Logie JanJAN LOGIE (Green): I rise to take a call on this the second reading of the Civil Defence Emergency Management Amendment Act 2016 Amendment Bill which is normally the time where we feed back contributions that have been made in the select committee. Obviously there is not the opportunity to do that because of the need for urgency and the fact that we have covered the substance through the recently passed Civil Defence Emergency Management Amendment Act 2016 but I would just like to note for people who may be listening that there has been external consultation on the bill. That shows up in the departmental disclosure statement. There has been input into this from a wide range of ministries. The Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet undertook consultation and provided a draft of the bill to the Ministry for the Environment the Departments of Conservation Internal Affairs; the Earthquake Commission; the Inland Revenue Department; Maritime New Zealand; the Ministries for the Environment Primary Industries; the Ministries of Business Innovation and Employment Culture and Heritage Defence Education Health Justice Social Development and Transport; the New Zealand Defence Force; the New Zealand Fire Service; the New Zealand Police; the State Services Commission; Te Puni Kōkiri; and the Treasury." Affected parties were previously consulted in the passage of the earlier Act. Although it is always uncomfortable I hope for everyone in this House to pass things through under urgency there have been a number of eyes on this bill.Yet still we have an amendment coming in the Committee stage thanks to the sharper eye of Labour member David Parker. He will I understand be adding an amendment to clarify that the intent of the bill is that the recovery manager or controller is able to require an assessment on a structure and that that assessment will be done in a timely manner and returned to them within that time frame. The owner or owners of that structure can appeal that request for an assessment and that can go to a District Court. But the intent of the legislation as we had discussed it before it came to the House today was not for that appeal to be able to stop the assessment. It was only that if the court ruled in their favour they would get the costs of the assessment back.The provision in the bill that I think was intended to deliver that policy intent new section 26A in clause 7 says at the moment "Any relief that may be granted under subsection (6) is limited to the reasonable costs associated with obtaining the assessment."—i.e. reading from that the relief would not be relief from being required to undertake the assessment and follow through on delivering it. I would imagine we will be supporting the amendment in the Committee stage to just make that that much clearer because I think that is absolutely the policy intent in this bill and it is good to be clear on that.I also would just like to touch on for people that this is bringing forward the commencement of the legislation that had its third reading on 10 November—the Civil Defence Emergency Management Amendment Act 2016—which creates a part of the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act that specifically looks at recovery and helps move local communities from a state of emergency to a formalised—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I am sorry to interrupt the honourable member. The time has come for me to leave the Chair for the dinner break.Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.JAN LOGIE: As I was saying before the dinner break we are bringing forward the ability to start the recovery phase which is what the legislation we passed just 3 weeks ago set in place. It was a process that was developed I understand in light of the learnings from Christchurch which recognised that the legislation that we had covered us well for immediate response to significant events but did not support people moving into a recovery phase. So that legislation provided a framework for planning and managing recovery efforts. In particular it provided the powers to support transition from response to recovery. It did this by providing a mandate for roles and responsibilities that apply for the duration of the recovery from an emergency. It re-strengthened that planning process and ensured—we hope it will ensure—a seamless transition from the response to an emergency to the initial recovery period by ensuring that the appropriate and effective powers and arrangements are available for those people on the ground because we have learnt from Christchurch that those systems were not well supported by legislation and were not necessarily clear.What the bill does provide is the power to require information the Minister's power of direction if needed evacuation of premises and places entry on to premises and places the closing of roads and public places the power to give directions and for a person exercising emergency powers to provide proof of identity as well as recording—it is all within this legislation that we are bringing forward. The hope is that Kaikōura Hurunui and Marlborough will be in a position to be able to move into recovery and away from immediate response soon. We do not want the state of emergency prolonged unnecessarily and that is part of what these clarifications in the bill enable—moving from that state of emergency into recovery.There has also been some mention in the House this evening about the stage that needs to go alongside this which is not covered by this legislation but is about the importance of preparedness. In some ways that is part of what giving councils the ability to get assessments of buildings is about; it is about preparedness for significant aftershocks or other events. But I did note the comments from the Labour MP for Mana Kris Faafoi about the need for a consistent response around tsunami alerts and I do recommend to people in the Mana area that they check on his Facebook page the interview that he did yesterday with the civil defence people on the ground there about that system and what is in place in the community.Thankfully living in Cannons Creek up in the hills I do not need to worry about the risk of tsunami; because of quality property up on the hills we are OK. But I do understand that those people down on the shores and closer to the beaches are feeling unsettled and it is good to know what the systems are and to get some sense of security. The key message for all of us is to get prepared because we do live on unstable land and we do not know when or if something might happen. So the best way to gain a sense of confidence again after the quakes is particularly for those in the Wellington region to get yourself prepared so that you do not have to have that added uncertainty of not knowing what you will do or if you have got what you need. So on that note I will finish this second reading contribution because there will be more speeches to come. Thank you.Hon Damien O'Connor: Mr Speaker."