Burns Brendon: Canterbury Earthquake Response and Recovery Bill — Procedure First Reading Second Reading 
Burns Brendon: Canterbury Earthquake Response and Recovery Bill — Procedure First Reading Second Reading 
[Volume:666;Page:13931] 
BRENDON BURNS (Labour—Christchurch Central) 
: 
 It is important in the second reading of the Canterbury Earthquake Response and Recovery Bill that I declare that although I and my Labour colleagues support this bill we do so with a degree of nervousness about some of the provisions contained within it. I support it as the MP for Christchurch Central. With all due acknowledgment of the damage inflicted at Kaiapoi Bexley and other parts of Canterbury Christchurch Central has suffered the most damage and certainly the most dollar damage to buildings particularly—but not exclusively—across the central business district of our city. All members will know that heritage is the hallmark of Christchurch. Christchurch has one of the best preserved central business districts in Australasia and beyond; it is what brings the tourists to our city and it enriches our lives. 
We know that this bill is a response to a once-in-a-generation event: a disaster that we are not likely to—or that we hope and pray we do not—ever see again in our lifetime. We know that a number of non-compliant activities within the city and within the region are currently permitted by the state of emergency which the indications are will lift at midday tomorrow. So the need for the bill is there in terms of what needs to happen for progress in our city both with the first phase of demolition of unsafe buildings—buildings that definitively cannot be restored—and then so that the next phase which is the rebuilding of our city can happen in rapid fashion. 
I see this bill as a test of good faith. It would not be in anybody’s interests if that good faith was not fulfilled. But at the back of my mind is the last time I spoke on such legislation the Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Bill which was passed under urgency prior to Easter. That bill was not hallmarked by the sort of disaster we face so I am not making a direct comparison but it is obviously in my mind. 
Talking about preservation of buildings I understand that a small business in my electorate the Canterbury Cheesemongers shop has unfortunately fallen to demolition. I visited that shop twice early last week at the call of Martin the cheesemonger. His building a small building had been declared sound but the buildings on both sides of it had been very badly damaged. We were trying to see whether there was some way of preserving that business and that building when the demolition of the surrounding damaged buildings took place. I understand—and I cannot vouch for this—that unfortunately that shop has gone today. That might signal to us the sorts of challenges we will face in the demolition phase: the need to protect and preserve as many of our heritage buildings as we can. The cheesemonger’s shop was not an iconic building by any means but it was a small turn-of-the-century building that added some character to our city and it will be a loss that it has gone. We will wait to see whether it absolutely had to happen or may possibly have been avoided. There are big questions as we go through this bill and what lies beyond. 
One of the best things that we as local electorate MPs can do is ensure that we provide the best possible information to our constituents and I am pleased to say that electorate MPs have swung into action. Last night Lianne Dalziel held a meeting that was attended by 500 people. She had an Earthquake Commission representative and others assisting 500 people who wanted to know about insurance Earthquake Commission cover and the like. I know that my colleague Clayton Cosgrove has a similar meeting coming up tomorrow night in Kaiapoi. Gerry Brownlee and I have meetings in our electorates on Thursday night with Earthquake Commission staff present. I will also have senior staff from AMI Insurance and hopefully other insurance companies present at my meeting at Shirley Intermediate School at 5 o’clock on Thursday night. I am doing a similar meeting at the same venue at 5 o’clock on Friday night to provide the best information we can. I know that both Ruth Dyson and Lianne Dalziel have meetings planned through the weekend and into next week to try to provide that sort of advice and information to their constituents. That is truly truly important. 
But to come back to the bill I think that although we have some of the best heritage remaining in Australasia in Christchurch’s central business district the track record has not been flash. We had already lost too many buildings prior to the quake. We have a cumbersome city plan that has done very little to protect our heritage buildings. I think of buildings like the very ugly Rebel Sport building on the corner of Colombo Street and Moorhouse Avenue—a big ugly tilt-slab monstrosity that somehow or other has managed to invade our cityscape. I know that more is on its way. 
The printing room of the  
Press 
 was demolished. It had immediately adjoined my now vacated office in Worcester Street. The replacement for it on that site is four multi-storeyed buildings stretching to 20 storeys high. This is within 100 metres of the square—the centre and the heart of Christchurch. How that could get through is beyond me. It is because the city plan allows it. My concern is—and we need everybody to hold hands on this—that we make sure that this legislation does not provide carte blanche for further development of that ugly tilt-slab kind of construction which does nothing for a cityscape be it Christchurch or anywhere else. 
We have a unique series of façades across Christchurch. It is a unique set of buildings which has added a huge amount to the fabric of our city to its beauty to its character and to its iconic status. At the moment we are seeking Unesco acknowledgment of the Gothic revival buildings of our city to put it on the world map in that respect. It would be a disaster if there was an enhancement of the prospects for ugly tilt-slab designs to replace some of those heritage buildings. We acknowledge that that is happening and that in some instances it has to happen but there is a limit as to how much can be restored both physically and financially. We have to protect the best of what we have rebuild the best of what we have and acknowledge that some will go. It is clear that we cannot save everything. We are concerned to ensure that this bill allows the best of what is left to be retained protected preserved and enhanced and that when other new buildings are built they are not ugly buildings that will add nothing to the vibrancy of our city. 
I make two acknowledgments in relation to groups of people. One is the Orion lines staff who have done a fantastic job over the last 10 days restoring power across the city. I also acknowledge those people in the media who have in general done a very good job. However I have one message in that respect. I note the comments made by Peter Townsend from the Canterbury Employers Chamber of Commerce who was being interviewed by a Perth radio station. The station asked him what he was doing now that Christchurch’s central business district had been obliterated. I want the message to go out very clearly that 98 percent of Christchurch’s central business district is standing most people are back at work and the city is functioning very normally. People should take note that although we have sustained a considerable amount of damage our city is up and running and looking toward a viable future with buildings restored and new buildings that complement the historic façades of our cityscape. 
Debate interrupted.