Dalziel Lianne: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Dalziel Lianne: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:678;Page:1234] 
5. 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL (Labour—Christchurch East) 
 to the  
Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery 
: Does he stand by the Prime Minister’s statement that the Government’s offer to insured residential homeowners whose properties had been red-zoned by the Government is “incredibly fair”; if so why? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery) 
: 
 Yes; those valuations were higher than likely market valuations in 2010. 
Hon Lianne Dalziel 
: Does he share the Prime Minister’s concerns that some residents will be out of pocket by more than $150000 and will be pointing the finger at the insurers and if so what steps has he taken to ensure that people are treated incredibly fairly by their insurers? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: The relationship between any policyholders and their insurers is one that can have an arbitration done through the Insurance and Savings Ombudsman. Also I think as time passes the incentive for insurers to settle those accounts is going to go greater. I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am deeply troubled by this question being raised in the House by this member. My reasons for that is that this member raised in her Address in Reply speech on 15 February a personal concern about how much she was being paid— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! I have heard sufficient of the point of order. An issue in respect of order in the House would be one as to whether the question is in order. This is question time and the only relevant issue is whether questions are in order. This question is in order. Every member has a right to ask questions that are in order. There may be matters that Ministers wish to include in replies but what the member was just raising is not a matter for a point of order because the question is in order. The only issue that could be raised could be to suggest that the Speaker had been in error in accepting a question on the Order Paper that was not in order. It is my view as Speaker that the question is in order and I will uphold the rights of all members to ask questions that are in order. 
Hon Lianne Dalziel 
: I seek the leave of the House to make a personal explanation in respect of my personal situation being a resident in a red zone in Christchurch. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is no objection.  
Hon Lianne Dalziel 
: I have made no secret to this House or to the public that I am affected by the residential red zone decision made by Cabinet on 23 June last year. That decision has placed in me in a personally difficult position but I do not believe that it is a conflict of interest for me to raise questions in the House because I am not the only person who is affected in the way that I have been affected. I am more than happy to table in this House the Government offer to me. I am more than happy to table in the House the offer that the insurance company gave to me last week—well to me and my husband; it does belong to my husband as well. I am also very happy to explain to people that I have got only 8 weeks left to choose one of the Government’s voluntary offers or they will be withdrawn from me in a situation where I got my offer from my insurance company only last week which puts us in a position where we can negotiate with them for the first time for a financial settlement. So the discussion around these issues in respect to a 9-month offer being made to people in the residential red zone has actually stepped into a framework where people do need to understand that not everybody has been given 9 months. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I thank the honourable member.  
Hon Lianne Dalziel 
: Does he consider the offer is incredibly fair to the Cairns family in Kaiapoi who would be out of pocket to the tune of $200000 if they tried to replace what they have now with option 1 and if so why? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: With all due respect to that family what they have now is an exceptionally damaged property on land that cannot be rebuilt on. That is fair.  
Hon Lianne Dalziel 
: Is he aware that insurance companies have advised residents in the red zone that their properties can be repaired despite having previously advised that their properties were rebuilds thereby limiting their offers to ones of indemnity and what sort of pressure does he think this has placed on people who have been told by the Government that it will give them even less if they do not accept those offers? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: So far more than 3000 people have accepted a Government offer and been settled. Further many of those are in a far better position than they would have been in normal circumstances. There will be variations—that is clear. When you are dealing with 7000 damaged properties and the Government is making an offer that allows people to make some choices then I think that is fair. In the member’s case we know the difficulty. She is being offered $87200 for her land; she wants $200000. She made that clear at the Local Government and Environment Committee but it is not easy just to put a hand in the taxpayers’ pocket and pay it out to members of Parliament who are grumpy about the money being offered to them. 
Hon Lianne Dalziel 
: Mr Speaker—[ 
Interruption 
]  
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! I am on my feet. Order! These matters are sensitive matters. I have upheld the member’s right to ask questions and I will watch Ministers’ answers. The member sought to make a personal explanation and brought into the House her personal situation. It has been talked about at a select committee; the Minister referred to that. I will be watching matters very carefully but I want the House to come back to order. 
Hon Lianne Dalziel 
: Can the Minister confirm that three-quarters of those who have accepted the red zone offer have accepted the land-only offer and that that means that they will accept the bulk of their settlements from their insurers? Is he aware that some red zone residents have not yet been able to resolve their disputes with their insurance companies and will he therefore consider leaving the options open to enable residents to make an informed decision on the voluntary offer? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: To the first question yes and that indicates that people are making sensible choices for their future.