O'Rourke Denis: Riccarton Bush Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
O'Rourke Denis: Riccarton Bush Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 17 October 2012. Volume:684;Page:5931. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
DENIS O’ROURKE (NZ First) 
: 
 Deans Bush with its remnant kahikatea forest and the Deans homestead since 1843 is an area of extraordinary beauty on the banks of the Avon River in Christchurch as we all know. It is therefore a very important Christchurch City asset—one of many assets in Christchurch that should never be sold. The current Acts and now this bill the Riccarton Bush Amendment Bill will continue to ensure this—we hope. 
This property has been well cared for but I think since only about 1990 using ratepayers’ money and that needs to continue. Before that in fact the property fell into disrepair. The early 1990s was the first time that the Christchurch City Council committed the adequate funding necessary for the preservation of this house and the grounds including Riccarton Bush behind it. I was a member of the council from 1989 to 2004 and I remember going to the property and inspecting the roof the unsafe rooms that could not be used in the house the fencing and the state of the bush itself. The fencing was important because cats dogs and all sorts of other animals were able to enter and do damage to that valuable piece of kahikatea forest in Christchurch. So we committed as a council—voluntarily—the funding necessary to make sure that the past regime of neglect would all change. What we see now is a property that we can all be proud of despite the earthquake damage that it has received. We knew it was worth preserving because it was valued by the people of Christchurch—and still is—all of whom can of course visit the property free of charge. I am glad to see today in the  
Press 
 that the Christchurch Earthquake Appeal Trust has given $128000 to repair the building after the earthquake damage it has received. This together with insurance money from the property will ensure the building’s survival in the future. 
This bill will help to ensure the ongoing maintenance of the house and Riccarton Bush and that is what all Canterbury people want to see. But what about other Christchurch heritage buildings? The member in charge of this bill the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery knows that he has the powers and that the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority has the powers under the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Act to ensure that buildings like Riccarton House are preserved and ultimately restored in whole or in part. As others have said what about the Anglican Christchurch Cathedral? Why is that different from Riccarton House? Gerry Brownlee has said that it is a matter for the Church but that is not correct. Gerry Brownlee knows that it is not just a matter for the Church; it is a matter for the whole community and I think for this Parliament as well. Like Riccarton Bush and Riccarton House where there is a trust board so is there a trust board for the cathedral and there is an Act under which that trust board operates for the cathedral. It is very much like the situation with Riccarton House. 
So why has no action been taken at all on the preservation of the most important building in the city and one of the most important buildings in New Zealand in terms of heritage the Anglican Christchurch Cathedral? It obviously can be preserved in just the same way that Riccarton House is being preserved in whole or in part. The whole Canterbury community contributed to the construction and maintenance of the Christchurch Cathedral including a lot of council ratepayer funding. I was on the council when that was committed—hundreds of thousands of dollars a year. So it is not just a Church concern it is not just a Church asset it is a community asset. The Minister and the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority must act now to apply the funding they have which includes provision for heritage buildings to save the cathedral and in due course to see that it is restored at least in part. Many Cantabrians want answers on that and they want them now. 
For the same reasons this Riccarton Bush Amendment Bill should now be supported. It updates the old 1947 Riccarton Bush Amendment Act as we know. The new sections 5 and 5A in clause 14 of Part 2 provide for a board of nine people: five are appointed by the city council—two of them must be community board members—the Deans family appoint two the Royal Society one and the board itself can appoint one as well. That is an appropriate mix of members of the board and the council supplies the money. It is therefore appropriate on behalf of the community that the council should appoint five out of the nine board members. 
The reservations that New Zealand First had when the bill was introduced related to some aspects of the financial plan. The city council in the new section 23(3) in clause 10 of Part 1 could only approve not disapprove of the financial plan which was a defect. It was actually not good law to make it possible for the council only to approve the plan and not to disapprove it. The Local Government and Environment Committee has recommended that this be remedied by the addition of new section 23(3A) which says: “If the council does not approve the draft financial plan … the council must provide its reasons for not doing so to the Board; and … the Board must within 90 days after receiving those reasons deliver a revised draft financial plan to the council.” This meets New Zealand First’s concerns as expressed in my speech some weeks ago by allowing the council to not approve the financial plan and to give its reasons. The board must then provide a revised plan within 90 days. The council has a majority as I have said of appointees on the board including two community board people and so should be able to influence the board to ensure that a sensible achievable and I might say affordable plan is achieved. In this way we can be confident of an appropriate balance—that the board’s aspirations for funding of its financial plan are achieved within reason and within prudential limits while on the other hand protecting the interests of ratepayers who will in the end be the funders. I am glad to see that the concerns I expressed when the bill was introduced have been met in this way. Therefore New Zealand First can now support the bill without reservation. 
I want to finish by again pointing out the inconsistency between what we see here with this piece of legislation and the very welcome intention to ensure that Riccarton House as a very important heritage building is preserved and ultimately restored—in fact it has been substantially restored except for earthquake damage and that will be done—and what we see about the Christchurch Cathedral in Cathedral Square possibly one of the most important heritage buildings in the whole country. There is a gross inconsistency between the way that Riccarton House is being dealt with and the way that the cathedral is not being dealt with. 
I put it to Gerry Brownlee who is the sponsor of this bill and who is also responsible as the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery to see that he acts consistently and actually does something about the heritage buildings in Christchurch that have not been attended to so far. Christchurch people are still waiting to hear what the plans for the preservation of the heritage buildings in Christchurch are. Why is there this silence? Why is Gerry Brownlee silent? Why is the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority silent? Why is nothing being done about that cathedral? It is high time that it was. This piece of legislation demonstrates the inconsistency and the incompetence of both the Minister and the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority with regard to heritage buildings in Christchurch and it is no wonder that people are getting so upset. If you were in Christchurch you would know how upset people are. I am upset. We should all be upset to see a building like the Christchurch Cathedral being ignored in this way. It is high time that we saw action happen as it is with Riccarton House.