Uncertain future of Civil Defence

The forthcoming merger of rural and urban fire services in New Zealand was quietly going under the political radar until the Port Hills fires burst into view a fortnight ago and, with them, questions about the speed and structure of the emergency response.

The merger is the project of Internal Affairs Minister Peter Dunne and it will lead to a new organisation called Fire and Emergency New Zealand (Fenz). The creation of a national, fully integrated fire service was recommended as far back as the Royal Commission into the Ballantyne’s fire of 1947. There have been many unsuccessful attempts at a merger since.

Fire incident controller Richard McNamara told The Press that the rural and urban fire services were working together on the Port Hills fires ahead of the new mandated model and that it went smoothly apart from ‘‘a few glitches’’ owing to different command structures. There is a cultural bridge that he and others are confident will be crossed by the new organisation.

Dunne suggests that the new model could go further still and possibly take over the role of Civil Defence, which is to be reviewed by Civil Defence Minister Gerry Brownlee. There have been criticisms of its chain of command and its communications during both the Kaikoura earthquake of November and the Port Hills fires. Many others who work in the emergency sector agree that Civil Defence’s management needs to be more streamlined, with fewer layers of command.

Dunne has argued that the quality of Civil Defence depends too much on the resourcing, funding and ability of individual councils. Some are clearly more prepared and experienced than others. While Civil Defence remains variable and piecemeal, and reliant on local volunteers, the Fenz structure, which launches in July this year with a $303 million overhaul, will be a professional body that could be further equipped to cover new responsibilities.

The idea has some merit but there are also obvious dangers than Dunne and others have acknowledged. One is the risk of marginalising community-based volunteers with local knowledge in a rush to centralise management and responses. There is much to be said for volunteers acting in their own regions, as long as they are well resourced, trained and briefed by a professional body.

In a blog post, Dunne has thought ahead and argued that after Fenz has expanded to include Civil Defence, it could eventually broaden to cover ambulance services as well. As Dunne wrote: ‘‘This is not about developing the large ‘standing army’ some are fearful and so scornful of, nor is it about building empires. Much more pragmatically, it is about ensuring that our communities are at all times best placed to protect themselves.’’

Whether or not Dunne’s idea is picked up or modified by Brownlee, it is clear that change will come to Civil Defence and it will be sooner rather than later. Brownlee has signalled that the internal review of Kaikoura will be finished by late March and he will also have a clear idea by then about the response to the Port Hills fires. As Brownlee said in careful political language, it is not about what went wrong, but about how things could have been done better.