Nelson Tasman Civil Defence Emergency Management Group
Te Rōpū Ohotata
Held in the Nelson City Council Chamber, Floor 2A, Civic House, 110 Trafalgar Street, Nelson on Tuesday 27 July 2021, commencing at 9.30a.m.
Present: His Worship the Mayor of Tasman T King (Chairperson), Deputy Mayor J Edgar (Nelson City Council – NCC), Deputy Mayor S Bryant (Tasman District Council – TDC)
In Attendance: P Dougherty, Chief Executive (NCC), J Dowding, Chief Executive (TDC), K Redgrove, Governance Adviser (NCC)
Civil Defence Emergency Management (CDEM): J Kennedy, Manager Emergency Management, CDEM Team Members: K Solly, M Griffiths, K Anderson, L Swatton, R Gibson
Apologies : Her Worship the Mayor of Nelson R Reese
1. Apologies
|
Apologies |
|
|
|
That the Civil Defence Emergency Management Group 1. Receives and accepts the apologies from Mayor Reese for attendance. |
Nil.
3.1 30 March 2021
Document number M16524, agenda pages 7 - 12 refer.
|
|
That the Civil Defence Emergency Management Group 1. Confirms the minutes of the meeting of the Civil Defence Emergency Management Group, held on 30 March 2021, as a true and correct record. |
4. CDEM Coordinating Executive Group Minutes - 28 June 2021
J Kennedy referenced the accessibility principles raised at the last meeting of this Committee and confirmed that material drafted for publication now incorporated these.
With reference to the Coordinating Executive Group (CEG) minutes, he said that the Nelson Tasman resurgence planning continued to be well placed due to the strong partnership with the District Health Board. He mentioned there had been some staffing changes which would necessitate amendments to the Resurgence Plan.
The meeting heard that further data connected with the Alpine Fault Project had been released and would impact on the existing information. The intention was to communicate this in a format that would be easily understood by the community.
J Kennedy responded to points of clarification in relation to the Joint Resilience Fund application. He went on to explain the purpose of the Work Programme considered at the June meeting of CEG was to identify and track key CDEM projects for the coming year.
Deputy Mayor Edgar mentioned the recent presentation by Dr Eade at the LGNZ conference. This had outlined the iwi Māori emergency management network, its structure and how the groups interrelated with CDEM. J Kennedy noted the desire for the work and aspirations of this group to be shared more broadly.
|
|
That the Civil Defence Emergency Management Group 1. Receives the report CDEM Coordinating Executive Group Minutes - 28 June 2021 (R26035) and its attachment (A2703734), for information.
|
5. Manager Emergency Management Report
S James from NEMA provided a verbal update to the meeting. She said the key focus at the recent LGNZ conference was around the iwi Māori engagement and advised the Māori Advisory Committee was now operational. It was hoped that a shared identity and strategic direction could be achieved between these two groups, with more inclusion of their operations within the CDEM system.
She advised NEMA were facilitating the development of a CDEM Strategy and had met last week with NEMA and CDEM Group Managers to try and achieve some structure around what that might look like. It was considered the key underlying piece of work was to align with CDEM Group priorities, allowing for the differing sizes of these Groups across the country. The aim was to support and improve national and local outcomes and strengthen partnerships, including those with iwi Māori. She said the process had been co-designed with NEMA and Group Managers and anticipated this piece of work would be finished by December 2021, with rollout of initiatives in 2022.
S James reported that a Ministerial Advisory Committee had been established by the Acting Emergency Management Minister and said that members all had extensive experience in emergency management. They would ensure iwi Māori perspectives were integrated in the programme and received support.
The meeting discussed the status of the emergency management legislation, there having been an Amendment Bill put previously. S James clarified that there was now a move to rewrite the legislation and that timelines had been adjusted accordingly to allow for a consultation phase later in 2021.
Concerns were expressed that, with the other major reviews of legislation relating to Three Waters and the Resource Management Act, this would create a great deal of pressure on local government to achieve meaningful consultation in all these areas and that it demonstrated a lack of ‘joined up’ thinking from central government.
S James noted these concerns, assured members these would be referred back to the NEMA Chief Executive and that, in relation to the processes, consultation with key stakeholders and local groups would be considered an essential factor in understanding the ‘on the ground’ viewpoint.
Further discussion on the draft Bill process ensued and a better understanding of timings for the Hazard Risk Assessment work was sought, there being concerns that allowance had not been given to allow for feedback that would inform these plans.
J Kennedy provided some reassurance in relation to this, stating that between 18-24 months had been set to initiate the process rather than complete it, which allowed for time to input and inform the process.
J Kennedy reported that some of the Emergency Management Assistance Team, of which there were 13 members, had recently been deployed to assist with flood events in Westport.
He advised there had been a renewal of Epidemic Preparedness Notice for a further three months. This assisted with achieving quorum where members were attending via an audio-visual link.
A South Island Severe Weather report document drawn from the recent flood events was tabled and noted.
A question was raised relating to information sharing between NZTA and CDEM during flood events. It had been observed there had been insufficient guidance on Waka Kotahi’s (NZTA) website, with criticism of the lack of updates provided to the public, creating uncertainty for motorists and issues with traffic congestion.
S James confirmed that all agencies connect with each other during emergency events but accepted that not all information was published to websites. She confirmed she would pass on this feedback to Waka Kotahi and have a discussion on how this may be improved.
J Kennedy commented that operations in that space had been improved through the Lifelines Committee work. It was confirmed there had been good communication between staff of the respective organisations but that they were aware Waka Kotahi had had technical issues with their website and this may explain the lack of information published.
The high proportion of demographics quoted evidencing vulnerable groups within smaller communities was queried and discussed. It was accepted that this would differ in each community. S James advised that the aim was to have a sharper focus around those more vulnerable communities but that these would need to be determined locally and a response would be dependant upon the type of event. J Kennedy accepted there was still work to do in this area.
S James advised that, in relation to the $46.6M of new Government Investment, the proportion of funding that would come to the Regions had not yet been determined. This is something that NEMA were working on, with a focus on using funds to strengthen the existing emergency management systems.
Members expressed concerns that, with investment of these funds being made centrally, this would then increase local demand and there was uncertainty around sufficient funding to cope with this. J Kennedy advised his understanding was that the majority of that funding would be kept at national level, unless there were additional resources required locally but that more detailed conversations had yet to happen.
J Kennedy highlighted a number of pertinent points in his Emergency Management Report, mentioning the recent debrief following the flooding events which identified improvements to the standard operating procedure. He confirmed there were ongoing discussions on aligning the Council’s and CDEM’s Hazard Risk Assessment Plans.
He went on to report that financial expenditure was tracking below budget, principally due to depreciation on staff costs as there was currently a staff vacancy. He anticipated funds relating to Covid-19 operations, once received, would address a reported overspend.
|
|
That the Civil Defence Emergency Management Group 1. Receives the report Manager Emergency Management Report (R26036) and its attachments a2703737 and A2506160.
|
6. Attendance by iwi representatives at the Nelson Tasman Civil Defence Emergency Management Group
J Kennedy explained the background to the recommendation, which was amended to better align with the Terms of Reference recommendation (item 7).
7. Terms of Reference for Civil Defence Emergency Management Group (CDEM Group)
Following discussion of item 6, the meeting agreed that the Terms of Reference should reflect the resolution carried and that the document should be referred back to this Committee once a final draft had been achieved. The key drivers was to ensure that the Terms of Reference reflects both the membership and the practices of this Committee.
|
Item |
General subject of each matter to be considered |
Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter |
Particular interests protected (where applicable) |
|
1 |
Civil Defence Emergency Management Group Meeting - Confidential Minutes - 30 March 2021 |
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7. |
The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(a) to protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of deceased persons. |
|
2 |
CDEM Coordinating Executive Group In-Committee Minutes - 28 June 2021
|
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7 |
The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(b)(ii) To protect information where the making available of the information would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information |
The meeting went into confidential session at 10.35 am and resumed in public session at 10.45 am.
There being no further business the meeting ended at 10.45 am.
Confirmed as a correct record of proceedings by resolution on 29 November 2021:
|
Resolved CDEM/2021/015 |
|
|
|
That the Civil Defence Emergency Management Group 1. Confirms the minutes of the meeting of the Civil Defence Emergency Management Group, held on 27 July 2021, both public and confidential, as a true and correct record. |
|
Edgar/King Carried |
|