Simpson Scott: Greater Christchurch Regeneration Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSimpson Scott: Greater Christchurch Regeneration Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 17 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9886. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]SCOTT SIMPSON (National—Coromandel): In rising to speak in support of the second reading of the bill I am very conscious that I am the first non-Cantabrian to speak in the second reading debate. As the chairman of the Local Government and Environment Committee which considered this bill—which has formed a cornerstone of a suite of legislation in fact relating to Canterbury Christchurch and the aftermath of the earthquakes that occurred 5 years ago—I can say it has been a bit of a learning curve and something that I have found as I say as a non-Cantabrian to be a really interesting insight into the experiences the tragedy the heartache and the physical and emotional rollercoaster that the people of Christchurch and Canterbury have undergone since those earthquakes back in 2010.The select committee met in Christchurch for 2½ days following the House’s rising for the Christmas break. We travelled to Christchurch and we heard a range of wonderful submissions from 56 organisations and individuals people who brought to the select committee their experiences their hopes for the future and their plans for their city and their region. We were very privileged I think to hear those submissions. We heard them in the council chamber of Christchurch City. We heard from such a wide range of people from individuals through to the very big and important project leaders and organisations that have been taking the city and the people of Christchurch from that phase that was initially emergency through to recovery and now looking forward to the future and to regeneration where the eyes of the city andindeed the country are upon what is happening in Christchurch now and what will happen in the future.Since 2010 as a Government and as a Parliament we have committed $16.5 billion to the initial response so the State has a very significant role to play in that future direction. This bill continues the historically strong support that this Parliament has provided to the people of Canterbury and Christchurch since the earthquake. Other speakers have made reference to and acknowledged the very good work that has occurred since the select committee reported back. I too want to add my endorsement to that work led by the Minister the Hon Gerry Brownlee and those other members from across the House who have individually met on a number of occasions with the Minister to work through some of the detail and some of the difficulties that we as a select committee were not able to resolve before reporting back. I am delighted that as the committee moved its report back to this Parliament we were of a mood to say that work still needed to be done. We knew that that needed to occur and we knew—and hoped I guess—that that work would be done. I want to place on record my thanks as chairman of the select committee to those people who have on behalf of their city and their region and their parties and this Parliament and the people of New Zealand made that a reality. That is a great credit to them as individuals but it is also a great credit to their parties and to the people whom they represent.I am not intending to go into the detail of this bill at this stage because there will be opportunity as we come together in the Committee of the whole House and consider the Supplementary Order Paper which the Minister has indicated he will be leading us through but the Supplementary Order Paper will include a number of changes. One will be to ensure that there is more public input into the regeneration planning process itself. I think that is a very good advancement. The second major point that the Supplementary Order Paper will cover is to give Regenerate Christchurch itself a greater role in the regeneration plans in the Christchurch district. It will also strengthen the leadership role of Regenerate Christchurch overall with more emphasis on public consultation around the use of clause 42 with the Minister now required to take public submissions into account. I think that is a good move as well.I want to just again conclude my comments in this second reading of the bill by thanking everybody who has been involved thanking my colleagues on the select committee and thanking the officials from the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority and our advisers for their good work. I endorse this second reading of the bill to the House.