Given that the MAO`s objectives include the sharing of supplies, equipment and personnel in undeclared emergencies, the MAO must address the “binding” constitutional issue in its planned intergovernmental agreements. Whether congressional approval could be obtained by amending the EMAC or some other mechanism remains an open question. Regardless, MAA public health officials have begun discussions with governors` offices and emergency management officials in MAA states about whether to pursue an “undeclared emergency” agency. Future direction will certainly be influenced by the outcome of these discussions. Public services also usually have mutual assistance agreements. [1] Finally, with respect to agreements with Canadian provinces and Mexican states, maintaining labour relations will allow U.S. lawyers to rely to some extent on lawyers from Canada and Mexico to explain their laws. Nevertheless, U.S. lawyers would be well advised to develop expertise on these laws to ensure that mutual assistance agreements are negotiated on a sound legal basis and meet the common objectives of U.S. and Mexican states and Canadian provinces. The relationship between the national and provincial governments in Canada is somewhat similar to the federal-state relationship in the United States and does not appear to be an obstacle to the conclusion of mutual assistance agreements itself.26 While different legal interests will certainly lead to disagreements and further discussion and negotiation is necessary, national and provincial lawyers in Canada have demonstrated a willingness to engage in dialogue on emerging issues.
Questions available. Other arrangements are common in small towns with little or no resources. In these cases, local teams are able to handle small incidents themselves, but for larger incidents, surrounding communities are called in with local resources during the initial deployment. For example, local fire and rescue services usually deal with fire alarm triggers and car accidents, while building fire reports cause the surrounding towns to intervene automatically (automatically assist). The NIMS Planning Guide identifies different types of mutual aid agreements that companies can benefit from. These arrangements include, but are not limited to: In addition to the types of mutual assistance that Hurricane Katrina provides (personnel, equipment and supplies), the exchange of epidemiological or laboratory information and specialized personnel across interstate and international borders may be essential to detect and control future infectious disease outbreaks, whether or not they occur naturally (e.g. the outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome [SARS] in 2003 or the threat of H5N1) or following a bioterrorist attack. States must therefore reach agreements to ensure mutual assistance in all its forms, to facilitate effective responses to disasters such as Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, and to detect and control potential infectious disease outbreaks before they become disasters. Following recent public health emergencies, numerous efforts have been made in the United States and in collaboration with officials from Canada and Mexico to identify and resolve legal issues related to the use of mutual assistance agreements and to improve legal preparedness for public health emergencies.
These developments underscore that the implementation of effective mutual assistance agreements relies on the completion of analyses of state law, a better understanding of the measures required to meet constitutional requirements, a better knowledge of public health and other relevant laws in Canada and Mexico, continued coordination between cross-border groups of states, and cooperation between these groups and cross-border Confederation. States are generally aware of the revised IHR, and the SPP is taking steps to coordinate its efforts with those of regional cross-border projects. Further coordination and the development of formal mechanisms for state inclusion will be part of the Confederation`s cross-border development process, and the resolution of the legal issues discussed here will be an objective of the procedure. Even if legally approved and implemented, mutual assistance agreements will not normally be fully effective unless the necessary action is taken to ensure that the agreements fulfil their purpose. States should cooperate and coordinate their activities with other relevant jurisdictions through tabletop exercises and other planning and implementation activities to ensure that mutual assistance agreements deliver on their promise as effective public health preparedness and response tools. These calls for help are the result of an escalation of an incident determined by the Chief Operating Officer. The responses required from other cities are predefined, so a dispatcher only needs to call the appropriate resources determined by the “race map” for such an incident. Intergovernmental cooperation is provided for and facilitated by the interim national preparedness objective under Presidential Directive 8 on Internal Security, which makes expanded regional cooperation through mutual assistance agreements a national priority (Table 1▶). The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention collaborative agreements, which aim to improve and improve state and local public health preparedness, encourage the development of mutual assistance agreements as a preparedness tool. Eventually, Congress provided funding and directed the Secretary of DHHS to establish a program to develop an Emergency System for Pre-Registration of Volunteer Health Workers (ESAR-VHP) (Table 1▶).13 Although the DHHS Health Resources and Services Administration provides funding for the development of ESAR-VHP, States are responsible for the design, development and management of what is known as a national system of government emergency volunteer registries. Cooperation across national borders is a natural part of the system. The Pandemic Preparedness and All Hazards Act, Public Law 109-417, is an important new addition to the federal fraternal aid structure.
A state consortium may be considered an entity eligible for funding under the law, and Article 201 requires “a description of the mechanism the institution will implement to use the Emergency Management Assistance Pact or other mutual assistance arrangements for medical and public health assistance.” These and other provisions of the Act on the Use of Mutual Assistance Agreements for Federal, State, Local and Tribal Coordination and the Integration of Resources among these Entities are strong evidence of Congress` promotion of mutual assistance agreements. Expanding the scope of response skills can greatly benefit businesses in the event of an emergency or disaster. Interoperability and related agreements with local, state, and federal agencies can provide additional resources based on specific experience, research, or professional training in a particular field, potentially reducing response time in a challenging situation. The Stafford Act provides a shortened way to gain congressional approval for interstate agreements. The consent of Congress is deemed to have been given 60 days after notification of an intergovernmental agreement to both houses.