SpeechDr JIAN YANG (National): Any Act has its purpose and this Act the Greater Christchurch Regeneration Act had its purpose; it's no exception. Passed in April 2016 the Act itself was trying to help resolve some long-term issues facing Christchurch after the earthquakes. The earthquakes happened a decade ago they caused hugged damage to our Garden City and after resolving some immediate issues the long-term issues emerged—for example in terms of land some land was no longer deemed suitable for the purpose it had and also it appeared that there was opportunity basically for development through amalgamation of titles or via amendments to originally zoned purposes. So to do that we would need some fast-track process and the Act itself was supposed to do that and to achieve that particular purpose.At the same time of course people would see some opportunities for urban renewal after the earthquakes. So to do that we would need some extraordinary measures to fast track the whole process. For that reason it would need some alternative measures or extraordinary measures legislative or institutional arrangements to make sure that this could happen. So the Act itself was trying to somehow help fast-track the process to rebuild Christchurch after the earthquakes. So the Act itself the GCR Act was trying to enable local and central government to deliver a focused and expedited regeneration process. Also it was a genuine cross-party effort in terms of designing the Act and also it enjoyed cross-party support—what was unanimous support for this particular Act. So the Act itself did work well to some extent and as I said earlier there was the annual renewal process and in 2017 it was noted that the Act worked reasonably well it was fit for purpose but gradually it became clear that the Act had started to become redundant and that is why in the 2019 review it was noted that it was necessary to somehow simplify the coordination of agencies and to do that we may need to somehow disestablish Regenerate Christchurch. So basically that is what we call—you know the bill itself served some purposes but as time goes on of course we would like to make some amendments.Now it was also noted that while the Act itself makes some achievements there was also some kind of reluctance in the local government the Christchurch City Council to work with central government in working on some plans. So in the end it is necessary for us to move ahead to move on. Now for this reason I would thank all the officials for their work. I thank all the submitters and all committee members for their commitment. As the Hon Megan Woods mentioned we did have committee meetings during the lockdown and actually it was quite a long process and also in the end we moved very fast to make sure that this bill could be reported to the House without going beyond the deadline. So also I would like to thank the committee staff for their efficient work and also I thank other colleagues like the Hon Gerry Brownlee Nicky Wagner and also Matt Doocey. They're from Christchurch. They made their own contributions. So the committee all worked collaboratively. That's why we say this bill itself really enjoys support from all parties and also I would like to make sure that this bill itself will continue to be an example for cross-party work in various committees.We made some amendments as we mentioned earlier that are largely to clarify the Ōtākaro Avon River Corridor and also to add some transitional power to some sections. But basically we believed that these amendments have improved the bill itself. We do have some concerns regarding the bill largely because implementation of the bill—we want to make sure that the taxpayers' money is used wisely.DEPUTY SPEAKER: Sorry to interrupt the member but the time has come for me to leave the Chair. This debate is interrupted and set down for resumption next sitting day. The House is suspended until 9 a.m. tomorrow.Sitting suspended from 10 p.m. to 9 a.m. (Thursday)