Huge difference in approach!

Kia Ora,

In my last post I finished with a comment about the latest rumour. EQC is short of cash as it was never prepared for something as big as the Canterbury earthquake.

Rumours like that get traction especially when the response has been so poor. Even more so when, as I have been doing, going back over my database of clippings concerned with security & risk assessment I find warnings about overdue earthquakes & volcanic eruptions for New Zealand.

But then you look at the response of New Zealand compared to that of Australia with their large floods at present.

Where as New Zealand couldn't make up its mind whether to deploy the military to assist after the earthquake because it would send the wrong message, the Australians have employed their military early & are looking to have them in the recovery phase. In fact leading the way.

I know one person from civil defence was worried about the military taking over & as I pointed out to them in the situation we had it was more likely to be aid to the civil power.

It took the Mayor of Christchurch to ask the Prime Minister live on TV for the military to be deployed.
2010 Planning Guidance for Response to a Nuclear Detonation - Federal Guidance for a Nuclear Bomb Attack on an American City, Effects, Fallout, Shelter, Medical Care, Decontamination
But even if the military did take over it tends to be much more organized(organized chaos as we always referred to it) that in any current major situation I have been involved in. In fact in one we advised the locals how to run their operations better so they didn't waste resources as they were at the time.

Their set up would require the advice from people with that specific knowledge & the likes of civil defence could learn a lot from them as the system is similar, but the military use it all the time. At present I find many in civil defence have this rose tinted view that they will save everyone all the time.

Despite claims to the opposite parts of civil defence were a shambles in my dealings with them during the earthquake.
Disaster on Green Ramp : The Army's Response
A big part has been the difference in attitude already evident.

Where as EQC are taking the attitude that a quick check & what was deemed to be condition of area in general was true for every property in that area.

Then take the attitude of the Military officer in charge of recovery operations in Australia his comment was "what I have learned in responding to disasters is the requirements of every community is different" & had he been in charge of the earthquake recovery here, I dare say he would of extended that to every household or building.
Preparing for the Humanitarian Consequences of Possible Military Action Against Iraq: Response to the Committee's 4th Report (House of Commons Papers)
So it goes back to that rumour. With the Australian approach there will be less likelyhood of them taking hold. Where as the New Zealand approach is actually feeding them.

This again is causing frustration & growing anger.

Crime & violence are already up due to the continuing financial crisis without continually adding to it by poor responses.

http://www.foxhoundsecurity.co.nz