Wood MichaelMICHAEL WOOD (Labour—Mt Roskill): Well following a couple of fairly undignified efforts I'd like to focus in a little bit on the bill that the House actually has before it. But just in opening up I do want to acknowledge in fact all colleagues around the Chamber whatever party they may come from from the city of Christchurch because pretty clearly we're here debating this bill as a result of what happened in Christchurch. So I just want to acknowledge the work that all of those colleagues in different capacities did to support their city following on from those events in 2010 and 2011.I want to especially acknowledge the Minister responsible for the Earthquake Commission the Hon Megan Woods because what we heard from her when she opened up this debate was that on coming into office she was determined that we got the horse moving on this one. The reality is that the Earthquake Commission (EQC) is an enormous organisation and changes to the way it works have significant impacts on New Zealanders and one does want to think a little bit carefully about those before implementing them. I have to say that what we effectively hear from the Opposition on these issues is that we shouldn't think before we act. Well this is a Government that is going to think before it acts. On coming into office—following on from the previous Government which did nothing to reform the EQC in the nine years that it had—what the Minister has said very quickly to officials is Look there's longer-range work that has to happen that is going to take deeper consideration but what are the things that we can move on now?" And that's why we have this bill before us and that's a symptom of a Minister who's all about action and a Government that's about actually getting things done.The Earthquake Commission is a national treasure. The Earthquake Commission is a national treasure and it's one that was bequeathed to us as many of our other great institutions were by the first Labour Government in the aftermath of the Napier earthquake and various other disasters in that period of our history. The reason that it is a treasure is that it is all about social solidarity. It is about New Zealanders saying "When bad things happen to other New Zealanders we're not going to leave you hanging out to dry. We are all in this together." Virtually all New Zealanders who have a home and have an insurance policy pay in on a roughly equal basis and we all get the support. And whether you are rich or poor in a place where a natural disaster hits you get the support that you need from the Earthquake Commission. That is at least how it is supposed to work and so continuing to ensure that that institution meets the needs of New Zealanders and is sustainable and fit for the future is incredibly important. It's part of our social fabric part of that notion—that Kiwi notion—of social solidarity and looking after each other. That is very much at the core of this Government's agenda.It's also worth noting that the Earthquake Commission is in fact one of the largest organisations in the world that has to go and seek reinsurance on the international markets. It is a substantial and quite unique organisation. I welcome the Hon Gerry Brownlee's comments about the value of the select committee—which will be the Finance and Expenditure Committee—making sure that it understands those issues fully and we will certainly be doing that. The bill addresses four key areas and just to quickly work through those the first is that it removes the EQC cover for contents. To me this is sort of a fox and a hedgehog thing. We have this organisation that has this incredibly important role in terms of supporting New Zealanders after a disaster. Do we want it to do a number of quite complex things or do we want it to really focus in on the big thing that will help people get back up on their feet? That's what this is effectively about. It's about saying "Let's let the private insurance market sort out the contents so that the Earthquake Commission can focus on the thing that is really really substantial in terms of people getting their lives going again which is getting their home back." So I think that's a very sensible change and there seems to be widespread support for that change. The bill increases the building cover cap from $100000 to $150000. It's my understanding that the $100000 cap was set back in 1993 when the commission was established in its current form so clearly it's well beyond time that that was increased to take account of increasing costs. The other benefit of that is that potentially it means that homeowners can have their needs met by simply dealing with the EQC instead of having to split a claim effectively between the EQC and a private insurer which obviously creates duplication confusion and delay. Thirdly there's the increase in claim notifications from a hard cap of three months to up to two years with some caveats. That's going to be explored at the select committee but it seems sensible to me given that certain earthquake damage may not be discovered until a bit later. Finally there's greater clarity around the EQC's information-sharing rights. I think that's good and proper given its role in public education. This is a good bill. It's a bill put forward by a Government that's set to improve things and I commend it to the House. Thank you very much."