‘Fiscal constraints’ major question mark in emergency reform

Comment: If there was a sense of the over-familiar in reading yet another government response to yet another damning report on the state of our emergency response network, at least Emergency Management Minister Mark Mitchell acknowledged the elephant in the room.
“The issues raised are not new,” Mitchell said in the foreword of the Government’s formal response to the findings of an inquiry into Cyclone Gabrielle response, which also covered other severe weather events in the North Island last year.
“They are the same issues we’ve heard from previous reviews and inquiries. It is time we ask ourselves ‘How can we make sure it is different this time?’”
That is quite literally the million-dollar question, given the growing costs associated with the response and recovery from emergencies – projected to increase by over 50 percent per decade, according to Mitchell, rising from $700 million in 2020 to $3.3 billion by 2050.
The message delivered by the Cyclone Gabrielle inquiry was strikingly similar to those dating back to the Canterbury earthquakes, from significant capability gaps to funding shortfalls and wide variations in performance.
Mitchell’s stated solution is to build a system that is “adaptive, simple and builds backup capacity”, with a clear plan for action – a goal that is hard to argue with, certainly compared with the sometimes convoluted nature of the status quo.
A commitment to empower communities and local bodies with the right tools for emergency responses likewise fits with established research on the importance of a community-led response to the recovery from a disaster.
That is something of a double-edged sword, however, with the response noting the need to talk honestly with New Zealanders about what support they can expect from local and central government, and a desire for heightened self-reliance.
“In a major emergency, limited resources are stretched or overwhelmed and focused on the areas of the highest priority. This means some communities will not get the assistance they may expect.”
The role of local government, a constant complication in recent responses given conflicting messages between different authorities, may also be beefed up.
“Local authorities across New Zealand are members of local communities and are well placed to understand and manage the risks communities face and partner with them to build resilience.”
That is not without some difficulty, as the report notes, with the sector “under considerable pressure” and local authorities with smaller ratepayer bases particularly affected.
“As emergencies have become more frequent, more intense, and longer running, some councils have fallen short of community expectations before, during and after emergencies. These challenges will continue to grow.”
Offering support for the Government’s response, Local Government NZ president and Selwyn Mayor Sam Broughton reiterated that concern, raising direct funding or an emergency management levy as potential solutions to fill the financial void.
“These communities are vulnerable and cannot afford to deliver minimum standards on their own, so we see central government funding as critical,” Broughton said.
Other recommendations, like expanding the ‘fly-in’ squad of emergency response experts to three full-time teams and investing in a new common operating picture and platform, will not come cheap.
But while the Government has indicated its support in principle for all of the inquiry’s recommendations, it comes with a major caveat – that of cost.
“We are in a constrained fiscal environment, and the Government is taking a disciplined approach to reducing spending as it delivers on key priorities. In this context, significant new investment is not expected in the short term.”
Indeed, one of the major improvements to the emergency response system already in place – the 24/7 natural hazards monitoring system – appears to be at risk of degrading in quality if GNS Science cannot find new sources of revenue to fund its work, as Newsroom reported earlier this week.
Instead, the Government says it will plan for “a sustained, strategic programme of investment over the medium term”. But long-term consistency has proved an issue, with the report noting resources for agreed improvements have sometimes been redirected elsewhere, including for short-term emergency responses.
Mitchell has said he will unveil a more substantive roadmap for action early next year, while a new Emergency Management Bill will be introduced at some point during the parliamentary term.
Securing cross-party support for changes, and resisting the urge to move any funding towards more vote-winning areas, may be critical if his work is to bear fruit where predecessors have failed.