Anderton Jim: Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Bill — First Reading 
Anderton Jim: Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:671;Page:17919] 
Hon JIM ANDERTON (Leader—Progressive) 
: 
 There are two things Canterbury people need. They need to get on with things as quickly as possible and they need to be involved in the decisions about the recovery of their city. For some reason there is a view that public participation is in conflict with rapid decision-making. In fact it is my view that they are both essential to each other. We cannot rebuild quickly if we do not take all of the people in the community along with us. People who are left out will challenge the process they will feel disillusioned and ultimately the process will fail. There is no point consulting if we do not get the processes and decisions moving because people will simply leave if there is inaction or they will stay away and some of them will not come back or they will try to push on on their own when what we need is to coordinate all of the efforts to rebuild Christchurch on a community-wide and collective basis. 
I support the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Bill because it enables the immense amount of work that Christchurch faces to be done and it offers the opportunity for genuine consultation. I say opportunity because basically it is not what is written on a piece of paper or even in legislation; it is how it is implemented and what is done about the proposals for consultation. Consultation in writing is not the same as taking the opportunity for consultation. I warn that it is critical that the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority consults and that the process is open to everyone in Canterbury who wants to participate it is transparent and it is accountable. That is why I will be supporting amendments to the bill at the Committee stage. Those amendments which I have looked at carefully from colleagues on this side of the House seem to me to add some substance to particularly the community relationships and community consultation that I believe is essential. 
I recently read an article by Steven Ames who has been in New Zealand looking at issues like the recovery of Christchurch in other arenas. I summarise what he said was the challenge for Christchurch: “We have to shift our perspective from ‘recovering what we once were’ to ‘building what we seek to become’.” 
He outlines the phases on the road back from disaster and they will be clearly apparent to anyone who lives in Christchurch. Firstly there is the rescue phase when the hours after an emergency require people to be saved or the removal of those who have been killed or injured. The second phase is recovery as we reconnect the essential services of water power sewerage roading and so on. Then there is the stage that we are approaching now but we are not really there yet which we could call the rebuilding stage. But a comparison of cities that have rebuilt brilliantly and cities that have struggled shows that there is probably a need for a fourth stage. Ames describes it as “revisioning”. The ultimate success of rebuilding depends on how much the city is able to understand how its context has changed. In other words there has been a cataclysmic event. How are we now approaching that and what understanding do we have of the implications of that event on us all? How much people understand where they may be headed what the emerging trends and issues are and what lies ahead will be critically important to what they and the city aspire to be. 
I want to read into the record the conclusion that Ames comes to: “City leaders would be remiss only to think of what must be rebuilt or replaced to bring the city back to where it was on the eve of the quake. Human nature suggests that when disaster strikes we hunker down”—and we surely did some of that—“convinced that we cannot afford the luxury of thinking beyond our most urgent needs.” Then he concludes: “But this moment also represents a singular opportunity for Christchurch and all of Canterbury to rethink revision and reinvent itself.” 
The ability for Christchurch and Canterbury people to reimagine Christchurch requires leadership capable of engaging with all of the city’s people. The success of what we have to do will therefore depend much more on that leadership than it does on any structure we have. I have been in business in politics and in other walks of life long enough to know that we can have the most brilliant organisational structure imaginable but if we do not have the right people running it it is a waste of time and vice versa. The success of what we do therefore will depend on the quality of the leadership we put in place. 
I am not as concerned with the structure of the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority as I am with having the right people to run it. We need people leading the rebuild who understand the stages of recovery that I have outlined to the House this afternoon. We need people experienced in managing large enterprises with an understanding of Christchurch its ethos and its culture and with a vision for its future. We need leaders who have the confidence of the people and are able to communicate with them and get things done. 
If there is one thing that I know about failure in Christchurch in the recent 6 or 7 months it is not so much the talking about the problems that are straight in front of us; it is information and communication about what is next and what can be done and involving people in those decisions the strategic plan and so on. Very few people in Christchurch have any grasp of that and that seems to me to be a lack of proper communication. 
The ability to engage the community and get things moving was a big disappointment after the first quake. I have to say that and I think the Government’s response reflects that to some extent. It did not happen well enough and not enough was done soon enough. Contrast that with what has happened for example in Kaiapoi. People say that Kaiapoi is a lot smaller than Christchurch so it is easier there. Well there is an element of truth in that but actually Kaiapoi did some things that Christchurch did not do. They got cracking early they talked to their people community meetings were held they were reheld ideas were accepted they were tested they were put back to the community and finally the community had a strategic plan drawn up which they recognised studied discussed and then signed off. Not all of them agreed of course but they did agree that they had been consulted properly and that they knew what was happening. Guess what? What is happening in Kaiapoi is happening very quickly and I have to say that Christchurch is in nowhere near the position that Kaiapoi is in. 
Dealing with the problems is not easy; that is true. But it has not been as fast as it needs to be and it has not to date adequately involved people and that needs to change. I understand why the Government is taking control and I do not blame it. It is a recognition that a lot of taxpayers’ money is at stake and also that things need to be handled better than they were after the first quake. What we need to see now in this legislation is a commitment to listening and making the community part of the rebuild. People need to feel that their views are taken into account and that the kind of Christchurch they want is being created. Otherwise if they feel it is not the Christchurch they were born into came to or want to experience again they will feel no commitment to it and it will fail. 
I recognise that the Government has not abused its sweeping and extraordinary powers under the first Christchurch emergency legislation. I am pleased to be able to say that to the House. This gives me hope that the Government will continue to use its powers in good faith in the future. But it has to do more than that. It has to reach out to a shocked and fragile community—and I do not know that many New Zealanders fully appreciate the fragility and the shock that is being felt in the Christchurch community. The Government and the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority which we are setting up today has to engage with the people of Christchurch on these issues. So that is how we will move forward from recovery to rebuilding a new vision for Christchurch and in the true Canterbury spirit I know that we have the resilience and the strength to do exactly that.