Faafoi Kris: Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFaafoi Kris: Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 30 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:10063. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]KRIS FAAFOI (Labour—Mana): I will be concentrating my comments on the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill to new section 133AA in clause 23 about which I think David Seymour has a Supplementary Order Paper but I will come back to that later in my submission. This is a necessary piece of legislation. I acknowledge all the Christchurch members of the Committee but also say being a Wellington member of this Parliament that because we are in a high-risk area we are also very aware of the need for this legislation.New section 133AA points out some buildings that are exempt from the purview of this piece of legislation. We are taking this bill as one question and I am very happy about that because it gives me the opportunity to pose some questions to the Minister around section 133AA from a layman’s point of view. I was not on the Local Government and Environment Committee and I realise that the Minister in the chair Judith Collins is not the Minister responsible for this piece of legislation the Minister for Building and Housing but I note that there are some officials who might be able to help us because I think there might be some valid questions from the public out in New Zealand about some of the exemptions here. I certainly am looking at some of the exemptions and scratching my head.If it is not the territorial authorities that are responsible for looking after these I guess you can say buildings or entities then who is? Subsection (1)(a) talks about a building that is used “mainly for residential purposes” unless it is two storeys and used as a boarding house a hostel or specialised accommodation—I can understand that. Paragraph (b) is “a farm building” and I guess that is probably some intervention by Federated Farmers. We also have paragraph (d) which is “a fence:”—I can understand that. Paragraph (e) puzzles me a little bit. It is “a monument (including a statue) unless the monument is capable of being entered by a person:”. That may sound strange but my own Anzac memorial in Porirua is quite a large memorial. It is probably about the size of just up to the roof here. I would be worried if that was not necessarily sound. It was erected by the Porirua City Council so who is actually responsible for making sure that that is not earthquake-prone? God forbid you would hate for that to come down and fall on somebody.The next one is paragraph (f) which is “a wharf:”. If the territorial authorities are not responsible for the sturdiness of the wharf then I would like to hear from somebody in this Parliament as to who is. There may be a simple explanation for that that was explained in the Local Government and Environment Committee but I cannot see in this piece of legislation who is responsible for a wharf. With Wellington being a port city there are a couple of wharves in Porirua there is a big wharf in Pētone and there is quite a sizable wharf in Wellington. Who is actually responsible for making sure that wharf is not earthquake-prone or is up to standard because according to section 133AA a wharf is exempt?The next paragraph paragraph (g) is “a bridge:”. If I were driving over a bridge or walking over a bridge when an earthquake hit I would like to think that someone had checked that bridge to see whether it was up to code. Again maybe the officials could help us. I hope that there is a simple explanation about this and that someone is looking after that. Maybe it is the New Zealand Transport Agency but if it is not the territorial authorities I would like to know who it is. Unfortunately we are only up to paragraph (g).The next one troubles me a little bit more. It is paragraph (h) which is “a tunnel:”. A tunnel is not somewhere where I would like to be if an earthquake hit. There is one tunnel I travel through regularly the Karori Tunnel. It is only a small tunnel. It is an older tunnel—probably the oldest tunnel in the Wellington area—and if an earthquake were to hit I would not like to be there but if someone told me that it was OK I would feel a lot safer. Unfortunately under this piece of legislation a tunnel is exempt so if someone could tell me what the story is with a tunnel—I would hope that it was the New Zealand Transport Agency that was responsible for that but can someone please tell me who is responsible for tunnels. Paragraph (i) is “a storage tank:”. That may not be such a big thing if it only a 100-litre tank but there are some very big storage tanks out there in our communities I know.