O'Rourke Denis: Debate on Crown Entities Public Organisations and State Enterprises — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeO'Rourke Denis: Debate on Crown Entities Public Organisations and State Enterprises — In Committee[Sitting date: 17 June 2014. Volume:699;Page:18547. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]DENIS O’ROURKE (NZ First):The Government’s handling of the whole earthquake recovery in Canterbury has been a test for both the Earthquake Commission and the Government. After more than 3 years the conclusion has to be that although some good things have been done there is still far too much that has not been done and still far too many issues that are unresolved. Neither the commission nor the Government has scored a pass mark and their report cards should read “must do better”. The Budget forecast a surplus of close to half a billion dollars but at the same time the budget for Canterbury earthquake matters was reduced by about half a billion dollars. That indicates that the budget for Canterbury earthquakes was reduced not because that was possible given the progress of recovery projects—or more accurately the lack of progress—but because this part of the Government’s Budget was an easy manipulation to create an artificial surplus for election-year purposes.That has been confirmed within the last few days when the Prime Minister indicated that far from it being possible to spend less the Government will most likely have to face an additional $5 billion or more for the rebuild over coming years as the overall cost has escalated. The Government is simply not being transparent about the real size of the contribution it will need to make. This issue alone makes its claimed Budget projections and the forecast surplus an absolute farce.Most people in Canterbury are concerned about the slowness of so many aspects of the rebuild and the dilatory way the Government and its agencies have handled the needs of the city. Infrastructure repairs are taking far too long. Demolitions are still not done after 3 years or more. Rebuilds are only just getting started. Planning gives little cause for confidence to people who need to make decisions about their investments. Insurers are getting away with blue murder. Decisions on Port Hills properties are still not made and the list goes on.But one of the worst performances by all agencies has been the failure to deal with flooding in one part of Christchurch in particular. This was a problem well known soon after the earthquakes but 3 years later and several floods later there has still been no action on the ground. That is not good enough from the Government and it is not good enough for the Government to blame the city council either. Flooding is clearly an earthquake effect and it is a Government responsibility. The planning should have been completed and the work started by now to relieve those flooding problems. Purchase offers without red zoning for those to whom the work would not be effective or would be too slow should have been made by now. This is a disgraceful absence of action by Government agencies and there will likely be more flooding of homes still to come this winter.Another disgraceful performance has been over compensation for red-zoned uninsured or bare land. The offer of 50 percent of 2007 valuations was never justified or justifiable. The courts have now said so and now the red zone quake outcasts have been given leave to apply to the Supreme Court to have the whole red-zoning process for all of Christchurch deemed illegal. That would be catastrophic as a result for the Government and for New Zealand as a whole. The hearing is in July. The Supreme Court bench will not be easily influenced by political considerations. So not only is the 50 percent offer clearly illegal but we face the prospect that the whole red-zoning concept may be illegal too with all the ramifications that that will have.If that is not bad enough the Port Hills people still waiting for a decision have been told that they will have to wait even longer until the court has made a decision on red zoning. These people are still suffering. They have been suffering for 3 years or more. They are paying mortgages a proportion of rates and rents all at the same time. How would you Mr Chairman like to be in that position? The Government and its agencies should have made better decisions in the first place.Report noted.