Woods MeganDr MEGAN WOODS (Labour—Wigram): It is my pleasure to take a call here and to look at the report of the annual review of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. DPMC or the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet has three functions: national security and intelligence coordination the management and oversight of the civil defence emergency management and of course what I will focus on the monitoring of the Greater Christchurch regeneration programme which now sits within DPMC after the disbandment of the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority (CERA) with the legislation that was passed last year. This was an important annual review for DPMC because this is one of the first times that Parliament through the select committee process got to question the chief executive about how the new entities of Ōtākaro Ltd and Regenerate Christchurch were performing in relation to DPMC and the regeneration of Christchurch. The questions that were asked at the Government Administration Committee which are covered off in the report are wide ranging.First of all there are the lessons from the Canterbury earthquakes. This is something where I am eager that we do not sweep under the carpet some of the more difficult bits of what has been first of all our crisis period and then our recovery and now our regeneration and not learn all the lessons that need to be learnt from this. This was covered off when the chief executive came to the select committee and questions were asked as was the very vexing issue of the insurance industry. I wonder whether one of the Government members when they take a call under this theme may give us an update about the report that is mentioned in the select committee report which was expected to be completed by 31 March 2017 which will include lessons about the insurance industry and how that performed and whether or not that would include of course the Government insurers both through the Earthquake Commission and through of course the Crown-owned insurer Southern Response.Of course we know that the Earthquake Commission itself has thousands of unfinished claims whether they be claims that have not been begun or claims that are having to go back and be re-repaired. This is something that is stopping many thousands of Cantabrians from getting on with their lives and this is something that certainly needs to be examined whenever we are thinking about how it is that our regeneration and our recovery is going in Canterbury.Another area that was canvassed was the East Frame anchor project. The East Frame of course was one of 13 anchor projects that were CERA-led and have now transferred to Ōtākaro in various forms—none of which have been completed according to the original time lines as were set out in the cost-share agreements. As they were reconfigured—they all have needed to be re-negotiated—what we have seen is the private sector going gangbusters in Canterbury and some really exciting developments growing in the CBD of Christchurch but what we have now is the Government anchor projects being the kind of anchors that weigh things down. We can look at the empty lot where the East Frame has sat vacant for many years. We can look at the hole in the ground in Cathedral Square where we should have a convention centre. We can look around and see that really we need some impetus from the Government—so being able to talk about that and talk about what the expected time frames are when we could finally see some of the stimulus that we were promised from these anchor projects come to fruition.Most concerningly this was also a chance to question DPMC about the various serious allegations of conflicts of interest in the former CERA organisation. Further to those serious allegations of conflicts of interest we now know in addition to the original three—two of which have been referred to the Serious Fraud Office given how serious they were—that there are at least a further three individuals within the CERA organisation who are being investigated by DPMC for conflicts of interest. This is a great concern to us. This is the kind of way in which we are not used to seeing Government operate in New Zealand and it is not something that we in Labour are willing to tolerate. We call on the Government repeatedly to have a wide-ranging inquiry into this. Why it is that it thinks it can confine it to a shopping list of three names that have been supplied by the original three under suspicion is beyond me. We must learn the lessons of what has happened in Canterbury and I think that the report that the select committee has produced there makes it clear that we need to see that leadership from the new Minister supporting Greater Christchurch Regeneration that will make sure it is a success.