Grigg NicolaNICOLA GRIGG (National—Selwyn): I was one of the hundreds of thousands of Cantabrians who hid under the dining table on 22 February 2011 and I really did think my number was up. Then of course five years later I was hiding under the doorway in my flat in Wellington and I really thought I'm not going to get away with this a second time." But luck thus far has been on my side.The disruption and the destruction and the distress that was caused on both of those occasions has been long felt and continues to affect the Canterbury region in particular to this day. What the earthquakes I think highlighted in part was firstly the ability of New Zealanders and Cantabrians especially to pull together but it also brought to the surface a number of shortcomings in the way that the Earthquake Commission (EQC) was able to respond to major events like those quakes.Those shortcomings have been well traversed in Dame Silvia Cartwright's public inquiry into the Earthquake Commission which the National Government set up in 2011. It was clear following the Canterbury and Kaikōura events as well I think as the floods and the scrub fires we've seen in the past 10 years that natural disasters are very much part and parcel of life in the "Shaky Isles" and as a result the functionality and range of EQC's reach does need to be clearly defined and managed. I would agree with the member from the Greens Eugenie Sage who spoke earlier and said that the range of events like this likely to hit our nation needs to be canvassed widely. This is our opportunity as a Parliament to take a good hard look and we can do it once we can do it right and yes with a view to revisit these things every five years.The bill seeks to deal with among other things the key issues and recommendations outlined by Dame Silvia. The National Party supports aligning the cover under the bill with that of standard private insurance practice and if it means that the commission and insurance firms are all working from the same playbook then that I have to say is a very good thing. It is so important to reduce the opportunity for dispute between the different interpretations of the bill because we have seen that go on and on and on for 11 years in Christchurch particularly. And because insurers are going to be acting as agents for EQC it is critical that these two sides so to speak are not operating to different standards.We would also support improving the consistency between the rules used to determine if a building is mixed-use and the resulting cover of that building. We've seen complex cases involving bodies corporate still running through the courts today. If you ask any resident in Christchurch I am sure they would agree that in the past there has been much difficulty trying to determine whether EQC cover is available and if so what the homeowner is entitled to. I personally have reopened a case 11 years after the fact; after I was given a $200 settlement to pull down and rebuild an entire brick wall. This bill will hopefully clear up things like that.There are some common-sense changes like extending the damage period of volcanic activity—we joke about it a little but we have seen it occur with devastating consequences in this country—and I am particularly pleased to see that given the amount of advocates who have emerged since 2011 purporting to act on behalf of claimants but actually pocketing often sizable commissions. There are some aspects of the bill which would require more clarification and review at the select committee and we look forward to supporting this bill as it progresses though its stages in the House."