Burns Brendon: Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Bill — First Reading 
Burns Brendon: Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:671;Page:17916] 
BRENDON BURNS (Labour—Christchurch Central) 
: 
 It is 7 weeks since Canterbury was savaged by the 22 February earthquake and this is the first time that I as the member of Parliament for Christchurch Central have had the opportunity to speak in the House. Given that most of the fatalities occurred within my electorate—the number of people who have been formally identified now stands at 172—I acknowledge the huge human toll that occurred and the impact it has had not just on families within our city but on families across our planet because many of those who died were visitors to Christchurch. 
I acknowledge the herculean and courageous efforts of so many people—doctors nurses firefighters and police—and the rainbow nation of urban search and rescue teams that gathered from around the globe to assist us in our time in need. They did outstanding work. I stood on Latimer Square watching them work on the CTV building near some of the families who were waiting for good news to come which in most cases did not come. I also stood and watched an Australian crew the day after the quake as they attempted to rescue a woman from the rubble. I turned to a gentleman alongside me and asked whether he knew who was in there. He said: “Yes it is my wife.” and I stood with him as that woman Ann Bodkin was rescued alive. 
I acknowledge also the bravery of so many ordinary people who pulled people from the rubble who risked their own lives as aftershocks continued who did extraordinary things and who were real heroes of our time. I acknowledge the stoicism of the people of Christchurch. Stoicism is a well-known characteristic of the people of Christchurch. 
I also pay tribute to the tolerance and patience of Cantabrians through these last 7 weeks and indeed the last 7 months. The earthquake on 22 February was not the second earthquake; in fact it was the third because the Boxing Day quake hit the central business district at the heart of my electorate as hard as the quake on 4 September. That tolerance and patience was exemplified at a public meeting I held last night in St Albans. It was run with my colleague Lianne Dalziel and more than a hundred people attended. Although many of the people were frustrated and angry about the processes and time being taken to settle the issues—some of which dated back to 4 September—they were tolerant. They were not savaging people which is a tribute to them.  
I hope and trust that the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Bill will deliver the same sense of urgency that we saw applied in the first few weeks after the 22 February earthquake as the rescue efforts continued. That urgency is absolutely essential for the future of our city. The task ahead is huge but there are also huge opportunities. 
I know that the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery the Hon Gerry Brownlee is concerned that public input into the decisions that are being taken might delay what the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority is attempting to deliver. That does not need to be so. I acknowledge that as far as I am concerned there have been some improvements to the bill from an earlier draft we saw. I welcome the improvements and take some delight in the fact that the Minister has acknowledged the need for some changes to the bill. 
I welcome the select committee process—as rapid as it is. At least people will have the opportunity tomorrow to provide some input to the bill. It is hugely important when we consider that the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority will dominate the life of our city for the next 5 years. It is really important to allow people that input. I also acknowledge that at least in the wording of the bill there is some reference to community input. In fact the reference has moved from clause 66 of the earlier draft to the general policy statement at the start of the current bill: “The Bill is founded on the need for community participation in decision-making processes while balancing this against the need for a timely and coordinated recovery process.” 
Community input has to be allowed to happen given the scale of the disaster we have been through and the need to do things differently this time around as we rebuild our city and rebuild it rapidly. The usual model is top-down; in this instance we need a bottom-up model. People need to be allowed genuine chances for input—and rapidly. 
There are mechanisms there for that to happen already. CanCERN the Canterbury Communities’ Earthquake Recovery Network was established after the September quake. I take some pride in the fact that I chaired the first few meetings of a group of residents’ associations then stepped back and that group went on to become CanCERN which is now accepted by the Minister for Earthquake Recovery by the community by the mayor and by the council as a very legitimate non-political set of groups from across the communities of Christchurch. Those groups are sitting at tables with Ministers and the council and are able to be heard. It is an example of how communities can form and have a say. 
I note also that in the last few weeks another group sprang up that I have been involved in. It is called ICONiC which stands for Interests in Conserving the Identity of Christchurch. It represents building owners and people with heritage interests who have had some role and input already into the civil defence provisions in terms of stopping the demolition of some heritage buildings until at least some pause can be taken and building owners can be consulted. 
I would point to the fact that councillors representing wards across Christchurch are in effect a consultative mechanism. Community boards also can play a much wider role if they are given the chance if they are given the power and if they are given the mandate to be involved and to represent their communities. The bill provides for the establishment of a community forum but it is a forum of 20 people appointed by the Minister for Earthquake Recovery with the requirement for them to meet no more than six times a year. I am sorry but that is not truly consultation. That is business as usual—doing things as they have always been done. 
We have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for Christchurch and for Cantabrians to have their say in the reshaping of their city. They want to do that and they want to be involved. These are their lives and these are their communities. It is their businesses and their jobs that are at stake. They need to have more than simply a hand-picked panel. 
Why not for instance establish a community forum allow anybody who wants to come and allow that to decide who the community’s representatives might be? Even if the Minister wants to still have veto powers or the right to appoint others to his forum he could actually allow the community to decide who its representatives are. That would really be a representative body not a panel of chosen representatives. 
I say as the MP for Christchurch Central which encompasses all of the central business district of our city that our business community must be very well represented on that community forum and on that panel. But it must not be just the business sector. I represent suburbs that have been hard hit and twice in some instances—suburbs like Avonside Richmond Philipstown Linwood Shirley and St Albans. They want a say in the rebuilding of their communities and their suburbs. They must be given that chance. They must be given a chance to say what sort of Christchurch they want to see. We want to see a sustainable city we want to see a strong city we want to see a safe city and we want to see a city that we can all have a say in in terms of shaping its future. We must absolutely get it right. There is a golden opportunity here a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to do that. 
I exhort the Minister even though he has taken on board some of the comments that have been made to take the opportunities that are here in front of him now. If he does not and if he does not include communities then the price will come back on his head and on the Government’s head sadly—or maybe not so sadly. It will be a price too high to pay. If people do not feel a part of it if they do not feel included in it and if they do not feel empowered by a process or by a decision they will not buy into it. They will not accept the decisions and if they do they will do so through gritted teeth. 
This is a golden once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. I exhort the Minister and I exhort the Government to think very seriously about inverting the usual top-down process and allow the communities of Christchurch to have their voice to speak rapidly and to be brought together in a community forum and allowed to give some indication of who they can bring together as their representatives. Let us work together for the future of our city. Kia kaha Christchurch