Brownlee GerryThird ReadingHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Acting Minister of Civil Defence): I move That the Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Recovery Bill be now read a third time. The Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Recovery Bill is the last of three pieces of legislation created in response to the emergency that began with the earthquake on 14 November of this year. It is worth noting that that was one of the biggest earthquake events in the world for 2016 so that should indicate some of the necessity for this approach. Firstly before we go too much further into the content of the bill I do want to acknowledge the work of our officials who have responded very very well to the needs that they could see on the horizon for the many places that are affected by that event. I also want to thank the members of the Local Government and Environment Committee who engaged incredibly constructively I think to a point where it can very much be considered Parliament's response to the needs of the Kaikōura/Hurunui district and right up into the Wellington district here as well.The bill allows for specified lists of legislation to be amended by Order in Council for earthquake-affected areas but only where it is necessary and desirable for recovery. It is a little open-ended but as I said when I introduced the bill it is just not possible in the early stages to know the full range of responses that might be necessary to move people's lives forward. The bill facilitates recovery without needing to anticipate every power or statutory provision. This process is generally used only in exceptional circumstances and there is I think a strong argument to suggest that this is a very definite exceptional circumstance. Although it was short the select committee process was well used by all political parties and by many who had an interest in where we might end up on a bill that has such broad powers. So I am very grateful to those who supported the committee as I said before but also to those who submitted to the committee and the changes that their submissions brought about. Those changes have improved the bill and I recognise that when you are having a piece of legislation that allows the suspension altering or changing of other pieces of legislation there is a necessity to have some constraint within it. Firstly the bill is limited in its geographic powers. Although there was initially an idea that we might be able to put other areas in through the select committee process there was the persuasive argument offered particularly by the Hon David Parker asking why that would be necessary when if these events happen Parliament comes together so quickly to do something for affected areas. I accept that that is a very reasonable position. The greater Wellington region has been significantly affected by these events and it is only right that there be some flexible mechanism to support effective recovery here in Wellington. It is not as evident here because the roads are working the sewers are working and the water is working. The issue here is potentially in the safety of buildings that so many Wellingtonians either live in or work in. Anybody would want to be able to do something to ensure that they have the ultimate comfort that comes from knowing that the law itself will do whatever is necessary to protect their interest.The bill is not a catch-all for all possible future natural events. As I said before in the discussions with the select committee and as acknowledged by many and as highlighted by the Hon David Parker if there is a future event there might be a future response. Generic legislation I think would be a very dangerous thing in these circumstances. It is important that this still does not mean that Orders in Council will be necessarily made for all the Acts that are listed in the schedule. It is very broad and a lot have been put in there trying to anticipate circumstances where it might not be possible—predicting them might be impossible at the present time. In any event there is a process now—quite prescribed—where a Minister choosing to use this provision will need to engage in appropriate consultation and will need to have good and justifiable reasons tested against the purpose of the bill for advancing that legislation.In addition there will be an independent review panel to look at those orders and to make a similar test and to make some recommendations to the Minister. That panel will be convened by a retired High Court judge and it will include people with a range of relevant skills and experiences including in Māori traditional knowledge protocol and culture as well as environmental protection and the nature of the communities within the earthquake-affected areas. One additional step added by the select committee stage is that the relevant Minister will now have to provide the review panel with a draft reason for seeking the Order in Council alongside a draft order. It might seem that that is an obvious thing to do but it was perhaps a little overlooked in the initial drafting of the bill itself; it is now there. The relevant Minister also needs to seek and consider appropriate public comment as I indicated before on any proposal unless there are exceptional circumstances that make that an unviable option. Draft orders will also be provided to the Regulations Review Committee or to the leaders of political parties during adjournment for comment and the relevant Ministers must have regard to comments received. The provisions of the bill are time-bound. The ability to make orders and any orders made under this bill will expire on 1 April 2018. There have been though some exceptions to that: we have made it possible for three specific pieces of primary legislation—for Kaikōura Hurunui and Marlborough districts only—to be extended. This will accommodate expected delays in revaluation of properties and associated audits of those councils so the expiry date for orders related to those matters will now be 30 June 2021.The select committee also discussed the importance of considering environmental concerns. In addition to the reference in the purpose statement to the role of the Resource Management Act environmental matters are specifically highlighted as requiring consideration as part of developing Orders in Council. I might add here that I do not anticipate that this will be anywhere near the problem that some might think. So far as the road south is being opened up between Kaikōura and Christchurch there have been appropriate steps to ensure that there are people onsite in fact who have an understanding of firstly tikanga Māori and how that might affect the area but also people who are sensitive to what might happen to other people's livelihoods if spoil etc. is not dealt with in an appropriate way. So I do not have some of the fears that others may have in that regard. It is certainly not a prohibition on people doing what is necessary and provided for by way of the powers in this bill. I think then that the bill does contain sufficient balances to make the necessary checks on it. The question of judicial review did arise and I am sure that that may come up again in this afternoon's final area of discussion on this bill the third reading. But in the end I think we have got to a point where we can be comfortable that there is a lot to guard against the irresponsible use of a bill like this.The bill is an important step in helping us to support and promote recovery from the earthquake sequence in the districts affected and we need to ensure that people can get on with getting on with their jobs and getting their communities up and running again. It will not be an easy task for them. It will not be a short task for them. This will not be the end of either this Government's or this Parliament's concern to ensure that those people are supported. I commend the bill to the House.