Faafoi Kris: Greater Christchurch Regeneration Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFaafoi Kris: Greater Christchurch Regeneration Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 29 March 2016. Volume:712;Page:9940. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]KRIS FAAFOI (Labour—Mana): It is a pleasure to take a call in this Committee stage of the Greater Christchurch Regeneration Bill. You may be asking why I am standing up and taking a call in this debate at all but as Mr Brownlee will know I am a former Christchurch boy myself and a proud Crusaders supporter—Hon Member: The Hurricanes.KRIS FAAFOI: —as well as the Hurricanes—and very interested in the goings-on in Christchurch. I grew up in the fine suburb of Hoon Hay which my colleague Megan Woods who is sitting to my right now is the representative of.It is an interesting life that this bill has had since it was introduced to this Parliament late last yearI think it was. At first reading it got support to be referred to the Local Government and Environment Committee but had a rocky time at the select committee—well to a degree Mr Brownlee. But then with some work from Mr Brownlee and my colleague Megan Woods it has arrived back in the Committee in a much better state than it was when it came from the select committee.One of the reasons for that as some speakers have spoken to already in this debate on Part 1 is that there is going to be a lot more input from the Christchurch community itself in this next phase of the recovery for Christchurch. I think it has been a well-spoken criticism that as we get to this regenerate stage of Christchurch’s rebuilding there has been a lot of Wellington-focused decision-making and that not enough has come from grassroots people in Christchurch. Although those who are actively doing the building in Christchurch have got a fair bit to say about how things go there the actual citizens have for some time been saying that not a lot of their voice has been heard.In Part 1 as some speakers have said in the purposes part of Part 1 around clause 3(1)(c) it does enable “community input into decisions on the exercise of powers” under this regeneration bill. Further down in clause 3 it also goes on to say that in doing so the agencies concerned have to look at the “environmental economic social and cultural well-being and the resilience” of the communities of Christchurch which I believe is a good addition to this bill because of the concern that I raised earlier in my speech.Interestingly enough there was a documentary on Television One on the anniversary of the Christchurch earthquake which I believe Mr Brownlee featured in. He may not have seen it when it went to air but there was a considerable amount of comment in that documentary from I would say mum and dad Christchurch Cantabrians who were concerned about the lack of the level of input that they were having into the Christchurch rebuild. But I think some of the changes that have been made with the input of Opposition parties to this piece of legislation will enable them to have that voice through the enabling of community input into the regeneration plan and importantly through the inclusion of those well-beings—the environmental economic social and cultural well-beings—that have been explicitly put into this piece of legislation.Looking a little bit further down the line in Part 1 to clause 11 “Conditions applying to exercise of powers by Minister or chief executive” within this piece of legislation there are still massive powers that are held by the Minister who is sitting in the chair and the heads of the agencies that are described in Part 1 and they include being able to acquire or to carve up or to sell off land—one of the many powers anyway—that may be needed as part of the regeneration. That is still I think a very hefty power in this piece of legislation and one that I think will need a lot of oversight by us as Opposition MPs and by those of my colleagues who are Christchurch-based MPs to make sure that what they are doing is within the realms of this piece of legislation.I think it is a carry-over power from the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority legislation which was passed very speedily and needed to be passed very speedily in the moments after the February earthquake. But because it is a carry-over power it does not necessarily mean that the level of critique that—on this side of the House we will need to pay attention to some of the decisions that get made by the Minister and also by the agencies concerned. We could see—I guess the worst-case scenario is the mandatory acquisition of land taken for a purpose that is not necessarily the best purpose for that land. We will keep an eye out for things like that.There is an amendment under the name of my colleague Dr Megan Woods that will amend clause 4 in Part 1 which will insert the name “Hagley Park Management Plan” into this piece of legislation. That will go some way to protect Hagley Park from the kind of acquisition that I have just spoken to. As a Cantabrian who grew up playing cricket and rugby at Hagley Park I know how important a resource and actually a jewel it is for the people of Christchurch. So to make sure explicitly in this piece of legislation that Hagley Park as it stands now is protected is I think a very good amendment.People who are not from Christchurch will realise if they have travelled to Christchurch just how important Hagley Park is. When Lancaster Park—or I think it was AMI Stadium—was hit by the February earthquake and was therefore rendered not usable Hagley Park became the cricket sporting centre for Christchurch and for the Canterbury region. So I guess we do know the importance of Hagley Park. It holds not just the Hagley Oval; Hospital Corner is where they play cricket. I think it is south—or north—Hagley Park where rugby is held on a Saturday morning for little nippers like me—Hon Gerry Brownlee: Both.KRIS FAAFOI: Both—OK. Some cold mornings at Hagley Park are had by some and will continue to be a bit of a rite of passage for Cantabrians who very well verse themselves on the rugby field when they get to senior levels. So I think to protect Hagley Park in that respect with Megan Woods’ amendment is a very good amendment to this bill.Just wrapping up all those together it is a much better piece of legislation because of the intervention of not just the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery but the Opposition parties. It means that because of the involvement of those in the community we will have a unified regeneration phase of Christchurch—at least at this point anyway. We would hope that because this piece of legislation has been improved and has got wide-ranging support from around this Chamber the spirit of that will continue not just in the legislative phase but also in making sure that it is continued in the actual regeneration. As we have said on this side of the Chamber we will be keeping a close watch on that to make sure that the spirit of the law is continued. Thank you.