COMMUNITY CONSTELLATION SUBMISSION ON THE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT BILL 2026

Submitted by: Hui E! Community Aotearoa on behalf of the Community Constellation

Date: 13 February 2026

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Community Constellation welcomes the Emergency Management Bill’s recognition of Māori participation in emergency management and its acknowledgment that emergencies can disproportionately impact vulnerable communities. The Bill represents an important opportunity to strengthen community resilience.

The recent 2026 flooding and landslide events across the North Island have demonstrated the critical role that tangata whenua, community organisations and volunteers play in emergency response and recovery—often before government agencies arrive and long after they leave. These events have reinforced the urgency of ensuring that community voices, knowledge, and resources are formally recognised and adequately resourced within New Zealand’s emergency management system.

Community resilience comes from being community-led and community-rooted, not from external agency coordination alone.

Key Recommendations:

1. Establish a National Tangata Whenua Emergency Management Partnership Forum
2. Establish formal partnership protocols and territorial partnership agreements
3. Resource iwi and/or hapū preparation and response
4. Embed community and volunteer expertise in emergency management governance
5. Recognise marae and community organisations as essential service delivery partners in response and recovery
6. Ensure lead agency establishes coordination protocols with iwi and/or hapū and community organisations
7. Co-design emergency management plans
8. Establish funding for community organisations to prepare and respond in emergencies
9. Support preventative measures, including community infrastructure development 
10. Develop community resilience metrics
11. Establish accountability mechanisms.

WHO WE ARE

The Community Constellation is a collaborative group of peak bodies and infrastructure organisations across Aotearoa. We came together in 2024 to collaborate more closely, hosted by Hui E! Community Aotearoa, with Te Tiriti o Waitangi as our foundation. 

The Community Constellation members include 20+ peak bodies representing large parts of the sector of 115,000 community organisations nationally. This includes the community organisations that are the first responders in emergencies.

Our shared focus is to:

• Give effect to Te Tiriti o Waitangi
• Weave networks for community infrastructure collaboration
• Amplify collective action towards transformational systems change.

The following 17 organisations are a part of the Community Constellation and jointly make this submission: 

• ACE Aotearoa
• Community Housing Aotearoa
• Community Networks Aotearoa
• Community Waikato
• Disabled Persons Assembly
• Environment Hubs Aotearoa
• Hui E! Community Aotearoa
• Inspiring Communities Aotearoa
• LEAD Centre for Not for Profit Governance and Leadership
• New Zealand Council of Christian Social Services
• NZ Navigator Trust
• Platform Trust
• Repair Network Aotearoa
• SociaLink
• Social Service Providers Te Pai Ora o Aotearoa 
• Tangata Whenua, Community and Voluntary Research Centre (Community Research)
• Volunteering New Zealand.

CONTEXT: THE 2026 NORTH ISLAND FLOODING AND LANDSLIDES

The Community Constellation is submitting this during an active emergency response to the 2026 flooding and landslide events that have affected communities across the North Island. These events have provided immediate, real-world evidence of the critical role that tangata whenua, community and voluntary sector organisations play in emergency management.

What we have observed:

• Tangata whenua and community organisations responded first. Before formal emergency management structures were fully activated, iwi, hapū and community organisations—churches, rural community groups, sports clubs, health and social service providers—began responding to immediate community needs.
• Volunteers mobilised at scale. Community volunteers have provided critical support for search and rescue, welfare, coordination of aid, shelter provision, cleaning and recovery. Rural communities, in particular, have mobilised local networks and resources.
• Existing community infrastructure proved critical. Existing relationships, facilities, and trust within communities have been essential to effective emergency response. Organisations with long-standing community presence have been able to respond more quickly and effectively than external agencies.
• Inequitable support. Rural and remote communities, and those with fewer resources, have received less immediate support than more accessible areas.

These real-time experiences reinforce why the Emergency Management Bill’s framework is important—and why strengthening community voice, coordination, and resourcing is urgent.

SUMMARY

The Community Constellation supports the Bill’s direction with recommendations to ensure that tangata whenua, community and voluntary sector organisations are recognised, resourced, and centred throughout emergency management, for the benefit of all.

We support:
✓ Recognition of Māori participation in the emergency management system at national, regional, and local levels
✓ Acknowledgment that emergencies can amplify existing inequalities and disproportionately impact vulnerable communities
✓ Requirement for Emergency Management Committees to identify and engage with disproportionately impacted communities
✓ Emphasis on strengthening community participation in emergency management

However, the Bill currently falls short of ensuring that tangata whenua, community and voluntary sector organisations—who are the backbone of emergency response and recovery—are adequately recognised, resourced, and centred in emergency management planning and action.

OPPORTUNITY 1: BRING EFFECT TO MĀORI PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CROWN THROUGHOUT EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT

The Opportunity

The Bill includes provisions for Māori participation, which are welcomed by the Community Constellation.

However, the current framework falls short of embedding genuine Te Tiriti partnership throughout the emergency management system. Notably, the Bill does not establish a dedicated National Māori Emergency Management Advisory Group at the national level to ensure Māori guidance informs emergency management strategy at the policy level, separate from regional implementation. This represents a significant gap compared to earlier legislative proposals.

Why This Matters

Te Tiriti o Waitangi establishes partnership between the Crown and Māori (tangata whenua). Effective emergency management requires genuine partnership, not just consultation.

Furthermore:

• Māori communities often face greater emergency risks (lower elevation, older housing stock, exposure to hazards)
• Tangata whenua often serve as first responders and community anchors
• Mātauranga Māori provides essential knowledge for risk reduction and recovery
• Kaupapa Māori approaches to community care and resilience are more effective over the longer-term
• Iwi and hapū have constitutional authority in their territories and should co-lead emergency management

The 2023 and 2026 flooding and landslide responses have demonstrated that marae have served as critical community centres and iwi and/or hapū have coordinated response and recovery. These institutions should be formally resourced and co-leading emergency management, not just participating.

What We Recommend

The Bill should include a statutory requirement for:

a) A National Tangata Whenua Emergency Management Partnership Forum, comprising:

• Representatives from iwi and hapū with national presence and expertise in emergency management
• Crown representatives including the Minister responsible for emergency management, the Director-General, and the National Controller
• Mandated to meet at least quarterly before any national emergency and throughout any declared national emergency
• Authority to advise on and approve major national emergency management plans and policies affecting Māori communities
• Dedicated permanent funding for secretariat, research, and operations

b) that:

• Require consultation with the Partnership Forum before activation of national emergency declarations affecting Māori communities
• Enable iwi/hapū to lead recovery in their territories, with Crown agencies providing support and resources

c) Clarify that emergency management co-ordinating executive group members (s39(2)(f)) have:

• Explicit authority to represent iwi and/or hapū positions and perspectives in Co-ordinating Executive Group decisions
• Authority to escalate concerns about Māori interests to regional Emergency Management Committees and the Director-General
• Dedicated funding for iwi and/or hapū administrative support, expertise, and governance time
• Authority to bring Māori-led proposals directly to the Committee
• Automatic invitation to all relevant sub-committees and planning sessions that affect Māori communities

d) Mandatory territorial partnership agreements between iwi and/or hapū and Emergency Management Committees, including:

• Formal co-leadership arrangements for emergency management in iwi territories
• Direct funding to iwi/hapū for their emergency management functions (separate from local authority contributions)
• Iwi and/or hapū nomination rights for key personnel, such as representation on Regional Controller teams and Recovery Manager representation
• Joint approval authority over regional emergency management plans, particularly provisions affecting Māori communities
• Recognition of marae as critical community infrastructure requiring dedicated emergency management resourcing (power supplies, communications capacity, supply chain resilience)
• Protocols for iwi/hapū-led response coordination, with Crown agencies in supporting roles

e) Recognition in the national emergency management plan that:

• Iwi and hapū have constitutional authority within their territories and in matters affecting their members
• Emergency management co-leadership with Crown agencies is a Te Tiriti o Waitangi obligation
• Mātauranga Māori hazard knowledge is co-equal with Western science in risk assessment and planning
• Recovery must include restoration of cultural sites, whānau reconnection, and community cohesion—not just infrastructure

f) Appropriation mechanism for direct funding to iwi and/or hapū for:

• Marae emergency preparedness capability (facilities, equipment, communications, supply stockpiles)
• Kaupapa Māori emergency response training, preparedness, and community readiness programs
• Cultural continuity in recovery (supporting marae and cultural site restoration, whānau reunification).

OPPORTUNITY 2: EMBED COMMUNITY AND VOLUNTEER SECTOR EXPERTISE IN EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT GOVERNANCE

The Opportunity

The Bill establishes Emergency Management Committees and Emergency Management Co-ordinating Executives at regional and local levels. The Bill clarifies the roles and responsibilities of local government participants in the emergency management system by specifying the distinct and separate functions of Emergency Management Committees and local authorities within each area.

The Bill does not currently mandate representation of community and volunteer sector expertise.

Why This Matters

Community and voluntary sector organisations:

• Are embedded in communities with existing relationships and trust
• Respond first in emergencies, often without waiting for formal activation
• Know vulnerable populations and understand their specific needs
• Employ 5% of the paid workforce and coordinate 1.6 million volunteer hours weekly
• Deliver essential services during and after emergencies
• Understand local infrastructure, risks, and community assets

The 2023 and 2026 flooding responses has made this evidence-clear: communities with strong local organisation networks have responded more effectively and equitably than those without.

What We Recommend

We recommend amending the Bill to require Emergency Management Committees and Emergency Management Co-ordinating Executives to include:

1. Consultation with community sector peak bodies to:
   1. Ensure community voice in emergency management planning
   2. Connect Emergency Management Committees with community organisations
   3. Facilitate community participation and engagement
   4. Represent community interests and knowledge
2. Membership with specific expertise in:
   1. Community coordination and volunteer management
   2. Faith-based community engagement
   3. Health and social service delivery
   4. Disability support and accessibility
   5. Mental health, addiction and wellbeing psychosocial support
   6. Rural and remote community networks
   7. Culturally and linguistically diverse communities
3. Clear funding and resourcing for community representatives’ participation, including:
   1. Paid participation (not unpaid volunteering)
   2. Support for community organisations’ staff time
   3. Resources for community engagement and coordination

As Volunteering New Zealand and the Volunteer Centre Network note, volunteer coordination is a key part of emergency operations, and volunteer centres have expertise in recruiting, onboarding, deploying, and coordinating volunteers—it is what they do in communities every day. These existing community infrastructure networks should be recognised and resourced as part of formal emergency management governance.

OPPORTUNITY 3: RECOGNISE COMMUNITY ORGANISATIONS AS ESSENTIAL SERVICE DELIVERY PARTNERS IN RESPONSE AND RECOVERY

The Opportunity

The Bill strengthens critical infrastructure provisions, focusing on lifeline utilities (communications, electricity, water, transport). This is important but incomplete. The Bill is largely silent on the role of community and social service organisations in maintaining essential human services during and after emergencies.

Why This Matters

Essential community services that keep communities functioning during emergencies include:

• Food security and distribution services (community food services, meal programs)
• Emergency shelter and accommodation (community housing services, marae, community facilities)
• Health and mental health and addiction services (community health organisations, counselling, disability support)
• Disability support services (equipment, personal support, accessibility)
• Childcare and family support (enabling adults to participate in response/recovery)
• Aged care services (residential and community-based)
• Social cohesion and community connection services (preventing isolation, maintaining hope, sustainable psychosocial support)

Community, neighbours and volunteers, marae and local community groups are first responders. Research by Environment Hubs Aotearoa (2026) documents that during Cyclone Gabrielle and the Auckland Anniversary Weekend Floods, community organisations responded first, often within hours, before formal emergency management structures were fully activated. These early responses were critical to ensuring vulnerable populations were not abandoned. 

As the Environment Hubs report documents: ‘Community organisations with long-standing presence in communities were uniquely positioned to reach vulnerable populations – elderly people, disabled people, non-English speakers, and socially isolated individuals – that formal emergency services struggled to locate.’ The research includes case studies of Waiheke Resources Trust and Sustainable Hawke’s Bay, demonstrating how community food distribution, shelter coordination, welfare checks, and psychosocial support were delivered through existing community networks rather than new formal structures. This is well-documented in the case of the Student Volunteer Army, which was born when one of its founders ignored official advice from Civil Defence after the 2011 Christchurch earthquakes to ‘go home and leave it to the experts’. At its peak the Student Volunteer Army coordinated 1800 volunteers.

These organisations are currently funded through philanthropy, government contracts, and limited support—none of which scale automatically in emergency. The research found that funding for community response often arrived weeks or months after the emergency, meaning funding came only after the response phase ended. As the report states: ‘Funding delays meant that community organisations could not surge capacity during the critical response phase. By the time funding arrived, immediate needs had passed, but recovery phase began with underfunded services.’

What We Recommend

We recommend the Bill be amended or regulations clarify that essential community services are recognised as critical infrastructure, requiring:

1. Explicit identification of essential community services within Emergency Management Committee plans, including:
   1. Food security and meal services
   2. Emergency shelter and accommodation
   3. Health and mental health and addiction services
   4. Disability support services
   5. Childcare and family support
   6. Community connection, psychosocial support and social cohesion services
2. Continuity planning for essential community services, requiring:
   1. Pre-emergency engagement with community service providers
   2. Agreements on service continuation during emergencies
   3. Identification of potential disruptions
   4. Plans for resource allocation and support
   5. Regular testing and updating with community partners
3. Funding mechanisms for service continuity, including:
   1. Pre-emergency funding for emergency preparedness
   2. Emergency funding to maintain services during activation
   3. Recovery funding for community organisations supporting response and recovery.

This would ensure that when communities face emergencies, the essential services they depend on are resourced and protected.

OPPORTUNITY 3: ENSURE COMMUNITY AND IWI COORDINATION WITHIN LEAD AGENCY FRAMEWORKS

The Opportunity

This framework identifies government agencies with ‘primary responsibility for managing the response’ to emergencies from particular hazards.

This is a significant structural change. Lead agencies will have:

• Primary planning and coordination authority for hazard-specific emergencies
• Responsibility to develop sector response plans (e.g., Ministry of Earthquake Commission for seismic emergencies, NZDF for tsunamis)
• Direct liaison with the Director-General and National Controller
• Resource coordination authority during response

Why This Matters

Lead agency frameworks can either:

(a) EXCLUDE community and iwi by creating parallel hierarchies that bypass community coordination and iwi authority, OR

(b) INTEGRATE community and iwi as formal partners in lead agency planning and response

The Bill does not specify:

• Whether iwi and/or hapū must be included in lead agency planning
• How community organisations coordinate with lead agencies
• How lead agency authority interacts with regional Emergency Management Committee authority

Risk: Lead agencies could focus narrowly on their technical domain (e.g., seismic response) while overlooking community care needs, thus creating silos where:

• Lead agencies coordinate technical response
• Emergency Management Committees coordinate community response
• No mechanism ensures these two efforts are coordinated
• Iwi/hapū authority in territories is bypassed if lead agency is not from that area

What We Recommend

1. Amend s69 (role of lead agencies) to add:

“The functions of a lead agency are to:

• Engage with iwi and hapū whose territories may be affected by the hazard, and incorporate their knowledge and leadership in planning; and
• Establish coordination protocols with Emergency Management Committees and community organisations providing essential services; 

2. Establish community service continuity as lead agency responsibility  

Amend section 69(2) to add:

“(f) Ensure that planning for hazard-specific emergencies includes maintenance of critical community services [as defined in section 91(1)(n)], and that community organisations providing these services are engaged as partners in response planning and coordination“

OPPORTUNITY 4: MAXIMISE COMMUNITY AND VOLUNTEER PARTICIPATION THROUGH AUTHENTIC ENGAGEMENT AND RESOURCING

The Opportunity

The Bill requires Emergency Management Committees to identify and engage with disproportionately impacted communities. Each Emergency Management Committee must identify and engage with communities within its area that may be disproportionately impacted by emergencies, and to engage with them about how to address their needs in emergency management committee plans.

This is a positive step. However, the Bill does not specify how this engagement should happen, how adequacy will be measured, or how it will be resourced.

The Environment Hubs Aotearoa research documents massive volunteer mobilisation during Cyclone Gabrielle and the Auckland Anniversary Weekend Floods, with thousands of community volunteers conducting search and rescue, welfare checks, shelter operations, cleanup, and food distribution. However, the research also identifies critical gaps: the lack of systematic volunteer coordination created safety risks, duplication of effort, and unsustainable burnout among volunteers who were operating without professional support or management.

Volunteer management is a professional discipline – it requires health and safety protocols, task-matching expertise, fatigue management, and activation systems. Current emergency management does not address this, leaving volunteers to self-organise in crisis.

Why This Matters

Emergencies disproportionately impact:

• Māori and Pacific communities (higher exposure, lower resource access)
• Rural and remote communities (geographic isolation, fewer services)
• Disabled people (accessibility barriers, dependency on specific services)
• Low-income populations (fewer resources to recover, asset loss)
• Older people and children
• Culturally and linguistically diverse communities

Many community organisations work with disproportionately affected communities and can support the Crown to engage with these communities.

Without authentic, well-resourced engagement:

• Emergency Management Committees may engage with easiest-to-reach communities (not most vulnerable)
• Engagement may be token consultation without real action
• Community knowledge may not be integrated into planning
• Community organisations may not be resourced to participate
• Plans may miss critical needs and solutions that communities identify

What We Recommend

We recommend the Bill, and accompanying regulations and guidance, clarify requirements for authentic community engagement including:

1. Mandatory resourcing for community participation, requiring:
   1. Funding for community organisations to participate in Emergency Management Committee work
   2. Support for community leaders and volunteers’ time
   3. Resources for accessibility and inclusion (translation, childcare, accessibility supports)
   4. Reimbursement of reasonable expenses for community participation
2. Co-design of emergency management plans with disproportionately impacted communities, including:
   1. Community-led identification of risks and needs including psychosocial support
   2. Community-led solutions and response strategies
   3. Transparent reporting on how community input shaped plans
   4. Regular feedback and updating based on community experience and feedback
3. Explicit community coordination mechanisms, including:
   1. Requiring that local government emergency plans state how they will work with existing community experts, including volunteer centres, on managing offers of assistance from the public
   2. Resourcing for volunteer coordination before, during, and after emergencies
   3. Engagement with community peak bodies to facilitate coordination
   4. Recognition of different types of volunteers (emergency-specific, formal emergency responders, established volunteer groups, spontaneous volunteers) and their different needs and contributions
4. Clear guidance on meaningful engagement, including:
   1. Identifying vulnerable communities
   2. Authentic engagement processes (early, ongoing, transparent)
   3. Integration of community knowledge into planning
   4. Accountability measures and public reporting.

OPPORTUNITY 5: ESTABLISH FUNDING FOR COMMUNITY EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE

The Opportunity

The Bill establishes a framework for emergency management functions and accountability. However, it does not establish funding streams for tangata whenua and community organisations to prepare for emergencies or respond when they occur.

Why This Matters

Tangata whenua, community and voluntary organisations are expected to:

• Participate in planning 
• Maintain continuity of essential services 
• Mobilise volunteers for response 
• Support vulnerable populations 
• Lead community recovery

Yet they receive:

• No dedicated funding for emergency preparedness
• No guaranteed reimbursement for emergency response costs
• No funding for volunteer coordination
• No support for their own organisational recovery after emergencies

This is unsustainable. The 2023 and 2026 flooding responses have highlighted marae and community organisations are stretched thinly, and are using reserves and whānau donations to continue services.

What We Recommend

We recommend the Bill, and government emergency management funding, establish:

1. Pre-emergency funding streams for:
   1. Tangata whenua and community organisation emergency preparedness and training
   2. Volunteer recruitment, training, and coordination infrastructure
   3. Community emergency planning and risk reduction
   4. Community facility emergency resilience (generators, water storage, etc.)
2. Emergency response funding for:
   1. Marae and community organisations providing emergency response services
   2. Volunteer coordination and support
   3. Community mutual aid and recovery support
   4. Essential service continuity (childcare, health, social services)
3. Recovery funding for:
   1. Marae and community organisations supporting response and recovery
   2. Repair and restoration of damaged marae, community facilities and infrastructure
   3. Trauma support and community wellbeing services
   4. Restoration of community social fabric and relationships
4. Volunteer support and protection, including:
   1. Reimbursement for reasonable expenses incurred by volunteers during and after emergencies (for example, volunteers’ wetsuits ruined in flood clean-up should not leave volunteers out-of-pocket)
   2. Civil liability protection (which the Bill includes positively)
   3. Training and support for different types of volunteers
   4. Recognition and appreciation for volunteer contribution

OPPORTUNITY 6: SUPPORT COMMUNITY-LED RESILIENCE AND RECOVERY

The Opportunity

Emergency management is traditionally framed as a government/infrastructure responsibility with communities as recipients of support. The Bill retains this framing, though it increasingly recognises community roles.

Why This Matters

Research and practice demonstrate that:

• Community-led resilience is more effective and sustainable than top-down approaches
• Māori-led and kaupapa Māori approaches are more effective in the long-term
• Place-based solutions developed by and for communities are more responsive and appropriate
• Community relationships and mutual aid provide the foundation for resilience and response
• Community empowerment leads to better outcomes and community ownership

The 2023 and 2026 flooding responses have demonstrated that communities with strong local organisations, relationships, and agency have responded more effectively and equitably than those dependent on external support alone.

Community resilience comes from being community-led and community-rooted, not from external agency coordination alone.

What We Recommend

We recommend that the Bill, and emergency management policy generally, explicitly:

1. Recognise communities as leaders in emergency management by:
   1. Positioning tangata whenua and community organisations as lead agencies (not just implementers)
   2. Funding community-led risk reduction and resilience building
   3. Supporting tangata whenua and community decision-making and agency
   4. Removing barriers to community action (permission, funding, coordination)
2. Recognise mātauranga Māori and community knowledge as essential
   1. Funding iwi and hapū-led emergency management at equivalent levels to government agencies
   2. Supporting whānau and community-centred recovery approaches
   3. Enabling community-led solutions and strategies
3. Support community infrastructure development for resilience, including:
   1. Funding for community facility resilience (generators, water storage, communications)
   2. Investment in volunteer centre networks and community coordination capacity
   3. Support for community-based early warning systems and community knowledge
   4. Resourcing for community relationships and social cohesion
4. Establish community resilience metrics, including:
   1. Measuring community wellbeing and social cohesion (not just recovery speed)
   2. Tracking equitable outcomes for vulnerable communities
   3. Assessing community agency and empowerment
   4. Evaluating effectiveness of community-led approaches

OPPORTUNITY 7: ENSURE TRANSPARENT IMPLEMENTATION AND ACCOUNTABILITY

The Opportunity

The Bill establishes new requirements for Emergency Management Committees, but provides limited guidance on implementation or accountability.

Why This Matters

Without clear implementation guidance:

• Committees may interpret requirements narrowly or inconsistently
• Community engagement may remain token without authentic integration
• Vulnerable communities may not be identified or engaged
• Community organisations may not be resourced or supported
• Progress on Māori partnership may stall
• Outcomes may not be measured or reported

The 2023 and 2026 flooding responses have highlighted implementation gaps: some Emergency Management Committees coordinated effectively with communities, whilst others operated in isolation.

What We Recommend

We recommend that regulations and guidance accompanying the Bill clarify and support implementation by:

1. Establishing accountability mechanisms, including:
   1. Public reporting on community engagement outcomes
   2. Measurement of plan effectiveness with impacted communities
   3. Regular review and updating based on feedback
   4. Equity assessment (ensuring vulnerable communities’ benefit)
2. Providing implementation templates and tools, including:
   1. Authentic engagement processes
   2. Tangata whenua and community organisation partnership agreements
   3. Volunteer coordination protocols
   4. Recovery planning templates

CONCLUSION

The Emergency Management Bill moves in a positive direction by recognising Māori participation and disproportionate community impact. This submission recommends strengthening the Bill to ensure that the tangata whenua, community and voluntary sector is recognised, resourced, and centred throughout emergency management.

The recent 2023 and 2026 flooding and landslide events across the North Island have demonstrated what we know from research and experience: communities are first responders and essential partners in emergency management. 

The tangata whenua, community and voluntary sector stands ready to partner with government to strengthen emergency management. We ask that the Bill recognise and resource this essential contribution.

References:

(1) Environment Hubs Aotearoa (2026) Community is Climate Resilience: Lessons from Cyclone Gabrielle and the Auckland Anniversary Floods.

(2)  G Nowland-Foreman (2016) “Crushed or just bruised? Voluntary organisations 25 years under the bear hug of government contracting in Aotearoa New Zealand” Third Sector Review, Vol, 22, No.2: 53-69