CERA is going to govern and influence our lives for the next 5 years - what do you think about it?

Is is Wellington now rebuilding Christchurch? Or is it the firm lead we need to rocket Christchurch into the future as a model world city?

The Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Bill passed its third and final reading by 109 votes to 11 this evening, at the end of a whirlwind three day legislative process.

The final stages of the bill today were mired in controversy after the Government could not produce its changes to the bill until well in to the afternoon.

Labour and the Green Party put up a series of their own amendments, which were voted down by the Government. However, after select committee hearings in Christchurch yesterday, Government officials worked until 4am this morning choosing 32 out of about 100 suggestions to accept. The Government tonight passed its own amendments to match.

The bill establishes the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority (Cera) and empowers it to lead reconstruction efforts in Christchurch.

It gives Cera specific powers to get information from any source, to requisition and build on land and to carry out demolitions. It can also take over local authorities if they are not working effectively on recovery work.

"I have great confidence that this bill does provide the sort of framework we need to effect a solid recovery in the greater Christchurch area," Earthquake Recovery Minister Gerry Brownlee said.

Despite strong criticism of the Bill, Labour voted for it.

Labour's spokesman Clayton Cosgrove said the bill provided "war-time powers" to the Government, but the process of passing it had been "botched".

"Labour is supporting the legislation but we are deeply concerned about the obscene way it has been rushed through Parliament by Earthquake Recovery Minister Gerry Brownlee without the proper checks and balances," he said.

"We had a chance to get this critically important piece of legislation right. That opportunity has been wasted by Gerry Brownlee who was just hell-bent on ramming through a law without proper scrutiny.

A select committee hearing into Canterbury earthquake laws became briefly heated after an MP said the Christchurch City Council had been too slow to react after the first earthquake.

Christchurch East MP Lianne Dalziel, who was sitting on the local government and environment select committee hearing submissions on the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Bill yesterday, said the new legislation was needed because the council failed to create an earthquake recovery management plan after the September 4 earthquake.

"You know that people blame the Christchurch City Council for the need for this legislation because you failed to come up with a plan after the earthquake," Dalziel told Deputy Mayor Ngaire Button.

Button responded by saying after the new council was elected in October, those issues were handled by "a structure above us" , a reference to the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Commission.

The commission will be replaced by the new government agency.

After the hearing, Button said the new department would have been needed regardless of what did, or did not, happen after the September earthquake.

"I don't know what she's [Dalziel] on about," Button told The Press.

"We would have needed this legislation regardless, simply because of the magnitude of what happened and that the Government was always going to be paying for it [the rebuild and recovery]."

If the council had formed an earthquake recovery management plan after September 4, the events of February 22 would still have meant the proposed legislation was needed, Button said.

The select committee resumed its hearings in Wellington last night.

Earthquake Recovery Minister Gerry Brownlee rejected a call by the New Zealand Law Society call for the bill to be split in two, with the urgent powers dealt with now and longer-term insurance and compensation issues dealt with later. On the issue of compensation for affected land owners Brownlee said "we might need to move more quickly than a long legislative process might allow".

The minister said some Resource Management Act applications could be fast-tracked and they could include projects such as proposed subdivisions that did not immediately appear to be earthquake-related.

He was aware there could be some "opportunistic proposals". One he was aware of had come from well outside the quake-hit area, but he would not detail it.

Christchurch residents – not just officials – should decide how a powerful new Government department handles the rebuilding of the city, a select committee repeatedly heard yesterday.

Submissions from groups including Ngai Tahu, the Canterbury District Health Board (CDHB), the CanCERN organisation and the New Zealand Law Society, and several members of the Government's local government and environment select committee, said community engagement was critical or the city could pay the price for decades.

The select committee held a four-hour hearing on the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Bill at Addington Raceway, giving submitters less than 24 hours notice.

Deputy Mayor Ngaire Button said councillors were "united in our desire" to work with the country towards an effective recovery, but the proposed Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority (Cera) legislation did not clearly state the council's role for the next five years, apart from driving a recovery operation in the central business district.

"We're looking for an assurance of the role of local government over the next five years," she told the hearing.

The council was best placed to handle key issues.

"There are many, many things that we know about the city that a central government agency won't necessarily understand."

Other councillors slammed the lack of time and consultation to respond to the draft bill.

Select committee member and Waimakariri MP Clayton Cosgrove asked each submitter how much notice they had been given.

Cosgrove and other Labour MPs constantly questioned the need to rush the new powers through without proper consultation.

However, the head of the South Island's largest iwi, Ngai Tahu's Mark Solomon, said the extraordinary powers were warranted "by these extraordinary circumstances".

Solomon said there were enough safeguards and checks in place to ensure the department's new powers would not be abused.

However, he said public participation was key to the recovery.

"The identity, strength and vitality of Christchurch is in the hearts of our people. There must be a collaborative working relationship."

Ngai Tahu backed the legislation, with Solomon saying it would "place trust in the Crown" by backing its bid for extra powers.

Other submissions were mostly positive.

However, some submitters raised concerns.

The district health board said it was fundamental that it be included in Cera's overall plan for the city.

Chief executive David Meates said its "number one concern" was the purpose of the legislation.

"The health and wellbeing of the people in Canterbury is the most important thing to consider here.

"We have an unique opportunity to fast-track a whole number of things that would make a huge difference to this city's health and wellbeing."

The New Zealand Law Society was worried about the possibility of unauthorised demolitions, saying the legislation must protect against the issue.

Austin Forbes, from the New Zealand Law Society, said the bill may not be scrutinised enough if it was passed too quickly.

Environment Canterbury said it supported the need for "timely decision-making".

Commissioner Dame Margaret Bazley said it already had statutory responsibilities throughout the greater Christchurch area "and it's important we are allowed to continue with those". Selwyn District Council Mayor Kelvin Coe hoped Cera would discuss issues with local government before using its widespread powers. Leanne Curtis, of CanCERN, said it wanted community "engagement" rather than simple consultation. Group patron Dean Peter Beck said people would "revolt" if they were not included.

Well, to quote what I've said before, I think it is a good idea to centralise resources as long as Cantabrians don't lose their voice. Centralising things cuts down on inefficiencies and the penchant for bureaucracy which has to be a good thing. As long as things are managed properly I think the initiative will be best for ChCh in the long term.

I agree. It is a worry how fast it went through parliament - but with out arguing the case for an upper house to help out - I'm glad they seem to be not wasting time.

My only concern is if the people of CHC and Canterbury get left out. I'm sure there will be plenty of people who will moan and whinge that they are, but if Mayor Parker and Council stick to their guns (also the councils of Waimakariri and Selwyn) - what should come about with be good for the city, region and New Zealand as a whole.

http://static2.stuff.co.nz/1302727024/190/4886190.jpg

Christchurch City Councillors make their submission at yesterday's select committee hearing on the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Bill

The Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Bill currently before a parliamentary select committee means Wellington is taking control of our city and Christchurch people are being sidelined, argues John Hopkins.

Christchurch is suffering. Like most citizens of this city, I know of what I speak.

But things are about to get worse - much worse.

Parliament is attempting to pass, through urgency, one of the most dangerous pieces of legislation to grace our statute book in modern times. I speak of the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery (Cera) legislation which will, in effect, strip Christchurch of the last remnants of its democratic processes and place them under the control of a single minister.

That such an act can even be contemplated in a modern Western democracy defies belief, but the speed with which it is being rushed through is a personal affront to the people of Christchurch.

Let us be very clear as to what this legislation proposes.

The powers it gives to the minister are legion, but in essence it places in the hands of a single minister (and the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority) the power to override legislation without the agreement of Parliament.

Beyond this it takes planning powers away from the local council and gives the minister "the ability to suspend, amend, cancel [or] delay, any council plans and policies".

The only restriction on these powers are the purposes of the act, which are drawn broadly, and a review board whose powers are consultative only and - wait for it - are appointed by the same minister.

There is much reference in the long explanatory notes for the bill to consultation and co- operation, but actions speak louder than words.

The current bill was introduced with little or no consultation with the council and the people of Christchurch.

We were given a whole day's notice to attend a select committee hearing in the city yesterday.

These actions smack of arrogance and autocracy not consultation and inclusion, but it should not surprise us.

This is a Government with previous "form". This is the same Government that abolished our regional council, Environment Canterbury, and recently suspended the board of Linwood School, again without consultation. Neither action accords with the warm words from Wellington.

The consequences of this are very simple. Wellington is taking control of our city. The people of Christchurch are being sidelined.

While The Press buzzes with talk and debate on planning for a better Christchurch, it is now clear that Wellington will be making the decisions.

Apparently we, the people of Christchurch, can't be trusted to take such important matters ourselves. Our newly "flexible" friend Gerry Brownlee will do it for us.

This is "nanny state" of the worst kind. It is patronising and shows a deep level of disdain for the people of this city in this difficult time. But the issue goes much deeper. This act is nothing less than a challenge to New Zealand's democratic principles.

Whatever one's view of Mayor Bob Parker and his council they must all eventually face the people of this city at the ballot box.

This is the essence of accountable democracy and the ultimate check on power in our constitution.

Earthquake Recovery Minister Brownlee by contrast will have no such inconveniences. He is not accountable to the people of Christchurch. We could, as one, reject his plans for our city but he need not care a jot.

Even the people of Ilam could turf him out yet he could return to haunt us. Why? Because his political position is in the hands of the National Party and more specifically, John Key.

As the rest of New Zealand moves on Canterbury's voice will be drowned out by the vast majority of Kiwis who will have their own (legitimate) concerns.

The decisions that are taken over the next few years will define this city not just for decades, but for its foreseeable future. If we get this wrong, Christchurch will never rise from its ashes.

That these decisions will be left to a minister with huge, unchallengeable legal powers, monitored only by a panel of "experts" of his own choosing is an insult to this city and an insult to democracy.

The only people who legitimately have the right to make these decisions are the people who live in this city. They are the ones who must make this city work in the difficult years that lie ahead.

The only way of ensuring their voice is heard is through a democratically controlled authority. Democracy might be the worst form of government known to man but, as one Winston Churchill commented it's preferable to "all those other forms that have been tried from time to time".

Our current Government should be ashamed for suggesting otherwise.

* Dr John Hopkins is a senior lecturer and director of postgraduate research at the University of Canterbury School of Law.

- The Press

^^ The thing that worries me is the length of time things would take to get done if the status quo was maintained. There would be excessive consultation with communities and huge amounts of bureaucracy. Japan has already rebuilt a good portion of their roading and rail infrastructure damaged in their quakes simply because they bulldozed ahead and got it done. By having central government step in, ChCh will recover faster.

Articles like this are scaremongering, though they do highlight the important point that both you and I have stressed, Davee - Cantabrians must not lose their voice totally.

One of the positive things I can see about CERA is the access and influence that it could/can have to the treasury and outside help and resources as we need them.

I think if CERA can act as the driving mechanism that will push things forward without undue hinderance and delay, that can only be a good thing for Canterbury. What I don't want to see, is it become some sort of old Soviet committee that will rebuild CHC into a hideous experiment gone wrong.

Haha, given the distaste for high density development following the earthquake I don't think soviet-style Le Corbusier planning occurring. ;)

Access to the treasury is a good thing, though I hope that the cheque isn't blank. I hate to sound selfish, but I wouldn't want too much treasury money siphoned into ChCh at the expense of other regions.

Haha, given the distaste for high density development following the earthquake I don't think soviet-style Le Corbusier planning occurring. ;)

Access to the treasury is a good thing, though I hope that the cheque isn't blank. I hate to sound selfish, but I wouldn't want too much treasury money siphoned into ChCh at the expense of other regions.

:lol::lol::lol::lol:

Wow, my grammar in that post was terrible. I'm obviously hanging around with non-English speakers too much. :(

Ah well, I tried and it's getting late now. :nuts:

When so much has to be spent, and we have a completely blank canvas to rebuild a new cbd I think it will take more than just a city council to rebuild. Remember of course a functioning Christchurch will help not only the South but ultimately the whole country.

I do have faith in the current CHC administration to do the right thing by the city, however as so much money is coming from the taxpayer I dont mind the idea of the government getting involved. Even if it does sound like it would get bogged down.

God either way Im just so happy Anderton didnt win that election. Without a doubt Parker's got the stamina to rebuild this town.

As per Svarty Im sure my grammar was horrific as well. No excuses here, all my current workmates are English.

Anyone in a creative industry will tell you that one of the basic philosophies of creativity is that too many voices always leads to a vanilla result.

Whilst it would be great to listen to every single person about their personal preferences, eventually someone with the overall vision has to step up and lead and make tough decisions in a cohesive manner. Otherwise we're just going to end up as a blander, bigger version of Hamilton.

That said, I'm not sure if the least creative looking man in NZ is necessarily the person to do it.

http://www.carltaylorhomes.co.nz/images/news/brownlee.jpg

The Government's new Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority (Cera) has been labelled bureaucratic, militaristic and the opposite of the community-led approach Christchurch needs.

A bill to form the agency was pushed through Parliament last week.

Earthquake Recovery Minister Gerry Brownlee criticised the speed of Christchurch's original recovery process under the Christchurch City Council and said that after two quakes, "stronger governance and leadership arrangements" were required.

However, at a Lincoln University conference attended by international disaster recovery experts, Cera was damned as "completely the wrong approach" and "far from best practice" by critics such as Christchurch East Labour MP Lianne Dalziel.

Speakers at the Resilient Futures conference on Monday included United States Centre for the Study of Natural Hazards and Disasters executive director Gavin Smith, San Francisco consultant Laurie Johnson, a veteran of rebuildings from Chile to China, and Massey University professor Bruce Glavovic, the Earthquake Commission (EQC) chairman in natural hazards planning.

Johnson said international experience showed that governments often had a top-down, fast-track approach to rebuilding and recovery when it should be a grassroots process, the community being actively involved in the creation of the plan.

"Planning needs time," she said.

"It takes time to comprehend the information and build trust."

Johnson said a rush to make decisions created losers because the lack of consultation meant only the voices of the organised and powerful were heard.

The experience of other disasters was that "existing inequalities grow", she said.

Glavovic said Cera looked to have a top-heavy command and control structure, with limited community involvement through a 20-person panel of appointees.

"There is a real need for local people to be empowered in the recovery process," he said.

"How is [Cera] going to capitalise on local culture and knowledge? How is it going to mobilise local capacity to rebuild? How is it going to enable local communities to make choices that will build safer and more sustainable communities?"

In a panel discussion, Dalziel said the Government had gone out on a limb in setting up Cera as a government department, when Australia and other countries had created corporate-style Crown agencies after disasters.

She said there should be a system for neighbourhood consultation.

"We need to own our own recovery; own our own future," she said. "That is the complete opposite of a government department structure."

Ad Feedback
Opening the conference, Christchurch Deputy Mayor Ngaire Button said there would be proper consultation.

She announced a public weekend planned next month at Addington's CBS Canterbury Arena, where there would be seminars and discussions.

- The Press

^^That's not good to hear

Aha so thats how it works. The State of Emergency ended at midnight last night. Civil Defense have formally handed over running of this 'whole earthquake thing' over to CERA.

The rebuild proper begins. Interesting times.

You know there'll be no pleasing anybody in the next few years. I think I might steer clear of all traditional media for the timebeing, just for my own sanity. Not looking forward to all the petty fighting that will undoubtedly come.

Oh yeah, in case anyone missed it Roger Sutton has been made head of CERA. I dont know anything about the guy other than he's the ex-CEO of Orion and likes to wear Mr Men t-shirts and is 'passionate about Christchurch'.

Thats cool I suppose.

And anythings better than Gerry 'old buildings kill people' Brownlee. Gerry needs to focus on trying to placate greenies, oh I mean his mining portfolio .

Like you Luka, I don't know anything about Roger Sutton - but he seems to be a good choice from what I have heard and read. I really hope he has the balls to stick it out and do a good job - this is soooooo important for the city, region and SI - stuff it - for the country :-)

7-day work week 'no go'

A Christchurch demolition boss has dismissed comments from an international disaster recovery expert that crews in the central city should be working harder.

Southern Demolition director Alan Edge said comments that demolition work should be done seven days a week were "ridiculous".

"You can't work men seven days. Whoever said they should be working seven days is ridiculous. People have families and life outside work."

Edge was responding to comments from Cameron Sinclair, chief executive of the international agency Architecture for Humanity, who visited Christchurch last week.

Sinclair, who helped with the rebuild of New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina, said contractors should be negotiating with the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority (Cera) to work every day.

Edge said health and safety regulations prevented a busier schedule.

"Some buildings you can only work daylight hours," he said. "Some of them are that dangerous you've got to have daylight because you've got spotters watching buildings beside so you don't damage them as well."

Machine maintenance and rubble clearance were also issues, Edge said.

"You've got to realise the dumps only run six days a week. You can only pull down so much ready for Monday morning."

Southern Demolition employed about 30 staff who worked 10 1/2 hours a day, Edge said.

Auckland-based Nikau Contractors had 20 staff in Christchurch, with 20 to 30 more on the way.

Operations manager John Paul Stil said crews were working seven days where possible.

"We've got the staff to rotate," he said. "We're working seven days to recover stock, then six or seven days [on the demolition] if we can work with the owner."

Bureaucratic delays meant few jobs were that busy, Stil said. "The last month or so has been a bit quiet with the transition between Cera and Civil Defence. [Cera] hasn't released as many buildings as what we'd like. We're working with the owners and trying to get those buildings fast-tracked."

This is INSANE - I can't believe they are working to essentially a 40-hour week while the tourism industry is destroyed and the CBD in ruins. "We can't have people working weekends because they have families" - give me a break, ever hear of shift work? If the refuse stations aren't open Sundays, pass a bylaw, hire some staff and open.

I know a lot of staff are specialised, but with so many unemployed it seems a bit rich to be claiming they are too stretched to work every day. The attitude of the man above is a great example of why Cera should be a lot stricter with the people that are going in there and their working schedule.

It is insane. Every disaster project I have worked on we worked 2 10 hour shifts per day 7 days per week. The extra 4 hours were spent on equipment maintenance.

Is it possible there just isn't enough people with the skills they need to cover round-the-clock shiftwork? If companies are pushed for staff I understand why they can't make it a full-time operation. NZ doesn't have anywhere near the population of Japan or the US to draw on...

Is it possible there just isn't enough people with the skills they need to cover round-the-clock shiftwork? If companies are pushed for staff I understand why they can't make it a full-time operation. NZ doesn't have anywhere near the population of Japan or the US to draw on...

There must surely be alot of low-skilled work that can be done by people not experts in demolition. I'm thinking of the thousands around the country who are unemployed. You'd have to have them pay their own way to get down to Chch, to ensure only those serious took up the offers.

However after that, CERA could arrange with local providers of accommodation for a set nightly charge. Just imagine the boom for the motels, B&Bs, restaurants etc still standing, having all those extra people in town.

And some of them are bound to stay on, having a connection with a place they helped rebuild.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/christchurch-earthquake-2011/5081270/Should-CERA-work-in-a-20-storey-tower-block

http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/christchurch-earthquake-2011/5081270/Should-CERA-work-in-a-20-storey-tower-block

Yip - I think they should. I don't want CHC to look like Santa Fe (not that SF isn't a nice place - it's just low).

Demolition isn't exactly rocket science. Pretty much a trained monkey can do it.

That is right Davee, it would send out a good example.