FENZ keeps in the good, blanks out the bad about flood rescues

Documents show Fire and Emergency (FENZ) blanked out references to people's lives being put at risk by delays in two flood rescues.

Swift water rescuers told FENZ there were hold-ups that escalated risks to people and themselves near Ōtorohanga and Papamoa earlier this year.

In the Ōtorohanga flood a driver died when his ute was swamped and at Papamoa a dozen people in a Defence Unimog vehicle got stuck in floodwaters.

RNZ has seen the original 'after-action' reviews done by the rescue team straight afterwards.

FENZ released the same reviews under the Official Information Act but with many key lines blanked out.

FENZ said it was disappointed the information had been provided to RNZ and trusted that would not deter personnel from giving it feedback.

In the Papamoa case, the rescue team told managers, "The time delays could have resulted in the loss of life."

In Ōtorohanga they said if they had been called in earlier they might have saved the driver.

The agency blanked these bits out of the version it released.

It also blanked out the team's repeated criticisms of managers holding them up - they mention "push back" and "roadblocks".

At Papamoa, the first fire engine was sent out a half hour after midnight, but the swift water rescue was not notified till over three hours later, only after the Unimog went into a culvert. An unredacted bit read, "Patients going into mild hyperthermia [sic] due to spending approximately 4 hours in flood waters and rain."

At Ōtorohanga the team was not pre-deployed so scrambled to respond and drive across from Rotorua in bad conditions.

FENZ did not agree to an interview request.

In the OIA response, it said it withheld the information on "free and frank" grounds - that is "where release of the information at issue would inhibit the future exchange of free and frank opinions that are necessary for the effective conduct of public affairs", according to the Ombudsman.

The agency in a statement on Tuesday said, "We are disappointed to hear that this information has been provided to you.

"We want our people to know they can provide their free and frank opinions, whatever they are, following an incident and through these kinds of reviews, and that we will honour the trust they place in us and keep their feedback confidential.

"We trust our people will not be deterred from providing feedback off the back of this information being shared."

'Blunt and straight'

The comparison of original and blanked-out reviews from the front line at the two floods shows what FENZ considered the public should know about how its systems to get relatively new swift water team to emergencies is performing as storms hit with increasing frequency. There are half a dozen teams nationwide of specially trained firefighters with a ute and non-motorised boats who typically go out in teams of eight.

RNZ has reported extensively on the two rescues previously based on statements and interviews. This has been part of a series on rescue problems as a whole, and especially between FENZ and Police over helicopters, problems that have prompted an overhaul of search-and-rescue controls.

In a couple of emails about the rescues also released under the OIA, the writer of both after-action reviews told managers, "Apologies for been [sic] blunt an straight to the point."

The Rotorua team responded at Waitoa Road near Papamoa overnight on 22 January - the day of the Mauao fatal landslide a few miles away - and later near Ōtorohanga on flooded State Highway 39 on the evening of 13 February.

In both reviews FENZ left in all the information under the heading 'What worked well and why?' and did not blank out anything.

But under 'What didn't work well and why?' it blanked out all seven bullet points in the Papamoa rescue, and five of the 14 points for Ōtorohanga.

The redacted Ōtorohanga bits included, "Seem to have push back from district and region management about releasing staff and covering over times [sic]."

And, "We were ready and put on standby, but not deployed yet, as we were told management had not made up their mind where they wanted to pre deploy us to."

Recommendations - some you see, some you don't

The Ōtorohanga review left in most of the recommendations - these are mostly pragmatic, say, about needing new paddles - but not the three that most clearly spoke of systemic problems.

"There still seems unwillingness for the organisation to use us, know when to use us, what our capabilities are," said one.

"Seems unwillingness to pre-deploy us early. Need to pre-deploy us early so we can get into flooded areas before they become flooded, and we can't get in. Early deployment will save lives," said another.

The third said when the National Commanders Group had authorised a swift water team - all requests to use such a team must get national-level OK - the district and region level needed to "stop putting roadblocks in place" as it seemed to be slowing down the whole deployment process.

Several times the reviews called for more education of other fire staff around when to call in swift water, and to retain the position of national manager of deployable capabilites - a job that had been due to be disestablished under a now-delayed FENZ restructure.

In January, the storms hit Bay of Plenty hardest on a Thursday.

"I had been monitoring the weather forecast since Monday and every hour the weather was getting worse from a low to a moderate to a high chance of a red weather warning," wrote the reviewer.

"In my opinion we should have been pre-deployed by Tuesday night at the latest somewhere." These lines were among those blanked out.

When the storm hit south Waikato on 13 February, the firefighters who made up the swift water team were mostly at home and had to be called in to Rotorua fire station to get their gear. They could not find a second ute so had to use a fire engine, the reports show.

"Having us pre-deployed even if it was sitting on Rotorua Station would have saved time."

Not doing this early "puts the team at additional risks and causes undue stress". Again, this was blanked out from public view by FENZ.

This echoes what members of other swift water teams have told RNZ on condition of anonymity, about delayed responses to the mid-2025 Nelson floods.

Info withheld about Nelson, Mauao

FENZ refused to release a review of the Nelson flood swift water response on the grounds that - almost a year on - it is still being done.

It withheld information about the Mt Maunganui Mauao landslide response on the grounds that multiple investigations are ongoing.

RNZ also asked for a record of the key National Commanders Group discussions, decisions and approvals on predeployment or deployment requests but FENZ did not release anything and gave no reason. RNZ has queried that.

Specific recommendations that were not blanked out in the two after-action reviews included to add more people to swift water; predeploy sooner and gather all team members in one place for that; improve how critical information is gathered and shared; and get more utes.

FENZ said in its statement: "We may not agree with, or adopt their suggestions, but we give their feedback our thorough consideration."