Wagner Nicky: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Wagner Nicky: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:670;Page:17042] 
7. 
CHRIS AUCHINVOLE (National—West Coast - Tasman) 
 on behalf of  
NICKY WAGNER (National) 
 to the  
Minister for the Environment 
: What changes has the Government made under the Canterbury Earthquake Response and Recovery Act to facilitate recovery and the processing of resource consents to enable Christchurch to rebuild as quickly as possible? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for the Environment) 
: 
 Changes adopted yesterday will enable land remediation work to progress far more quickly. This is essential because before houses can be rebuilt and before permanent infrastructure like roads footpaths sewerage and water systems can be built in some areas where land has been liquefied during the earthquake the land needs to be remediated. Every day involved in the processing of consents for this work is a day longer that families are displaced and a day longer that families are without basic services. That is why such a high priority for the Government is to have efficient processes so that this work can start as soon as possible. The first consent application for this work is expected next week. 
Chris Auchinvole 
: How long could it take to get resource consents for the land remediation works if the Government did not use the Order in Council mechanism of the Canterbury Earthquake Response and Recovery Act? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: There is no provision in the district or regional plans in Canterbury for construction of stone piles or the consolidation work that is needed to repair the now large areas that were subject to severe liquefaction. So the consents would need to be notified they would be subject to full public hearings and they would be subject to appeals to the Environment Court. That could take anything from a minimum of 3 months to as long as 2 or 3 years. The streamlined process that the Government has approved will allow written submissions by affected parties and a decision can be made within a fortnight. 
Chris Auchinvole 
: What is the purpose of the other Order in Council passed yesterday in respect of the Resource Management Act for temporary accommodation and works depots? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: Normally resource consents would be required for erecting temporary accommodation and for establishing works depots of which a large number will be required in Christchurch. The changes we have made enable councils and the Department of Building and Housing to erect temporary buildings such as site offices temporary accommodation and sewerage facilities to assist the earthquake reconstruction work. Landowners’ permission will still be required but this will enable reserves the margins on the area of roads and other areas to be quickly utilised for the essential temporary infrastructure that will be required to support the rebuild of Christchurch. 
Charles Chauvel 
: Can the Minister assure the House that past changes made under the Canterbury Earthquake Response and Recovery Act have not contributed to an increased rate of death or serious injury in the 22 February earthquake? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: It is too early to speculate on the cause of death of the estimated 200 victims of the Christchurch earthquake. But I note that a number were killed by the collapse of older buildings that would not meet a modern earthquake standard. The provisions by which those buildings can be removed are complex and it is possible that some buildings that should have been removed after the 4 September earthquake contributed to the loss of life on 22 February. 
Charles Chauvel 
: Is the Minister aware of concerns about the consistency and accuracy of the use of the green red and yellow card system under the Canterbury Earthquake (Building Act) Order is he further aware that both the Pyne Gould and the Canterbury Television buildings received green cards under the provisions of that emergency order and does he accept that real care is needed when the wide powers available under the emergency legislation are used? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: The member’s question goes beyond my responsibility for the resource management and environment provisions but I note that the Prime Minister has stated that there will be a full inquiry into the reasons for the collapse of the CTV building and the Pyne Gould building. As an engineer I urge people to await the proper process for establishing the cause of collapse and death before drawing simplistic conclusions. 
Charles Chauvel 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The primary question addressed to the Minister asked the Minister to speak on behalf of the Government in respect of the Canterbury Earthquake Response and Recovery Act and orders made thereunder to facilitate recovery. The Minister was quite happy to answer questions beyond the brief of his particular portfolio in respect of that primary question. I do not know that it is fair to seek to avoid answering the thrust of my question simply because it may on narrow grounds fall outside the warrant of the Minister for the Environment. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Because the question and answer have both been handled quite seriously I will hear from the Hon Dr Nick Smith. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: The questions I have answered are specifically about changes to the Resource Management Act; they are absolutely my responsibility. The latest question from the member was in respect of issues in the Building Act and the red green and orange sticker system that are the responsibility of the Minister for Building and Construction. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I hear both members. I wish I could satisfy the member because I acknowledge fully the care he has taken in preparing his questions which are perfectly good questions. But I do accept the Minister’s point that he cannot answer specifically on issues outside his area of responsibility. I think good questions were asked and I think the Minister did his best to answer. I thought the Minister gave very genuine answers in his attempts to answer the questions and I regret I cannot satisfy the member whose questions were good. But I think the Minister is right in that he cannot answer outside his portfolio responsibility areas.