Mathers Mojo: Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMathers Mojo: Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 10 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10928. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MOJO MATHERS (Green): I wish to start as others have done by acknowledging that it is more than 5 years since the traumatic Canterbury earthquake that was so destructive and caused such great loss of life and serious injuries to so many people. Earlier this year the larger than usual aftershocks were both an unwanted reminder of the trauma of the original earthquake and a timely prompt that we need to get on with fixing our earthquake-prone buildings.The Green Party is now pleased to be voting in support of this bill. In our view this bill is a testament to the value of good process genuine collaboration and cross-party cooperation. I commend the chair of the Local Government and Environment Committee Scott Simpson for his constructive leadership on this. The first round of submissions and hearings highlighted significant flaws in the bill. As a result it was redrafted so extensively that the select committee decided to put it out for a second round of consultation among the original submitters. I am very glad that we did so because although the second version was a huge improvement on the first it still contained a number of outstanding issues which were worked through in the next round. I now believe that we have a bill that strikes the right balance between making our buildings safer and other factors.Critically the bill now specifies that unreinforced masonry parts of buildings such as parapets and gables need to be prioritised for fixing. This bill also makes it absolutely clear that any exemption from fire or disability upgrades can be granted only on a case by case basis and then only where owners can demonstrate that full compliance would be unduly onerous. Even if an exemption is granted building owners must still comply as much as possible with the usual requirements for fire and disability access. As the select committee report noted it is not intended to allow financially capable building owners to circumnavigate the requirements for providing and upgrading fire and disability access.The fact that this bill now actually includes unreinforced masonry as a priority is a testament to the perseverance of both the Christchurch City Council and Ann Brower who made compelling repeated submissions pleading for the small stuff to be fixed quickly in a faster time frame so as to save lives. As they pointed out these features are not only the cheapest to fix they are the first to fall and the deadliest when they do so. I would like to quote Ann Brower here: “It is incomprehensible that a health-conscious safety-conscious Parliament would not address the low-hanging fruit first.” We agree and that is why we are so pleased to see it in this bill and finally addressed.Of course the other major flaw that was in the original bill was the removal of the requirement for buildings to upgrade disability and fire access when undergoing earthquake re-strengthening. The Green Party was strongly opposed to the removal or dilution of access provisions and this is because we see access to the built environment as a human right not as an optional extra or a nice-to-have. With an ageing population failing to upgrade disability access requirements represents a missed opportunity to futureproof our buildings. When they are undergone at the same time as earthquake strengthening work it saves owners money and is cheaper in the long run.I want to acknowledge that at the same time as this bill was going through the Local Government and Environment Committee we also received two petitions from the public that highlighted just how important and critical access to the built environment is. One was from Gary Williams of the Earthquake Disability Leadership Group and one was from the late Felicity Emmett supported by thousands of others. It is really good to be able to acknowledge that their input has informed the select committee and highlights the importance of access to public buildings.