Emergency management: progress, but gaps remain

This Bill represents a genuine step in the right direction for engineering and public safety, including stronger legal protection for people – including engineers – who take pre-emptive actions and decisions in good faith to prevent or limit the impact of an imminent emergency. We raised this as a key area of concern in our submission on the original Bill.

The Bill also creates stronger links between emergency management planning, councils’ long-term planning and other relevant legislation. These changes should support more coordinated decisions about infrastructure, hazards and investment. Clearer roles and responsibilities, together with stronger parliamentary scrutiny, should also improve accountability across the emergency management system.

Engineering New Zealand was involved in extensive feedback and consultation on the legislation during 2025 and 2026, and while aspects of the final Bill reflect improvements we advocated for on behalf of the profession, practical gaps remain:

• The Bill extends civil-liability protection to people who take precautionary or preventive action in good faith when an emergency is imminent. However, it does not include the specific guidance and rules we recommended to clarify when engineers are considered to be acting under direction.
• There remains no mechanism for compensating engineers and technical specialists for their time and expert knowledge during an emergency.
• The Bill did not follow through on our recommendations to establish the national hazards map nor technical capability register, which would provide decision-makers with a clearer picture of risks in order to inform planning, and help identify and mobilise specialist response and expertise before and during emergencies.
• Our recommendations for better readiness and preparedness reporting measures were not taken on board, nor does the bill clarify consistent criteria for pre-activation protocols. Clearer expectations would help agencies and technical specialists prepare earlier and respond more consistently when a threat is emerging.
• Engineering New Zealand also advocated for Schedule 3 - which designates essential infrastructure providers - to include the likes of hospitals, flood-protection entities, critical private roads, and public mortuary and forensic pathology services. Although additional providers can be added later, recognising these categories now would have provided greater clarity for emergency planning and response.

As extreme weather events and natural hazards place growing demands on communities and infrastructure, Aotearoa needs an emergency management framework that works in practice as well as in law.

The new Bill provides a stronger foundation, but its effectiveness will depend on clear implementation guidance and further work on readiness, specialist capability, compensation, planning and essential infrastructure.