The Press MONDAY, APRIL 22, 1968. Filling The Breaches In Civil Defence

Press, Volume CVIII, Issue 31660, 22 April 1968, Page 10

The Press MONDAY, APRIL 22, 1968. Filling The Breaches In Civil Defence

Shortcomings in a civil defence system that has never been tested in an emergency should surprise no-one, least of al! those concerned with the planning of the system. Long before the recent storm aroused the first serious public interest in civil defence, some of the deficiencies were apparent. The implementing of the Civil Defence Act of 1962 throughout the country has been very uneven; it has encountered much indifference, even some hostility. This lack .of interest and co-operation parallels the publics general indifference to the Armed Services except in time of war. In the last week or so persons who previously seem to have given little thought to either the need for, or the merits of, civil defence have become remarkably conscious of supposed deficiencies in the system. Some criticism of what happened during the storm was misdirected; much of it appears to be without foundation. Some critics were members of the civil defence system who complained that they did not understand their duties; apparently they had done nothing to remedy their uncertainty. Misunderstandings of civil defence—of how and in what circumstances it should be brought into action—are, of course, one failure of the civil defence scheme. It is worth noting, however, that civil defence organisations have been designed to be as simple as possible and to involve as small a number of people as possible, commensurate with the tasks likely to have to be performed. In Christchurch, for example, the only instruction to citizens is: “In a “ disaster, if you need help go to, or get word to, your “nearest State primary school”. The schools are bases for relief work in a major disaster. This Instruction applies only where a state of disaster has been declared and has been signalled by continued short blasts on whistles and sirens to alert citizens to listen for radio announcements. It may be difficult to foresee the nature and extent of a major disaster. In such an emergency as the flooding and wind damage that occurred recently in Christchurch, rescue and relief work was well within the capacity of the men and machines the police could call on without recourse to full-scale emergency measures. Action must be scaled to the degree of an emergency; the deployment of unnecessarily large “forces” might hamper, not expedite, relief work. The conference of civil defence officers in Wellington last week was more concerned with the dangers of underestimating the scale of an emergency and of failing to anticipate a threat of major disaster. The dangers of overestimating or of underestimating an emergency cannot be removed merely by refining a system. Much must be left to human judgment Although most of the recent criticism concerned human judgment much of it was expressed in such a way as to suggest that the system was faulty. Some weaknesses in the system were revealed; but they were not of such a kind as to suggest that, where civil defence organisations were called on, they failed to respond. The weaknesses should be repaired promptly. Civil defence officers may find their work easier now that the public have a better appreciation of the purposes and value of the scheme.