Project STRIM, Mohua / Golden Bay, New Zealand — Project STRIM says a new Ministerial response confirms a serious gap between public assumptions about emergency communications and the reality facing remote communities dependent on vulnerable infrastructure.

In a letter received this week from Minister for Media and Communications Hon Paul Goldsmith, the Government confirmed it does not currently have regulatory levers to compel telecommunications operators to make specific resilience investments in regional backhaul infrastructure. The Minister also acknowledged that current satellite-to-mobile services do not yet support calling 111, noting that “advancements in satellite technology are evolving” and this “may” improve.

Project STRIM says the response matters because emergency communications are wider than 111 alone.

During a major telecommunications outage, communities also need to contact family, check on neighbours, receive emergency information, coordinate welfare, organise local response, use EFTPOS, maintain medical alarm pathways and communicate with Civil Defence and emergency services.

Golden Bay / Mohua has experienced multiple major communications outages in recent years after its single fibre route over Tākaka Hill was severed. During those outages, the region lost mobile service, landlines, internet access, EFTPOS, connected medical alarms and practical access to emergency communications at the same time.

“This is the gap the public needs to understand,” Project STRIM said.

“Satellite and wireless technologies are improving and absolutely have a role to play. But hoping future technology will eventually support 111 is not the same as having resilient community communications during an emergency.”

The Minister’s letter says decisions about network design, redundancy and transmission routes are operational matters for private network operators, who are considered best placed to assess the technical feasibility, costs and trade-offs for particular locations. It also says the Government does not have plans at this time to establish a new telecommunications resilience fund to support community backup projects such as those proposed in Golden Bay.

STRIM says this places remote communities in a difficult position: they are told resilience matters, but no agency or operator appears clearly responsible for guaranteeing practical regional communications continuity when a single backhaul path fails.

The response comes directly on the heels of the TUANZ Connecting Aotearoa Summit in Wellington and the newly released industry report, Connecting Rural New Zealand by Flint Global. While that report promotes a "technology-neutral" approach using mixed fibre, wireless, and satellite technologies to bridge the digital divide for the final 1.1% of isolated New Zealanders, it uncovers a stark commercial reality.

It also comes days after the Mohua / Golden Bay Resilience Expo, where STRIM presented on the public-safety risks of telecommunications failure. Audience feedback made it clear that the concern was not only 111 access, but the wider ability of households, neighbours, welfare centres, emergency coordinators and local responders to stay connected during a prolonged outage.

Recent public advice from the Telecommunications Forum also tells households to plan for telecommunications services being unavailable during emergencies.

STRIM supports that advice. Households should have backup plans, battery power, radios, cash, printed information and ways to check on neighbours. But household preparedness is not the same as resilient regional emergency communications.

STRIM says the TCF advice reinforces three points:

• telecommunications services can fail during emergencies;
• households and communities need backup plans;
• but household preparedness is not a substitute for resilient regional communications infrastructure or clear accountability for emergency continuity.

The unresolved question remains: when a whole region loses mobile service, landlines, internet, EFTPOS, medical alarm pathways and practical 111 access at once, who is responsible for ensuring communications continuity?

STRIM says a technology-neutral approach may be useful, but only if the public understands what is — and is not — guaranteed during an emergency.

“A technology-neutral approach is progress, but accountability still matters. Prepared households and shared community action are vital, but resilient physical infrastructure matters most.”

Following the Expo, STRIM is now looking at practical local resilience measures, including public emergency Wi-Fi hub concepts, clearer public information, backup power planning and continued engagement with stakeholders.

Background / related material:

• Flint Global report: Connecting Rural New Zealand
  https://www.flint-global.com/work/connecting-rural-new-zealand/
• Telecommunications Forum NZ emergency preparedness guidance:
  “Plan the work, work the plan”
  https://www.tcf.org.nz/news/plan-the-work-work-the-plan

© Scoop Media