Calder Cam: Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Bill — Second Reading In Committee 
Calder Cam: Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Bill — Second Reading In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:18162] 
Dr CAM CALDER (National) 
: 
 It is a great pleasure to rise and speak on this exceptionally important bill the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Bill. I had the pleasure to be a member of the parliamentary committee that journeyed to Christchurch yesterday to hear evidence and worked into the night last night to progress this legislation. We took a very early morning flight and we arrived in Christchurch with time up our sleeves before our hearings began at Addington Raceway. 
As members of the Local Government and Environment Committee we took time to make ourselves aware of the devastation in the central business district. Many of us had spent only a little bit of time in Christchurch before at the very moving memorial service and at that stage we saw the devastation in the eastern suburbs. Therefore we took the opportunity to see some of the devastation visited upon the central business district. 
It was exceptionally sobering to see Colombo Street where for a whole block the façade of shops along one side had been completely torn off exposing the sobering reminders of domestic life within—tables set chairs around and pictures on the wall—untouched for some months. In the distance we could see the lean on the Hotel Grand Chancellor. In other parts of the city we saw the old and much-loved Stone Chamber which was surrounded by a network of fallen scaffolding where the repairs that had been undertaken after the effects of earlier quakes had suffered and the whole façade had tumbled down. It certainly underlined the need for this legislation the need for strong governance and the need for a united and effective response to this long-term tragedy. 
I want to acknowledge the select committee process and the very able chairmanship of Chris Auchinvole. As Charles Chauvel has attested it was a challenge and Chris did an exceptional job. I acknowledge Kennedy Graham whose contribution was measured considered and very positive to the end result and of course the submitters. I also want the Government to give itself and the Minister a pat on the back. 
The Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery the Hon Gerry Brownlee has taken the recommendations on board the select committee members have listened and we have here a huge number of recommendations that the Government has taken on board from the hearing of evidence. It is interesting that we have had a certain amount of vituperation from the Opposition benches because a Supplementary Order Paper has yet to be tabled. The reason it is yet to be tabled is of course that the Government has been listening to the evidence and to the debates within the select committee where there has been a certain amount of banter and passionate evidence. The Government has listened to that and taken those things on board. I want to make that point and to come back to some of the other points raised shortly. 
We realise that this bill is crucial. It is crucial because it is setting out appropriate measures to enable the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery and/or the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority to facilitate and direct if necessary Greater Christchurch and its communities to respond to and recover from the impact of the Canterbury earthquake. This bill is founded on and recognises the need for community participation. That is something that a number of submitters commented on as have a number of speakers in the Chamber today and if I get a chance to speak later in the debate I will come back to that point. 
We want community involvement in the decision-making process but we must balance that against the need for a timely and coordinated recovery process. We need strong governance and leadership for the rebuilding and recovery of the Greater Christchurch area for the benefit of all those living there and for all New Zealanders. 
Some concern has been expressed about the location of powers regarding the approval of the recovery strategy and the recovery plans. There was some concern that those powers should not be held by Ministers but be implemented by local government structure. We did not agree with this. We believe a recovery process is beyond the capability of current institutions and that new institutional arrangements with specific powers are required. There will be opportunities for significant community participation in the recovery plan. 
A submitter expressed some concern which was taken on board and looked at carefully that the purpose provision was too wide and that it preconditions the exercise of executive and coercive powers. We do not agree with this. We do not think it is necessary to outline criteria for when and why the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority or the Minister can exercise powers. Significant checks and balances have been built into the legislation to ensure that powers are exercised only in accordance with the purpose of the legislation and only if reasonably necessary. Also the exercise of a statutory power can be subject to judicial review. 
The bill also contains other significant protections. Some of these are that the power to require information can be used only when the information can be provided without unreasonable difficulty or expense. Before disseminating information the chief executive must consider the privacy principles under the Privacy Act and the need to protect confidential and commercially sensitive information. 
The person exercising the power of entry must produce evidence of authorisation and where practicable this power must be exercised at a reasonable time and prior notice of entry must be given. Before exercising a survey power the chief executive must consult the Surveyor-General and where there is a dispute a mechanism will be put into place whereby landowners can disagree with the definition process. 
In undertaking building works a notice is required to be served on owners occupiers and other persons with an interest in the land. The exercise of powers of direction and step-in rights regarding councils and council organisations does not include the ability to collect rates or to take any other action or powers affecting rates. There are many other checks and balances but I will finish at this point. I commend the bill to the Committee.