Goff Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Goff Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:670;Page:17034] 
2. 
Hon PHIL GOFF (Leader of the Opposition) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: Does he stand by his statement that in Christchurch “up to 10000 houses will need to be demolished and over 100000 more could be damaged.”? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister) 
: 
 Yes. It was a preliminary figure from the Earthquake Commission’s geotechnical engineers as a result of the early modelling of their observations. I have absolutely no reason to dispute their expert advice. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: Does the Prime Minister accept that speculation by him about whole neighbourhoods having to be demolished has according to the people in Bexley and Burwood whom I spoke to this morning unnecessarily caused anxiety distress and uncertainty because there is no follow-up as to which neighbourhoods he was referring to and what will be done to help them? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: To the best of my knowledge I have never said that whole suburbs would be abandoned. I have said that streets houses or areas may be abandoned. That is as a result of very very significant damage. We will not know exactly those areas until we get the absolute geotechnical advice. I can say to those householders in that position that as soon as we get that advice we will not only release that advice to them but also share with them the options that are presented to them. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: Does the Prime Minister accept that it is better not to speculate about those sorts of things until those areas can be identified by geotechnical reports and there can be back-up support and assurance to the residents who will be so affected? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: If I had gone out there and named streets areas or houses without geotechnical advice then I think the Leader of the Opposition would have a point. That is not what I have done. The reality is that the issue is not ultimately whether 9000 10000 or 11000 homes are demolished; the issue is which homes will be demolished. It is blatantly obvious to anyone who has been in Christchurch that a significant number will be demolished. We know as a result of the first earthquake that 3500 homes are to be demolished and 8000 homes in total breach the $100000 cap. We also know that as a result of this earthquake there has been substantially more damage. For the Government not to give an indication of the likely extent of damage to both business and consumers is quite frankly treating the people of Canterbury with contempt. We actually need to share with them the level of information we have and also share with them the options that may be presented to them. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: Given the huge amount of rebuilding work that will need to be done what is he doing at the moment to ensure that as many local people as possible who are currently unemployed with 9000 more being made redundant can be upskilled to do some of that work and prevent a crisis in shortage of skilled labour? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: Firstly I cannot speak for every building contractor who will be involved in the projects but I know that from Fletcher’s perspective it is trying to use local contractors. Secondly the Government is attempting either to have the cordon moved or ultimately to be in a position where Christchurch Polytechnic Institute of Technology can get back to business. It trains a lot of people in the skills area. I am sure that over the course of a number of years in the future there will be enormous demand for people in the construction sector and I think those people will find work in Canterbury. There is very little in the way of silver linings as a result of this earthquake but if it provides employment and skills for some young people then I think that is one of them. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: Is the Prime Minister aware that the building and construction industry in Christchurch is still downscaling that companies are going into liquidation and that apprenticeship numbers and training numbers are being reduced when there will be a huge demand for skilled labour within 6 to 12 months; and what specifically is he doing to address that need? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: I hate to go back to the basics of supply and demand but if we look at what is going to happen to Christchurch over the next number of years we think that in the order of $20 billion will be spent on infrastructure. We know that some workers will want to relocate from around New Zealand and that some companies will draw on their New Zealand - wide staff but it is blatantly obvious for anyone to see that as that rebuilding process takes place there will be enormous opportunity. I for one happen to believe that plenty of people will either apply for courses or find opportunities. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: Does the Prime Minister not understand that although there will be enormous opportunities if there are people who are currently being made redundant and unemployment is projected to rise to 7 percent in Christchurch over the next couple of months then unless there are specific programmes to enable people to acquire those skills it will not help the employment and economic situation in Christchurch if people are coming from around New Zealand and around the world as he suggested today and yesterday? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: That is not what I have said. What I have said is that I believe there will be great opportunities for the people who work in Christchurch. I am advised by the Minister for Tertiary Education that at the moment he is looking at those programmes and projects that will be available to them. I have absolutely no doubt that increasing numbers of young people will find employment in that area. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: How does the Prime Minister respond to criticisms from within the industry itself in Christchurch and around the country that this Government does not have an adequate skills-training programme and that there will be a major shortage of skills in the very trades we need to rebuild Christchurch within 6 to 12 months? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: I am reliably informed by the Minister for Tertiary Education that that is total rubbish from the Leader of the Opposition. Secondly let us get a little bit of perspective on what is going on. We have had an earthquake that has cost the lives of up to 200 people. We have a city that has had utter devastation wreaked upon it and we are in a situation where 10000 homes will probably be demolished and 100000 additional claims are likely to be made. The city has been without power water and sewerage. The Government has been doing everything it possibly can in a 2-week period to restore those basic infrastructures. Yes the issue of training more people is an important one but if the Leader of the Opposition thinks that it is the most important one at the moment he will be the Leader of the Opposition for a very long time until the Labour caucus boots him out. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. You will understand that having spent several hours this morning talking to really stressed and anxious people— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member will resume his seat. The House will get into disorder if points of order are used for matters that have nothing to do with order. The member’s question verged on an allegation that the Government was ignoring an issue. The Prime Minister responded to that in his answer and that kind of question will get that kind of response. If the member wishes to ask a further supplementary question he can but he cannot use the point of order process for that purpose. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think you will agree that my question was a very straight question. It asked how the Prime Minister responded to criticism that had been made to me by the building industry that there was not an adequate programme— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member will resume his seat. He is now using the point of order process totally incorrectly. The Prime Minister disputed the assertion made in the Minister’s question. The Minister answering is perfectly entitled to dispute a claim that is made in a question and the Prime Minister did that. If the honourable Leader of the Opposition wishes to ask a further supplementary question he certainly may do so but he cannot raise points of order like that. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: How does the one-third fall in apprenticeships taken on by the building industry and the continuing collapse of building companies—one collapsing today—assist in the rebuilding process that will be necessary on a massive scale in Christchurch? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: One thing that the Government can pat itself on the back for is that in the last 2 years it has supported a huge amount of the construction sector through the amount of work it has undertaken. This Government has supported that sector and therefore ultimately it has supported training in that sector. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Will water and sewerage be reconnected in streets that as he has indicated are to be abandoned? 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: I always find that it is going badly when one has to revert to another member on the front bench. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! [ 
Interruption 
] I am on my feet. The Prime Minister should not push his luck. He knows better than that. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am deeply offended. I have been approached by people— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member will resume his seat right now or he will leave the House immediately. The House will come to order. I say to members that it is not a good look at this time. The Prime Minister knew that that comment would lead to disorder. It was not wise. The House will come to order and I warn the shadow Leader of the House that when I get to my feet he will sit down or he will leave. 
Rt Hon JOHN KEY 
: I have not seen what the final recommendations will be but if an area of land cannot be remediated and therefore properties cannot be built on it partly because they would not be insurable then it would be very unlikely that water and sewerage would be connected there.