Editorial: Tsunami alarm

OPINION: After a powerful earthquake struck near Samoa in late September last year, and raised fears that a tsunami might hit coastal regions of New Zealand, the response of Civil Defence authorities was roundly criticised. A subsequent report found that the Ministry of Civil Defence had underperformed, especially with respect to its public information management responsibilities.

This report, and the public criticism, appear to have had a salutary effect, as shown by the far more efficient Civil Defence response during the weekend to the threat of a tsunami after the devastating Chilean earthquake. But this improved performance does not mean that there are no lessons to be learned from the latest tsunami scare.

A key problem last year was the lack of communication by Civil Defence with the news organisations which the public rely on to inform them of the scale of the danger posed by a tsunami and what action they should be taking.

There should, as the report suggested, have been an earlier decision to trigger the emergency broadcasting arrangement contained in the Memorandum of Understanding with Radio New Zealand and other broadcasters.

After the Chilean earthquake, which struck at 7.34pm, NZ time, on Saturday, it appears that Civil Defence did initially downplay the risk of a tsunami. Later that evening it announced that there was a threat, but by then many New Zealanders would have retired for the night and not known until the next morning of the warning.

That aside, there was much better communication, for which Civil Defence authorities and the news media organisations concerned can take credit.

Further improvement in Civil Defence's management of tsunamis and other emergencies can be expected. The Government announced earlier this year that it would introduce a new electronic emergency management information system and thought should be given to investigating whether modern technologies, such as text-messaging, could send warnings directly to members of the public.

In the event, the worst-case scenarios did not materialise. Canterbury was struck with three surges, including one which lifted the water level in Lyttelton Harbour by more than two metres.

The region was fortunate, however, that this hit during low tide and there was no major damage or flooding.

If Civil Defence deserves plaudits for its management of the tsunami threat, the same cannot be said of those New Zealanders who disregarded warnings and descended on beaches. No doubt they were curious to see a tsunami arrive, but they were also, as Civil Defence Minister John Carter said, stupid and in some cases ignored requests from emergency workers to get to higher ground, leading to suggestions that there should be greater powers for the authorities to close beaches.

Rubber-neckers must surely have seen images of the sheer power and speed of the 2004 Boxing Day tsunami and realised that, if a major wave did hit, they would have too little time to escape.

Even the photograph in The Press yesterday of a dry Cass Bay, after a surge had sucked out the water, was testimony to the fact that even a small tsunami is not to be trifled with.

It is not just their own lives which by-standers put in danger but the emergency personnel who would be called upon to rescue them.

Some rubber-neckers might also have become blase about tsunami warnings, but these warnings are never issued lightly and they must be respected.

New Zealanders must also remember that they live astride a major fault-line and take responsibility for their safety in another way. They must be ready with their own household emergency plan and supplies if an earthquake, tsunami or other natural disasters strike.

When an earthquake generates a tsunami on the other side of the Pacific, or even near Samoa, there will generally be time to issue warnings and, if need be, evacuate those in peril. But an earthquake closer to this country would provide far less opportunity to do so and all New Zealanders must be prepared.

- © Fairfax NZ News