Air disaster fears for Auck. firemen

Press, 3 May 1984, Page 30

Air disaster fears for Auck. firemen

PA Auckland Firefighters at Auckland International Airport fear it will take an air disaster to force changes recommended almost 3% years ago by the Commission of Inquiry into the 1979 Friendship crash. They allege that emergency exercises at the airport had been a “total shambles” and some senior officers wanted no further part of them. They claimed the “fiasco” over the choice and subsequent rejection of the second rescue hovercraft reflected incompetence or indifference by the Ministry of Transport. The regional officer of the Firemen’s Union, Divisional Officer Dennis Heath, said that under the present airport emergency plan, Fire Service firefighters and the Ministry of Transport’s airport crash rescue firemen would be trying to do the same job, with neither group recognising the authority of the other. “Anyone experienced in emergency work knows there can be only one boss at the scene of operations,” Mr Heath said. The Commission of In-

quiry in 1979 had stressed the importance of its recommendation that the airport crash rescue service and the Fire Service be amalgamated, but this has not been done, he said. The union criticised the Government, the Ministry of Transport and the Fire Service Commission for lack of progress on amalgamation and other recommendations. Officers in the two services had met on their own initiative to plan ways to work together, but the question of who was in charge was unresolved. Fire Service officers claimed that a “co-ordina-tor” at the Friendship crash stopped them from getting to the scene and the union now suggests firefighters ignore any such persons. Three recent air disasters — two in Spain and one in the United States — showed runway approaches were a critical area for emergency services, Mr Heath said. Yet firefighters would have “no show” if an aircraft crashed on the eastern approach to Auckland airport because the water supply recommended there had still not been installed, he said.

The Ministry of Transport had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on a second hovercraft which proved completely useless for its intended purpose, Mr Heath said. “We’re inclined to think that this indicates either incompetence or indifference on the part of the Ministry.” Airport emergency exercises arising from the Ministry’s airport emergency plan had been “about as useful as the hovercraft.” Mr Heath said the exercises were completely unrealistic because some of the organisations involved were advised weeks in advance so they could be prepared and ready at the airport on time. There woul d be little or no warning for real emergencies. “The exercises have been a total shambles. All our officers say they are real ‘Dad’s Army’ stuff,” he said. “Most senior officers would rather not take part. We have to take full responsibility for any fires which may occur around the city while giving a full response to the exercises only to find it is a stupid game.”