Webb DuncanDr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour—Christchurch Central): Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. If I may say as the MP for Christchurch Central it would be hard to find a bill that was closer to my heart and I recognise and acknowledge the very hard work that my predecessor Nicky Wagner did as Minister and the fact that she brought together people in a way that was admirable and I acknowledge her for that.This is an important building in Christchurch; that's been noted by many already. I do want to recognise to all of those other people struggling in Christchurch with other buildings—some of them of significant heritage value and religious value—that we want to keep working on those buildings as well. Having said that this is by far and away the most symbolic building in Christchurch. It does sit at the heart in the middle of Cathedral Square. The city was designed around it and it is in an architectural form neo-Gothic architecture that resonates around the city with the Arts Centre with the museum with the provincial chambers and with many other buildings. So even from an architectural perspective alone it's important that this building is restored.I think it's also important to recognise that we have no small task ahead of us. It has been a long time since this building was damaged but let us recognise also that it's going to be a long time until it is fully restored as well. The task ahead of us is complex and it will require a lot of people to get together and to make further compromises and to act with some understanding and graciousness that perhaps doesn't always come naturally.The bill itself defines reinstatement" and I think that's important because reinstatement in this era with this building cannot mean putting it back exactly as it once was. I think we need to recognise and trust the experts who will give advice on what can be done and what will work both in a visual and engineering sense. I must say as a new parliamentarian it is great to come here and see the cross-party support for this bill. I think it important to also recognise that this bill will not be in its final form. I know our friends on the other side of the House will have useful and meaningful input into it as will of course the other parties of this Government.It's been a long road to get here and probably one of the lessons to be learned from the way we've got here is that litigation does not restore buildings. It would have been good to have got here earlier but people weren't prepared to sit around the table. This has been to the Supreme Court and back. Guidance has been followed and only then were people ready to recognise that the building would sit there and remain derelict and decaying. More cases would ensue more lawyers would be paid but no rebuild or restoration would occur. So it's good to see ultimately with cross-party support with a bit of a nudge from certain key people involved that a pragmatic solution was arrived at.This bill like many others gives the Minister extraordinary powers. As a lawyer I'm always exceedingly cautious of extraordinary powers being conferred on the executive. We've seen previously in the post-earthquake space those powers being used and challenged. However the fact of the matter is that in cases like this in cases where there is a real need for direction and for some urgency extraordinary powers are appropriate if properly controlled. Whilst obviously this will remain open for discussion it's clear that these powers are appropriate. Exactly how they'll be controlled is yet to be finally settled but I think we've got the outlines pretty good. Obviously a really important part of this will be the advisory panel. The Christ Church Cathedral reinstatement review panel will give very useful advice to the Minister and I'm quite certain that this Minister will listen to that advice carefully and take it. Of course the appointments to that review panel will be important as well. Some legal advice is going to be needed but also engineering and architectural advice. Advice from Ngāi Tahu will also be important because this building is of significance to everyone.It will be good to see this building restored because from a commercial point of view Christchurch has been held back. There are plenty of people who would love to see the square the thriving buzzing place that it has been in the past but until this really gets under way that can't happen. There is no confidence there and to be frank the environment is not one to celebrate.One of the things that this bill the package that has been so skilfully put together by a number of people contemplates is philanthropic support. If I can say in this House that it is not usual to be passing legislation that assumes philanthropic support but it really is time for the wider community both here in New Zealand and overseas to step up because this is a building well worth preserving. This really is part of the heart of Christchurch and if we're going to restore it in the manner that it deserves and that it requires it's going to need more than simply Government Church and council to come together—extraordinary though that is—it is going to need some additional support. So I encourage those who are able to assist in a real and tangible way.The bill itself is of course the crux of the matter. It's important to recognise that those extraordinary powers that are conferred on the Minister: the power to essentially suspend the operation of certain legislation—importantly the Resource Management Act is still recognised as a disallowable instrument. So it essentially comes before a committee of this House the Regulations Review Committee—a committee that I am very happy to be a member of—and is examined. Of course it can be subject to disallowance. So it's not entirely accurate to say that those powers are entirely outside of the ambit of this House. That committee of the House will examine and will scrutinise—and my experience to date is that it's a committee that is very much going to cooperate on these matters.The other interesting point that I'd just make a note of is their restrictions on judicial review. Certainly some Ministers would be very happy to see judicial review not used as widely as it perhaps is because it is a powerful tool for the judiciary to examine the conduct of the executive. This bill does limit the power to bring an application for judicial review but only by saying it must be brought promptly by saying that it must be brought within 28 days. I think in this case that is a matter that is entirely commendable because far too often people sit on their hands and make threats and noises and only at the last moment do they bring a judicial review application when once again everything is on hold. Certainly were any judicial review applications to be brought in this matter I am sure that the courts would do their duty promptly and assiduously.This matter is to be referred to a select committee forthwith and might I also hope and pray that the people of Christchurch who have an interest in this matter will make submissions because that is really how this is going to work. We need to understand what the people of Christchurch think and want and consider is needed. Also I note that the Christchurch City Council has a decision ahead of it that it is accepting or has accepted submissions on and I certainly hope that the city council will be on board and will indeed also submit on this bill.There is work to be done—work to be done in examining this bill and on making it as workable and effective a tool as it possibly can be and work to be done with the people of Christchurch to come together and to rebuild and reinstate this cathedral. I commend this bill to the House.Bill read a first time. Bill referred to the Environment Committee."