend as observers. The Mayor selected a councillor to be chairperson.

2.15
The same structure continued after the 2022 local government elections.

The Auckland Civil Defence Emergency Management Co-ordinating Executive Group

2.16
The Act requires the Auckland Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group to establish and maintain a Civil Defence Emergency Management Co-ordinating Executive Group (the Co-ordinating Executive Group).⁷

2.17
The Co-ordinating Executive Group is responsible for:

• providing advice to the Auckland CDEM Group as well as any task groups or subcommittees;
• implementing, as appropriate, the Auckland CDEM Group's decisions; and
• overseeing the preparation, implementation, maintenance, and evaluation of the Group Plan.⁸

2.18
The Co-ordinating Executive Group meets quarterly and is chaired by the Council's Chief Executive. The Group comprises:

• statutory members representing the New Zealand Police, Fire and Emergency New Zealand, Hato Hone St John, and health and disability services;
• co-opted members such as the Auckland Group Controller,⁹ the Group Recovery Manager, the Auckland Emergency Management General Manager, a representative from Auckland Transport, and a representative from the Auckland Lifelines Group; and
• contributing members such as the Auckland Welfare Co-ordination Group chairperson, the Harbourmaster, the chairpersons of the Auckland Regional Leadership Group, and representatives from the Ministry of Social Development, New Zealand Defence Force, and the National Emergency Management Agency.

2.19
Figure 1 shows the relationship between the Auckland CDEM Group, Auckland Emergency Management, and the Co-ordinating Executive Group.

Auckland Welfare Co-ordination Group and Auckland Lifelines Group

2.20
Two other groups have important roles in emergency management. They are the:

• Auckland Welfare Co-ordination Group – a group of social sector government agencies and other organisations that co-ordinate community welfare and recovery in the event of an emergency; and
• Auckland Lifelines Group – a regional collaboration of lifeline organisations.

2.21
A member of the Council's emergency management staff is the chairperson for the Welfare Co-ordination Group, and a senior Council manager is the chairperson for the Auckland Lifelines Group.

Auckland Council's role

2.22
The Council is the Auckland CDEM Group's administering body and carries out administrative functions and duties. The Council is responsible for funding and co-ordinating emergency management activities in the Auckland region. Because there are many organisations involved in emergency management throughout the Auckland region, the Council's co-ordination role is critical to the Auckland CDEM Group's operation.

Figure 1
Auckland Civil Defence Emergency Management groups

Source: Adapted from CDEM groups and councils September 2013, at civildefence.govt.nz.

2.23
In practice, the Auckland CDEM Group's work is supported by Auckland Emergency Management. Auckland Emergency Management is expected to:

• co-ordinate and plan activities related to hazard and emergency management;
• encourage co-operation and joint action in the region;
• identify and understand the aspirations of its communities and their implications for risk and hazard management; and
• examine risks and hazards to the Auckland region and prioritise each hazard.

2.24
At the time of writing this report, Auckland Emergency Management had 32 staff in three teams reporting to a general manager. One team focused on Auckland's readiness to respond to, and recover from, emergency events. Another team focused on building community and business resilience. The third team was responsible for emergency management capability and public awareness.

The Group Plan provides strategic direction for emergency management activities

2.25
The Group Plan is the five-year strategic plan for the Auckland CDEM Group and relevant organisations in the Auckland region. Although it was intended to cover just 2016 to 2021, it remains in place until a new plan is finalised.

2.26
The Group Plan sets out:

• the hazards and risks that the Auckland CDEM Group needs to manage;
• the actions needed to manage the hazards and risks;
• how its objectives align with the national civil defence emergency strategy in place at the time;
• arrangements for declaring a state of emergency in the Auckland CDEM Group's area; and
• arrangements for co-operating and co-ordinating with other civil defence and emergency management groups.

2.27
The Group Plan's vision statement is "working together to build a resilient Auckland". It sets out five overarching goals:

• Reduction: Reducing risks from hazards to Auckland.
• Readiness: Increasing community awareness, understanding preparedness, and participation in emergency management.
• Response: Enhancing Auckland's capability to manage disasters.
• Recovery: Enhancing Auckland's capability to recover from disasters.
• Resilience: Building a resilient Auckland to support the vision of Auckland as "the world's most liveable city".

2.28
The first four of these goals align with the national emergency management strategy's 4 Rs framework that was in place when the Group Plan was prepared. The fifth is consistent with the National Disaster Resilience Strategy Rautaki ā-Motu Manawaroa Aituā's emphasis on resilience.¹⁰

Auckland Council developed the 2016 Group Plan with other relevant organisations and the community

2.29
The Council prepared the Group Plan in 2015 and formally approved it in 2016.

2.30
When drafting the Group Plan, the Council consulted with:

• councillors, local board members, and advisory panels;
• other relevant organisations, including the then Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management; and
• the wider community through various groups and networks.

2.31
The Council carried out formal public consultation on the draft Group Plan between February and April 2016. The then Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management also carried out a technical review of the Group Plan.

2.32
The Council incorporated the Ministry and the public's feedback into the revised draft Group Plan before it underwent Ministerial review. After the Ministerial review, the Auckland CDEM Group approved and adopted the Group Plan.

The Group Plan accurately described the specific challenges Auckland faced

2.33
It is important to understand the specific challenges that communities face. This allows the design of community readiness activities to consider the level of resilience and experience of different demographic groups. It also means that responses can be tailored to those groups' specific challenges and vulnerabilities.

2.34
The Group Plan provides a broad, high-level assessment of the state of emergency management in the Auckland region in 2016. It provides information about:

• demographic trends and ethnic diversity;
• infrastructure (water, gas, buildings, and communications networks);
• the economy; and
• the geographical and environmental features of the region.

2.35
The Group Plan also has commentary about the Auckland region's risk profile, including a high-level account of important hazard management work that the Council was carrying out when the Group Plan was being prepared.

2.36
When it was approved in 2016, the Group Plan accurately described the Auckland region's complex demographic, economic, and physical landscape, including the needs of people who lived there. However, this information is now more than five years old and needs to be reconfirmed or updated.

The Group Plan's framework for action was too ambitious

2.37
The Group Plan had a "framework for action" that set out the actions to take to achieve its overarching goals (see paragraph 2.27) and address specific issues (see Figures 2 and 3). This framework also identified the agency who would lead the action and the time frame for each action to be completed.

2.38
When the Group Plan was approved in 2016, there were 80 actions in the framework. The framework assigned the Council responsibility for all but two actions.¹¹ Most actions were assigned to Auckland Emergency Management.

Figure 2
Examples of the link between actions in the Group Plan's framework and the reduction goal

Issue	Activities	Actions
Hazards and risks including how they are managed need to be better understood and more effectively communicated by the CDEM sector.	Increase the understanding of disaster risk in Auckland through further investigation, promotion and accessibility of research.	9. Develop an effective and comprehensive hazard and risk awareness campaign. 10. Conduct further investigation and research into the consequences of hazards and ensure that hazards and risks and not considered in isolation. 11. Support the development and implementation of the Natural Hazard Risk Management Action Plan (NHRMAP) to deliver best practice risk reduction and resilience outcomes. 12. Develop a 10-year hazard research plan to target gaps in knowledge and information in line with the NHRMAP (e.g. impacts from climate change and future growth). 13. Provide targeted and coordinated risk reduction education and training as part of a professional development programme. 14. Develop a mutually beneficial exchange programme with international partners and organisations to learn about disaster risk reduction and how it is being applied globally.

Source: Adapted from Auckland Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group Plan 2016-2021.

Figure 3
Examples of the link between actions in the Group Plan's framework and the readiness goal

Issue	Activities	Actions
CDEM information needs to be more comprehensive and accessible to the public and taught more consistently by education providers.	Increase the level of community awareness and understanding of the risks from hazards and how to prepare for emergencies through public education.	21. Develop a public education strategy to enhance disaster preparedness through relevant and meaningful community engagement. 22. Utilise technology and innovative solutions to help communicate information to the public. 23. Work with primary schools and early childhood centres to ensure that emergency preparedness is being taught as part of the school curriculum. 24. Develop an education programme for secondary schools and tertiary education institutions in the area of disaster resilience. 25. Develop a targeted public education campaign for Auckland's public alerting and warning systems.
Community participation and preparedness in emergency management is low because CDEM's activities are not well understood and changing people's behaviour is challenging.	Empower the community to increase their own resilience through strategies and tools.	29. Work with established community and organisational networks to increase participation, optimise collaboration and to empower the community to help themselves and others during a disaster. 30. Develop a Māori Responsiveness Plan and establish partnerships with Māori to ensure greater involvement in CDEM. 31. Develop guidance to leaders, elected members and advisory panels on what they can do to increase resilience within their community and support elected members through a comprehensive framework across the 4 Rs. 32. Encourage community-led hubs which assist the community to effectively respond in an emergency.

Source: Adapted from Auckland Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group Plan 2016-2021.

2.39
Significant work was required to achieve the Group Plan's goals and objectives. However, in our view, the expectations set out in the framework for action were not realistic. Many of the actions are significant and complex pieces of work. For example:

• developing a mutually beneficial exchange programme with international organisations to learn about disaster risk reduction and how it is being applied globally;
• developing an education programme for secondary schools and tertiary education institutions on disaster resilience; and
• working with established community and organisational networks to increase participation, optimise collaboration, and to empower the community to help themselves and others during a disaster.

2.40
In the documents we reviewed, the time frames for completing these actions had been frequently adjusted, extended, or postponed. We saw many examples of plans and strategies that were still in draft form and activities and actions that had not been completed. In our view, Auckland Emergency Management did not adequately prioritise the different actions and its work programme lacked focus. We do not think that the governance of this work programme was effective.

Not enough progress has been made on implementing the Group Plan's framework for action

2.41
In 2019, at our request, the Council assessed its own progress against the actions outlined in the Group Plan. At that time, the Council told us it had completed 16 actions and was on track to complete a further 44 actions.

2.42
The Council provided an updated assessment of progress in 2022. However, many of the activities they highlighted were broadly defined. Some activities we consider to be ongoing functions of Auckland Emergency Management rather than specific initiatives. Some of the updated information contradicted earlier information we were provided.

2.43
Overall, the information the Council provided did not give us a complete picture of progress against each action in the Group Plan.

2.44
The Council has progressed a range of activities that support actions identified in the Group Plan. These include:

• sharing work programmes with Fire and Emergency New Zealand's community risk managers and their teams to deliver shared community resilience-building activities, working with the Capability and Capacity Working Group, and meeting quarterly with Emergency Management Committees, which comprise operational organisations in the northwest, central, and southern parts of the region (these activities are intended to support the "Develop strategic partnerships to deliver effective and sustainable strategies" action in the Group Plan);
• chairing the Auckland Lifelines Group (this activity is intended to support the "Maintain the Auckland Lifelines Group to promote research opportunities and increase infrastructure resilience" action in the Group Plan);
• developing and delivering an education programme "Kia Rite, Kia Mau" to marae and schools (this activity is intended to support the "Develop an education programme for secondary schools and tertiary education institutions in the area of disaster resilience" action in the Group Plan);
• trialling a Community Emergency Hub Guide with a range of community groups, and designing and providing signage to groups that have an active community hub (this activity is intended to support the "Encourage community-led hubs which assist the community to effectively respond in an emergency" action in the Group Plan); and
• developing and distributing business information packs, and holding webinars, workshops, and stands at industry and community events and speaking engagements (this is intended to support the "Develop an effective partnership and working relationship with sector groups to help promote organisational resilience" action in the Group Plan).

2.45
The Council has also made some progress against the broad goals of the Group Plan (see paragraph 4.9).

2.46
Despite this, most of the actions in the Group Plan have not been fully completed. This lack of progress suggests that there are a range of management and governance issues that need to be addressed by Auckland Council, the Co-ordinating Executive Group, and the Auckland CDEM Group.

2.47
In our view, not enough progress has been made in:

• developing a disaster risk reduction strategy and creative workspace to guide relevant organisations, practitioners, and policy makers in how to effectively manage hazards and risks in the long term, including the effects of climate change (action 5);
• developing an education programme for secondary schools and tertiary institutions on disaster resilience (action 24);
• carrying out regular audits of agency resources, capability, and capacity during a disaster (action 40);
• developing a library of exercise co-ordinating instructions for Auckland across the range of hazards identified in the Group Plan (action 52); and
• developing, maintaining, and implementing an agreed common operating structure and procedures for sharing/managing resources to enable an efficient response across all agencies (action 54).

2.48
There are also important matters in the Group Plan that were not necessarily the subject of specific actions in the framework but that still need to be addressed. We note that Auckland Flood Response Review: Independent, External Review of Events, January 27-29, 2023 also referred to this. These matters are:

• developing or supporting specific contingency plans for very high priority hazards (including flooding and "superstorms"); and
• regularly testing the Council's capability and capacity to respond to a large-scale emergency and learn from that testing.

2.49
Council staff told us that they prioritised the emergency management work programme in 2022/23 to focus on five priorities. These are to:

• review the Group Plan;
• review the Evacuation Plan for Auckland;
• work on a multi-agency capability and capacity strategy and training programme;
• develop and establish improved partnerships with Māori to ensure that they have greater involvement in emergency management; and
• develop a process, framework, and understanding of the roles and responsibilities for air quality in the event of a fire in Auckland.¹²

2.50
We are pleased that the Council has brought more focus to Auckland Emergency Management's work programme. We also appreciate that this work will take time to complete. However, in our view, it is important for the Council to improve its understanding of all the other actions in the Group Plan, and why they were initially included, to determine if they are still relevant.

2.51
If any actions in the Group Plan are not progressed, it will be important for the Council to be transparent about its reasons when it updates the Plan. Ideally, that information would be available to the Auckland CDEM Group, relevant organisations, and the public.

The Group Plan must be reviewed and updated as soon as possible

2.52
The Council has created a project schedule for reviewing and updating the Group Plan. Work on this has started, including reviewing the hazards that the Auckland region faces and some specific analysis of tsunami risk.

2.53
The original project schedule stated that the Council would finish reviewing and updating the Group Plan by the end of November 2023. The Council intended to submit the updated Group Plan to the Auckland CDEM Group for approval, and then to the Minister of Emergency Management by the end of 2023. Until then, the current plan remains in effect.

2.54
The Council told us it originally set November 2023 as the deadline for completing the update because there was a national-level regulatory work programme under way. This programme involves the development of a new Emergency Management Act, review of the National Civil Defence Emergency Management Plan Order 2015, and development of a National Disaster Resilience Strategy roadmap. Because these are important parts of the regulatory framework in which the Council carries out its emergency management work, it wanted to align the updated Group Plan with any changes to the regulatory framework.

2.55
We now understand that updating the plan has been delayed because Auckland Emergency Management staff have had to focus on flooding and cyclone responses for most of 2023 to date. The Auckland CDEM Group met on 26 April 2023 and agreed to a January 2024 completion date for the Group Plan.

2.56
We understand the reasons for this time frame. However, we strongly encourage the Council to progress this work as soon as possible. Emergencies can happen at any time. The Council needs to agree priorities and implement improvements urgently to ensure that it is better prepared for the next event.

2.57
The Council told us that it expects the updated Group Plan to be more concise and have fewer objectives and actions. The Council also expects the plan to embed a commitment to greater iwi and Māori involvement in emergency management.

2.58
We support this. In our view, one of the main reasons that progress towards achieving the Group Plan's goals and objectives has been slow is because Auckland Emergency Management was trying to do too much at once. We encourage the Council to consider how other business units in the Council can support Auckland Emergency Management's work programme.

2.59
In our view, a thorough assessment of current emergency management capability and capacity as well as responses to recent events is also required to inform the review and update of the Group Plan. This is necessary to make sure the right activities are prioritised, and will assist the Council to properly resource Auckland Emergency Management's work programme so it can deliver on the updated plan.

2.60
In our view, it would be useful if the Group Plan's actions were organised into a sequenced plan that better reflects interdependencies. This will help other relevant organisations understand what actions to focus on first. It will also encourage them to work together and with the Council to make progress.

2.61
There also need to be clearer measures to assess progress towards the updated plan's goals and objectives. This will help the Council understand what progress has been made each time the Group Plan is reviewed. It will also improve transparency for relevant organisations and the community.

Recommendation 1
We recommend that Auckland Council complete its review and update of the Civil Defence Emergency Management Group Plan and its associated framework for action as soon as possible.

2.62
The Council should work with relevant organisations and their partners, as appropriate, to ensure that respective roles, responsibilities, and expected actions are understood and clearly defined in the Group Plan. The Council should also ensure that the priorities in the updated Group Plan are adequately resourced.

---

6: The 4 Rs are reduction, readiness, response, and recovery.

7: The requirement to establish a Co-ordinating Executive Group is in section 20(1) of the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act.

8: The functions of the Co-ordinating Executive Group are defined in section 20(2) of the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act.

9: The Group Controller directs and co-ordinates the use of personnel, materials, information, services, and other resources made available by departments, emergency management groups, and other persons during a state of local emergency. The Group Controller also carries out other functions delegated by the Group or allowed by legislation.

10 National Disaster Resilience Strategy Rautaki ā-Motu Manawaroa Aituā replaced the previous National Civil Defence Emergency Management Strategy. As well as the 4 Rs framework, the new strategy emphasised building resilience in a way that contributes to the well-being and prosperity of all New Zealanders.

11: One action was assigned to the New Zealand Police and the New Zealand Fire Service. Another action was assigned to Civil Defence Emergency Management Recovery Task Groups. We did not audit the progress of actions that these organisations were responsible for.

12: This was identified by the Council as a priority after the 2019 New Zealand International Convention Centre fire.