John MacDonald: Call in the army for our civil defence future

How many reviews and reports do we need before we accept that we are nowhere near as good at emergency and disaster management as we think we are here in New Zealand?  

I reckon we’ll never admit it. But we should.  

In fact, we shouldn’t just admit that we’re not as good as we think - we should also be looking at some major structural change. Not just more of the tinkering around the edges that the Government is talking about today.  

We need to accept we’re pretty average; we need to accept that we’re a tiny country; we need to accept that, when it comes down to it, the military is the best outfit to be running our disaster response and we should be merging our civil defence and military defence functions.  

The Government has announced a big overhaul of emergency and disaster management after recent reports showed just how woeful things are in this department. Particularly after what happened during and after Cyclone Gabrielle last year.  

You might remember back in March this year when Mike Bush —who used to be the Police Commissioner— released his report on his review of the Civil Defence response to the cyclone.  

I remember being astounded when he came out and said that Civil Defence wasn’t prepared; it hadn’t planned for worst case scenarios; and that the national emergency management system was setting people up to fail.  

It was setting people up to fail.  

I was astounded because it seemed the country had learned nothing from the experiences during the 2010 and 2011 earthquakes in Canterbury. It was no better prepared in 2023 than it was 12 years earlier.  

So the Government’s taken all that on board and is talking about changing things.  

As you’d expect, what the Government’s talking about is all high-level, strategic stuff. It’s saying things like: “We want to build an emergency management system that can continuously improve and become stronger over time”.  

Which is all great stuff, but the Government’s also warning that it might have the money to do it.  

So here’s what I reckon we should be doing: 

You know how after a disaster the army either turns up to help or people call for the army to be sent in? I think the army or our defence force (even though it’s way under-resourced in a lot of areas itself) should be doing the planning and the leading during times of disaster.  

I heard Emergency Management Minister Mark Mitchell on Newstalk ZB listing all the people involved in emergency management in this country. Which tells me there are just too many cooks in the kitchen.  

And that’s the nub of why we seem to be getting no better at disaster planning, disaster response, and disaster management.  

From my experience, there are a lot of moustaches involved. A lot of testosterone, and a lot of egos.  

You don’t get that in the military. There are hierarchies that people operate under in the defence force. In normal times and during times of disaster. The military has communication functions and capabilities that no local council is ever going to have.  

It does plan for worst case scenarios. It does all the things our disaster and emergency management people haven’t been doing and have been called-out for not doing it. Not just in Mike Bush’s report, but others as well.  

And that’s why I’m more convinced than ever that, instead of pouring more time and money into a standalone civil defence system —one the Government itself is saying today needs to improve, but is also saying that there might not be the money to do it— that’s why I think we should be merging our civil defence and military defence functions.  

Or, to put it another way: I think we should be bringing the army in well before disaster strikes. 

See omnystudio

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:06):
You're listening to the Kerrywood of morning's podcast from News
Talk said, be.

Speaker 2 (00:12):
How many reviews and reports do you think we need?
How many before we accept that we are nowhere near
as good an emergency and disaster management as we think
we are here in New Zealand. I reckon we'll never admitted.
I don't think we're big enough to admit it, but
we should. In fact, we shouldn't just admit that we're
not as good as we think we are. We should
also be looking at some major structural change, not just

(00:35):
more of the tinkering around the edges of the government's
talking about today. We need to accept we're pretty average.
We need to accept that we're a tiny country. We
need to accept that when it comes down to it,
the military is the best outfit to be running our
disaster response and we should be merging our civil defense
and our military defense functions. That's right, Matt. So what's

(00:57):
happened this morning as the government's announced a big overhaul
of emergency and disaster management after recent reports you know about.
These reports showed just how woeful things are in this department,
particularly after what happened during and after Cyclone. Gabriel last year.
And you might remember back in March this year when
Mike Bush, who used to be the Police Commissioner, he

(01:18):
released his report on his review of the civil defense
response to the cyclone, and I remember being astounded when
he came out and said that civil defense wasn't prepared,
it hadn't planned for worst case scenarios, and that the
national emergency management system was setting people up to fail.
It was setting people up to fail. And I was

(01:42):
astounded because it seemed the country had learned nothing from
the experiences during the twenty ten and twenty eleven earthquakes
in Canterbury. It was no bed to be prepared, it
seemed in twenty twenty three than it was twelve years earlier,
thirteen years earlier. So the government's taken all that on
board and is talking about changing things and getting local
councils all trained up more and getting professional development sorted

(02:05):
for emergency management workers, and blah blah blah, blah blah
blah blah, more of the blah blah as you would expect, though,
to be fair of the government, what it's talking about
today is all high level strategic stuff. You know, it's
saying things like quote where you want to build an
emergency management system that can continuously improve and become stronger
over time. End of quote. Which is all great lofty stuff,

(02:27):
all brilliant, but the government's also warning today that it
might not have the money to do it. So back
to what I reckon we should be doing. You know
how after a disaster, the army either turns up or
people call for the army to be sent in. Now
I'm in Canterbury, but I remember after the big cyclone
people in Hawke's Bay were begging the government to send

(02:49):
the army in. And I think the army, or more specifically,
our military force, even though it's way under resourced in
a lot of areas itself, I think our defense force
should be doing the planning and should be doing the
leading during time of disaster. Now I heard Emergency Management
Minister Mark Mitchell talking to Mike Eurlery about this, and

(03:11):
he was being all diplomatic, saying that despite the recent
scathing reports about our emergency and disaster management, he still
has confidence in the people involved, which he has to say,
doesn't he's the minister. But listen to this role call
of people that he trotted out to Mike earlier this morning,
which tells me there were just too many cooks in
the kitchen, especially when things hit the fan, and this

(03:33):
is why things fail.

Speaker 3 (03:34):
Without a doubt. All the means of shown leadership, the ces,
our controllers, all of our CDM teams, first responders, community groups,
but what we have to do is we have to
be ready for a really big event across region to
make sure that we can respond to that as well.

Speaker 2 (03:51):
Now call it what you want, too many cocks in
the kitchen, you can call it a cast of thousands,
But that's the nub of why we seem to be
getting no better at disaster planning, disaster response, and disaster management. Now,
Mike referred to all the people Mark Mitchell was talking
about there as Dad's army. But I either way, from
my experience, there are a lot of mustaches involved in
emergency and disaster management, a lot of testosterone, and from

(04:16):
my own personal experience, a lot of egos. Now you
don't get that in the military. You probably still get
your fair share of mustaches. But there are hierarchies that
people operate under in the Defense Force in normal times
and jury type. During times of disaster, the Defense Force
has communication functions and capabilities that no local council is

(04:38):
ever going to have. The Defense Force does plan for
worst case scenarios. It does all the things our disaster
and emergency management people haven't been doing and who have
been called out for not doing it, not just in
Mike Bush's report, but others as well. And that's why
I am more convinced than ever that instead of pouring

(04:59):
more time and money into a standalone civil defense system,
one the government itself is saying today needs to improve,
is also saying that there might not be the money
to do it. That's why I think we should be
merging our civil defense and our military defense functions. Or
you want to put it another way, I think we
should be bringing the army in well before disaster strikes.

Speaker 1 (05:22):
For more from carry Wood and Mornings, listen live to
News Talks a B from nine am weekdays, or follow
the podcast on iHeartRadio