Members of a King Country iwi occupying one of the Crafar farms near Benneydale say they fear the Government may offer them back Landcorp farms, which have absolutely no connection to the iwi; The Minister of Maori Affairs, Dr Pita Sharples, says he pushed to have a Maori presence at the Rugby World Cup - because tangata whenua didn't even get a look in during the America's Cup in 2000; The Chairman of Bay of Plenty's Economic Development organisation wants to see concrete results in two to three years, from a strategy which aims to develop Maori assets in the region; and Almost a year since the Christchurch earthquake, the Nagi Tahui leader is urging locals to continue sticking together.
Questions to Ministers 1. PESETA SAM LOTU-IIGA to the Minister of Finance: What are some of the issues the Government will consider to meet the expected fiscal cost of the Christchurch earthquake? 2. Hon PHIL GOFF to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement that, in Christchurch, "up to 10,000 houses will need to be demolished and over 100,000 more could be damaged? 3. Hon JOHN BOSCAWEN to the Attorney-General: What changes, if any, is he proposing to the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill, and why? 4. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Minister of Finance: How much of the cumulative $15 billion drop in GDP over the next 4 years, as identified in the Treasury's February Monthly Economic Indicators report, is a result of the "weaker [economic] outlook we were seeing prior to the February earthquake" in Christchurch? 5. Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Is he satisfied that there is enough coordination between central government agencies, local council, and non-government organisations in the response to the earthquake? 6. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Attorney-General: Is it his intention to further progress the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill this week? 7. NICKY WAGNER to the Minister for the Environment: What changes has the Government made under the Canterbury Earthquake Response and Recovery Act to facilitate recovery and the processing of resource consents to enable Christchurch to rebuild as quickly as possible? 8. Hon JIM ANDERTON to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Does he stand by his comment in the House yesterday that "there is a period in which insurance companies will not provide cover", and if so, what will the Government do to assist people who have already signed purchase contracts and are seeking insurance cover? 9. JACQUI DEAN to the Minister of Police: What has been the response of the New Zealand Police and their counterparts in other countries to the Christchurch earthquake? 10. GRANT ROBERTSON to the Minister of Health: Is he satisfied with the cost of after-hours medical treatment? 11. TIM MACINDOE to the Minister of Housing: What assistance is available for people who require emergency housing following the earthquake on 22 February? 12. Hon TREVOR MALLARD to the Minister for Communications and Information Technology: Who made the decision to defer MediaWorks' payment of $43 million to the Crown?
DAVID SHEARER to the Prime Minister: Is it still a fundamental purpose of his Government to narrow the wage gap between New Zealand and Australia, and to grow local wages in New Zealand? TODD McCLAY to the Minister of Finance: What recent reports has he received on the economy? Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Finance: In dollar terms, what is the shortfall in the tax-take for the nine months to March revealed in yesterday’s Financial Statements compared to October’s pre-election update? Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Minister of Finance: How much has been raised to date by the Earthquake Kiwi Bonds and, at this rate, how many years will it take to cover the Government’s estimated $5.5 billion liability resulting from the Canterbury earthquakes? Hon TAU HENARE to the Minister for Social Development: How will Budget 2012 provide greater support for young people most at risk of long-term welfare dependency? Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE to the Minister for State Owned Enterprises: Does he stand by the Prime Minister’s statement regarding asset sales that “We are not going to do anything tricky there”? Dr JIAN YANG to the Associate Minister of Health: How is the Government expanding its programme to reduce rheumatic fever in vulnerable communities? Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister of Housing: Does he stand by all his comments regarding housing? JULIE ANNE GENTER to the Minister of Transport: What is the plan to pay for the Government’s transport expenditure given that the Ministry of Transport’s Briefing to the Incoming Minister warns of a funding shortfall of $4.9 billion if high oil prices and low GDP growth continue? MARK MITCHELL to the Minister for Economic Development: How is the Government improving value for money in its procurement of services for the public sector? DARIEN FENTON to the Minister of Labour: Does she stand by her statement that “I do not want to see unnecessary change for change’s sake. Rather I am looking to put in place pragmatic solutions as we implement our manifesto commitments and let employers, employees and business focus on what they do best.”? Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Prime Minister: Does he still have confidence in the Minister for Social Development and the Associate Ministers for Social Development; if so, why?
TE URUROA FLAVELL to the Minister of Conservation: Does he agree with Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, Dr Jan Wright, that joint decision-making with the Minister for Energy and Resources on mining the conservation estate undermines the role of the Minister of Conservation as guardian of that estate, and how will he respond to her advice to Parliament that conservation should take precedence? Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement that "for most New Zealanders an indicator of how well the economy is doing is whether or not they can keep up with the cost of living"; if so, is he satisfied that they currently can? Hon TAU HENARE to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on inequality in New Zealand, and how do recent changes in trends compare to other countries? Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Finance: Does he agree with BERL that "outside of dairy and forestry, export receipts have effectively flatlined since April 2009" and that "The risks inherent in such a narrowing of our export base should be of concern to all"; if not, why not? Dr CAM CALDER to the Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills and Employment: What announcements has he made about the Māori and Pasifika Trades Training initiative? Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his Government's decisions? PAUL FOSTER-BELL to the Minister of Housing: What progress has he made with local government in securing Housing Accords under the legislation passed last year, and how are they increasing the supply and affordability of housing? Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister of Health: What was the original forecast cost for Health Benefits Limited and what is the revised forecast cost now, if any? MAGGIE BARRY to the Minister of Education: What recent announcements has she made on the Government's $359 million investment to raise student achievement? Hon RUTH DYSON to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: How much has the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority spent on legal fees in the last 3 years? DENIS O'ROURKE to the Minister of Transport: When will the Government provide a comprehensive and integrated land transport plan for New Zealand? PAUL GOLDSMITH to the Minister of Revenue: What is the objective of the Government's recently announced Taxpayer's Simplification Panel?
The Canterbury earthquake sequence (2010-2011) was the most devastating catastrophe in New Zealand‘s modern history. Fortunately, in 2011 New Zealand had a high insurance penetration ratio, with more than 95% of residences being insured for these earthquakes. This dissertation sheds light on the functions of disaster insurance schemes and their role in economic recovery post-earthquakes. The first chapter describes the demand and supply for earthquake insurance and provides insights about different public-private partnership earthquake insurance schemes around the world. In the second chapter, we concentrate on three public earthquake insurance schemes in California, Japan, and New Zealand. The chapter examines what would have been the outcome had the system of insurance in Christchurch been different in the aftermath of the Canterbury earthquake sequence (CES). We focus on the California Earthquake Authority insurance program, and the Japanese Earthquake Reinsurance scheme. Overall, the aggregate cost of the earthquake to the New Zealand public insurer (the Earthquake Commission) was USD 6.2 billion. If a similar-sized disaster event had occurred in Japan and California, homeowners would have received only around USD 1.6 billion and USD 0.7 billion from the Japanese and Californian schemes, respectively. We further describe the spatial and distributive aspects of these scenarios and discuss some of the policy questions that emerge from this comparison. The third chapter measures the longer-term effect of the CES on the local economy, using night-time light intensity measured from space, and focus on the role of insurance payments for damaged residential property during the local recovery process. Uniquely for this event, more than 95% of residential housing units were covered by insurance and almost all incurred some damage. However, insurance payments were staggered over 5 years, enabling us to identify their local impact. We find that night-time luminosity can capture the process of recovery; and that insurance payments contributed significantly to the process of local economic recovery after the earthquake. Yet, delayed payments were less affective in assisting recovery and cash settlement of claims were more effective than insurance-managed repairs. After the Christchurch earthquakes, the government declared about 8000 houses as Red Zoned, prohibiting further developments in these properties, and offering the owners to buy them out. The government provided two options for owners: the first was full payment for both land and dwelling at the 2007 property evaluation, the second was payment for land, and the rest to be paid by the owner‘s insurance. Most people chose the second option. Using data from LINZ combined with data from Stats NZ, the fourth chapter empirically investigates what led people to choose this second option, and how peer effect influenced the homeowners‘ choices. Due to climate change, public disclosure of coastal hazard information through maps and property reports have been used more frequently by local government. This is expected to raise awareness about disaster risks in local community and help potential property owners to make informed locational decision. However, media outlets and business sector argue that public hazard disclosure will cause a negative effect on property value. Despite this opposition, some district councils in New Zealand have attempted to implement improved disclosure. Kapiti Coast district in the Wellington region serves as a case study for this research. In the fifth chapter, we utilize the residential property sale data and coastal hazard maps from the local district council. This study employs a difference-in-difference hedonic property price approach to examine the effect of hazard disclosure on coastal property values. We also apply spatial hedonic regression methods, controlling for coastal amenities, as our robustness check. Our findings suggest that hazard designation has a statistically and economically insignificant impact on property values. Overall, the risk perception about coastal hazards should be more emphasized in communities.
A video of a presentation by André Lovatt, Chair of Regenerate Christchurch, during a panel at the 2016 Seismics in the City Conference. The panel has three themes:A City on the Move: Collaboration and Regeneration: "'Christchurch is now moving rapidly from the recovery phase into a regeneration stage with Central and Local Government working with the wider community, including the business community to ensure we get optimal outcomes for greater Christchurch' (CECC)."Looking Back: Remembering and Learning: "What are the milestones? What are the millstones? What have we learnt? What have we applied?"Looking Forward: Visioning and Building: "What do we aspire to? What are the roadblocks? What is the way forward?"
A video of a presentation by Hugh Cowan, General Manager of Reinsurance, Research and Education at EQC, during a panel at the 2016 Seismics in the City Conference. The panel has three themes:A City on the Move: Collaboration and Regeneration: "'Christchurch is now moving rapidly from the recovery phase into a regeneration stage with Central and Local Government working with the wider community, including the business community to ensure we get optimal outcomes for greater Christchurch' (CECC)."Looking Back: Remembering and Learning: "What are the milestones? What are the millstones? What have we learnt? What have we applied?"Looking Forward: Visioning and Building: "What do we aspire to? What are the roadblocks? What is the way forward?"
A video of a presentation by Peter Townsend, CEO of the Canterbury Employers' Chamber of Commerce, during a panel at the 2016 Seismics in the City Conference. The panel has three themes:A City on the Move: Collaboration and Regeneration: "'Christchurch is now moving rapidly from the recovery phase into a regeneration stage with Central and Local Government working with the wider community, including the business community to ensure we get optimal outcomes for greater Christchurch' (CECC)."Looking Back: Remembering and Learning: "What are the milestones? What are the millstones? What have we learnt? What have we applied?"Looking Forward: Visioning and Building: "What do we aspire to? What are the roadblocks? What is the way forward?"
A selection of the week's news including a former New Zealand cricketer demanding answers over how his name has been linked an investigation into match-fixing, the Act Party leader announces he is quitting as party leader and will leave parliament next year, the biggest drug haul in New Zealand history, the Auditor General apologises to Mangawhai locals for Audit New Zealand's failure to identify a 60 million-plus waste-water debacle, the Labour Party says its victory in the Christchurch East by-election is an indictment of the Government's response to the earthquakes, we hear from the author of a book about the building blocks of our words and literature and the national champion who will proudly represent New Zealand at an international competition in Perth.
A video of a panel discussion at the 2014 Seismics and the City forum. The theme of this section was Building Momentum, and it addressed panellists' views on the progress of the rebuild, the main obstacles, and how they can be resolved. The panellists are as follows: Christchurch Mayor Lianne Dalziel; Waimakariri Mayor David Ayers; Roger Sutton, CEO of CERA; Ian Simpson, CEO of the NZ Earthquake Commission; Peter Townsend, CEO of Canterbury Employers' Chamber of Commerce; and Joanna Norris, Editor of The Press.
Under the framework of New Public Management, the government has decentralised the responsibility for Disaster Risk Management (DRM) to regional, local, and community levels in New Zealand. This decentralisation serves political agendas related to resource allocation and is supported by empirical evidence suggesting that involving communities in DRM during recovery decision-making enhances disaster resilience. Extensive evidence indicates that community participation in DRM, especially during recovery decision-making, can significantly improve recovery outcomes at the community level. However, there has been limited research into whether the legal framework in New Zealand effectively facilitates meaningful public engagement to empower the public in influencing disaster recovery decisions. To address this gap in the literature, this thesis aims to explore the extent to which legislative and governance arrangements transfer the responsibility, liability, and costs of managing disaster risks to local levels without enabling meaningful public contribution to and influence on recovery decisions affecting them. Situated within Public Law and Disaster Risk and Resilience disciplines and using a case study of Greater Christchurch, New Zealand, this interdisciplinary thesis examines both common law and statutory provisions in the legal framework impacting public engagement before and during recovery from the Canterbury Earthquake Sequence. In particular, this thesis assesses how legislative, and governance frameworks influenced communities’ ability to influence recovery decision-making following the 2010-2011 Canterbury Earthquake Sequence (CES). This thesis shows that before the CES, the New Zealand public engagement system closely adhered to the common law principle of the ‘duty to consult’, which remains the current legal standard. This principle required decision-makers to use the 'public notice and comment' approach as a minimum, limiting meaningful community participation in decision-making. After the earthquakes, reliance on this traditional approach caused growing frustration and division locally, as the public struggled to effectively engage in and influence recovery decisions, resulting in new community activism. The Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Act (CER Act), introduced following the Christchurch Earthquake, included innovative provisions on public engagement. However, for various reasons, this Act appeared to have minimal impact on meaningful public engagement in recovery decision-making, which continued to align with the broader, existing public engagement system and associated norms. The empirical findings indicate that despite the novel legislative language, the traditional public engagement framework in New Zealand constrained effective engagement, leading to a broader erosion of trust between the public and the government. This was largely attributed to the default ‘public notice and comment’ approach at the local government level, with inadequate mechanisms for community engagement in central government decision-making shaping the expectations of recovery decision-makers still operating within this framework. Notable departures from this traditional approach were evident in the practices of the Waimakariri District Council and Christchurch City Council. Particularly noteworthy was the ‘Share an Idea’ public engagement campaign. Unlike conventional processes, it did not commence with a near-final or draft document. Instead, it utilised participatory mechanisms that fostered meaningful dialogue, enabling the public to significantly shape the content of the draft Christchurch Central Recovery Plan. The initial success of such participatory engagement underscores its potential effectiveness throughout the entire recovery planning process, an option that was not exercised by the central government. In conclusion, this thesis argues that New Zealand should move beyond the entrenched ‘public notice and comment’ approach and adopt more open and inclusive public participation mechanisms. It contends that supplementing this approach with proactive participatory methods before disasters could yield favorable outcomes during disaster recovery, thereby ensuring meaningful public involvement in future decisions that affect communities.
An exceedingly large 'Gerry' Brownlee, the Minister for Earthquake Recovery, rises from a chair, holding a briefcase labeled 'CERA' and calling for 'Bob' Parker, the mayor of Christchurch. The thin Parker was flattened against Brownlee's enormous rear, when Brownlee sat on the chair. Brownlee and Parker had a strained relationship, with the government taking an increasing amount of control in local decision making. After ongoing assurances by Parker that Christchurch City Council would meet all of International Accreditation New Zealand's requirements on issuing building consents, Brownlee announced in June 2013 without Parker's prior knowledge that the authority had withdrawn its accreditation. Quantity: 1 digital cartoon(s).
Questions to Ministers 1. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Does he agree with the Canterbury Employers' Chamber of Commerce chief executive Peter Townsend that the reconstruction of Canterbury following the earthquake requires someone "to co-ordinate and oversee" reconstruction? 2. COLIN KING to the Minister of Finance: What steps is the Government taking to ensure the Earthquake Commission can meet claims arising from the Canterbury earthquake? 3. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Minister of Finance: What was the earliest date that Treasury formed the conclusion that South Canterbury Finance could fail, and when and by whom was that first raised with him? 4. DAVID GARRETT to the Attorney-General: Does he agree that "tikanga" as it is described in the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill will differ in meaning from iwi to iwi and hapū to hapū? 5. Hon RUTH DYSON to the Minister of Health: Are doctors and nurses having more say in how the health system is run? 6. NICKY WAGNER to the Minister for the Environment: What reports has he received on responses to the Canterbury earthquake, particularly with respect to the region's flood and waste management systems? 7. TE URUROA FLAVELL to the Attorney-General: What is the burden of proof under the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill in relation to applications for customary interests, and what type of evidence would the Crown be required to produce to prove that a customary interest had been extinguished? 8. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Attorney-General: When he answered yesterday that "hopefully" the new foreshore and seabed bill "will settle the protracted controversy around the issues of the foreshore and seabed", was he aware that the Government's confidence and supply partner Hon Pita Sharples told TV3 that he was "not entirely happy" with the new bill? 9. JO GOODHEW to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: How have Government social services been supporting the people of Canterbury? 10. PHIL TWYFORD to the Minister of Local Government: Why did the Auckland Transition Agency award the $53.8 million contract for the Auckland Council's Enterprise Resource Planning computer system without a competitive tender? 11. Dr JACKIE BLUE to the Minister of Women's Affairs: Why is the Ministry of Women's Affairs celebrating Suffrage Day? 12. CATHERINE DELAHUNTY to the Minister of Women's Affairs: How will New Zealand's forthcoming report to the UN under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women explain the Government's decision to axe the Pay and Employment Equity Unit?
There has been little discussion of what archival accounting evidence can contribute to an understanding of a society’s response to a natural disaster. This article focuses on two severe earthquakes which struck New Zealand in 1929 and 1931 and makes two main contributions to accounting history. First, by discussing evidence from archival sources, it contributes to the literature on accounting in a disaster. This provides a basis for future theory building and for future comparative research related to the response to more recent natural disasters such as the 2010–11 Canterbury earthquakes. Secondly, it questions the conclusions of recently published research concerning the role of central and local government in this and recent earthquakes.
The recent earthquakes in Canterbury have left thousands of Christchurch residents’ homeless or facing the possibility of homelessness. The New Zealand Government, so far, have announced that 5,100 homes in Christchurch will have to be abandoned as a result of earthquake damaged land (Christchurch City Council, 2011). They have been zoned red on the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority (CERA) map and there are another 10,000 that have been zoned orange, awaiting a decision (Christchurch City Council, 2011). This situation has placed pressures on land developers and local authorities to speed up the process associated with the development of proposed subdivisions in Christchurch to accommodate residents in this situation (Tarrant, 2011).
A video of André Lovatt, Chair of Regenerate Christchurch, Hugh Cowan, General Manager of Reinsurance, Research and Education at EQC, and developer Antony Gough responding to questions from the floor during a panel at the 2016 Seismics in the City Conference. The panel has three themes:A City on the Move: Collaboration and Regeneration: "'Christchurch is now moving rapidly from the recovery phase into a regeneration stage with Central and Local Government working with the wider community, including the business community to ensure we get optimal outcomes for greater Christchurch' (CECC)."Looking Back: Remembering and Learning: "What are the milestones? What are the millstones? What have we learnt? What have we applied?"Looking Forward: Visioning and Building: "What do we aspire to? What are the roadblocks? What is the way forward?"
Hon PHIL HEATLEY to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on the economy – and especially on further signs of economic momentum in the regions and among manufacturers? Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Minister of Finance: How much did the Government's share sales in Mighty River Power, Meridian, and Air New Zealand raise, given that the Supplement to the 2010 Investment Statement of the Government of New Zealand projected that those sales would raise $5.18 billion? Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister for ACC: How much did ACC invest in Pike River Coal Limited and in New Zealand Oil and Gas Limited over the last eight years, and how much has it made or lost in total on its investment in each company, taking into account share purchases, subscriptions and sales, dividends, and current share prices? Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Minister of Māori Affairs: Does he stand by his statement "I know Māori want to talk about the place of the Treaty of Waitangi in our constitution, and how our legal and political systems can reflect tikanga Māori."; if so, why? Hon SHANE JONES to the Associate Minister of Finance: Is he satisfied with his performance in regard to his delegations as Associate Minister of Finance? JONATHAN YOUNG to the Minister for Building and Construction: What reports has he received regarding the state of the building and construction sector? GARETH HUGHES to the Minister for the Environment: Did the Environmental Protection Authority assess the full version of Anadarko's Discharge Management Plan and Emergency Response Plan as part of its evaluation of the company's Environmental Impact Assessment for the Deepwater Taranaki Well; if not, why not? Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE to the Minister of Finance: When, if at all, did Cabinet approve the timing of the Air New Zealand sell-down and what directions did Cabinet give the shareholding Ministers? NICKY WAGNER to the Minister of Housing: What steps is the Government taking to rebuild Christchurch's housing stock damaged or destroyed by the earthquakes? Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR to the Minister for Primary Industries: Does he stand by his statement "The opportunity, and challenge, for our meat producers now is to add value to different cuts of meat and continue to sell the New Zealand story"; if so, why? IAN McKELVIE to the Minister of Local Government: How is the Government improving councils' financial reporting? DARIEN FENTON to the Minister of Labour: Does he stand by his statement that "I am especially keen to hear what affected parties have to say on the Part 6A proposals in the Bill, and will carefully consider their submissions and the recommendations of the select committee"?
The National Science Challenge ‘Building Better Homes, Towns and Cities’ is currently undertaking work that, in part, identifies and analyses the Waimakariri District Council’s (WMK/Council) organisational practices and process tools. The focus is on determining the processes that made the Residential Red Zone Recovery Plan, 2016 (RRZRP) collaboration process so effective and compares it to the processes used to inform the current Kaiapoi Town Centre Plan - 2028 and Beyond (KTC Plan). This research aims to explore ‘what travelled’ in terms of values, principles, methods, processes and personnel from the RRZRP to the KTC planning process. My research will add depth to this research by examining more closely the KTC Plan’s hearings process, reviewing submissions made, analysing background documents and by conducting five semi-structured interviews with a selection of people who made submissions on the KTC Plan. The link between community involvement and best recovery outcomes has been acknowledged in literature as well as by humanitarian agencies (Lawther, 2009; Sullivan, 2003). My research has documented WMK’s post-quake community engagement strategy by focusing on their initial response to the earthquake of 2010 and the two-formal plan (RRZRP and KTC Plan) making procedures that succeeded this response. My research has led me to conclude that WMK was committed to collaborating with their constituents right through the extended post-quake sequence. Iterative face to face or ‘think communications’ combined with the accessibility of all levels of Council staff – including senior management and elected members - gave interested community members the opportunity to discuss and deliberate the proposed plans with the people tasked with preparing them. WMK’s commitment to collaborate is illustrated by the methods they employed to inform their post-quake efforts and plans and by the logic behind the selected methods. Combined the Council’s logic and methods best describe the ‘Waimakariri Way’. My research suggests that collaborative planning is iterative in nature. It is therefore difficult to establish a specific starting point where collaboration begins as the relationships needed for the collaborative process constantly (re)emerge out of pre-existing relationships. Collaboration seems to be based on an attitude, which means there is no starting ‘point’ as such, rather an amplification for a time of a basic attitude towards the public.
This community-partnered thesis explores the impact of ReVision Youth Audits in promoting youth-friendly community spaces in Christchurch, a city undergoing long-term urban transformation following the 2010–2011 earthquakes. In partnership with ReVision, a not-for-profit organisation facilitating youth-led audits of public and community spaces, this research examines how audit recommendations have been implemented by organisations responsible for 23 previously audited sites. Using a mixed-methods approach, including an online stakeholder survey (n = 16) and semi-structured interviews (n = 2), the study identified variation in implementation outcomes, with non-profit organisations reporting higher adoption levels than local government entities. Stakeholders reported that commonly implemented recommendations included enhanced lighting, inclusive signage, additional seating, and youth-focused amenities such as murals, free Wi-Fi, and gender-neutral toilets. The average youth-friendliness score increased from 4.7 to 7.5 out of 10 following implementations, reflecting tangible improvements in accessibility, inclusivity, and youth engagement. Despite these gains, several barriers limited full implementation. Local government stakeholders cited procedural delays, regulatory frameworks, and funding cycles tied to long- term planning. At the same time, non-profits stakeholders faced constraints such as property ownership and limited influence over shared spaces. Challenges related to timing, staffing capacity, and the absence of follow-up mechanisms were also reported. Stakeholders recomended integrating youth input in the design process earlier, as several audits occurred after key planning phases. Feedback on the audit process was largely positive, with high ratings for the clarity of recommendations and the tool's credibility. However, stakeholders advocated for refinements when recording the audit recommendations to capture young people's lived experiences better and sustain youth involvement beyond the initial audit phase. The research demonstrates that the ReVision Youth Audit framework contributes to meaningful improvements in public spaces especially for youth and reinforces the value of youth-informed urban design. This research provides practical guidance for enhancing youth engagement in urban planning and improving the long-term utility of participatory audit frameworks, based on an analysis of both the factors that enabled and those that constrained the implementation of audit recommendations.
Christchurch City has to be rebuilt after the earthquakes of 4 September 2010 and 22 February 2011. People are being invited to contribute ideas about how to rebuild on a city council website. A group of people look at ideas on computers; a boy comments that 'this one looks just like the old city' and his father comments 'but built fifty miles up the road!' A woman looks at what appears to be pre European Maori pa site and says 'Hone Harawira wants something pre-European!' Another woman looks at a map of the middle of the South Island and says 'Rodney Hide doesn't care as long as Christchurch combines with Timaru and Westport!' Context - Former ACT leader Rodney Hide in his role as Minister for Local Government likes 'supercities' and Hone Harawira has left the Maori Party, fed up with the compromises he believes they have to make to suit their coalition agreement with the National government. He seems to prefer a city that will reflect simpler pre-European times. Colour and black and white versions available Quantity: 2 digital cartoon(s).
A video of Hon. Nicky Wagner, Associate Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery, Hon. Lianne Dalziel, Mayor of Christchurch, and Peter Townsend, CEO of the Canterbury Employers' Chamber of Commerce, responding to questions from the floor during a panel at the 2016 Seismics in the City Conference. The panel has three themes:A City on the Move: Collaboration and Regeneration: "'Christchurch is now moving rapidly from the recovery phase into a regeneration stage with Central and Local Government working with the wider community, including the business community to ensure we get optimal outcomes for greater Christchurch' (CECC)."Looking Back: Remembering and Learning: "What are the milestones? What are the millstones? What have we learnt? What have we applied?"Looking Forward: Visioning and Building: "What do we aspire to? What are the roadblocks? What is the way forward?"
Questions to Ministers 1. JACQUI DEAN to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on the economy? 2. Hon PHIL GOFF to the Prime Minister: Will he rule out making cuts to Working for Families payments this year; if not, why not? 3. TIM MACINDOE to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: What changes is the Government making to Family Start to ensure a greater focus on protecting children from abuse and neglect? 4. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: Does she agree with the Prime Minister that "anyone on a benefit actually has a lifestyle choice…some make poor choices, and they do not have money left"? 5. KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI to the Minister of Civil Defence: Did he meet with business leaders in Christchurch yesterday to discuss the Civil Defence state of national emergency operations; if so, what was the outcome of that meeting? 6. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Minister of Finance: Who was right, the Prime Minster who predicted that the New Zealand economy would grow "reasonably aggressively" in 2010-11, or the last four quarterly NZIER consensus forecast updates for GDP, which have progressively declined from 3.2 percent to just 0.8 percent for the year to March 2011? 7. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Minister of Finance: Which response to the Christchurch earthquake carries a greater risk of a credit downgrade: increased government borrowing or a temporary earthquake levy? 8. PHIL TWYFORD to the Minister of Local Government: When he said "Auckland's fragmented governance has meant a lack [of] leadership and vision, but soon its leaders will be able to think regionally, plan strategically and act decisively", did he mean only if they agree with the Government's plan for Auckland? 9. JO GOODHEW to the Minister of Education: What were the results of the Accelerating Learning in Mathematics Pilot Study? 10. Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR to the Minister for Biosecurity: Does he agree with the statements made by John Lancashire and Stew Wadey, President of Waikato Federated Farmers, in the Dominion Post yesterday that New Zealand is exposed to greater risk of incursions or exotic pests at our borders as a result of the "fast-tracking of tourists", the "attempts to abolish import restrictions", and his axing of 60 frontline border staff? 11. MICHAEL WOODHOUSE to the Acting Minister of Energy and Resources: What reports has she received on levels of renewable electricity generation? 12. CHRIS HIPKINS to the Minister for ACC: Does he stand by his answer to question 4 on Thursday last week "that funding will be taken from either the earners account or the work account" and "that a higher proportion of claims than the overall average for ACC are actually in the work account"; if not, why not?
The Canterbury Earthquake Sequence (CES) was a monumental natural disaster in Aotearoa New Zealand that permanently altered Ōtautahi Christchurch’s geography. Following the earthquake events, the central city was in need of recovery and regeneration to return to being an enhanced and thriving space. The Christchurch Central Recovery Plan (CCRP) was developed to outline the aspirations, visions and challenges associated with rebuilding the central city. The purpose of this research was to review the current status of the CCRP, with a particular focus on identifying the projects that have or have not progressed. This research sought to understand which aspects of a post-disaster recovery plan have contributed to successful post-disaster recovery in Ōtautahi Christchurch. Secondary data was used to identify successes and failures in this regard. The results highlighted the top-down approach taken by the central government in the recovery process and a notable lack of community engagement throughout the CCRP. However, there were some projects and aspirations that have enabled Ōtautahi Christchurch to become a thriving city and express its regenerated identity at a local, national, and international level.
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements? DAVID SHEARER to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements? PAUL GOLDSMITH to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on business and economic conditions in New Zealand? Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his answer to written question 07314 (2013) when he said: "The inquiry team, itself, did not seek permission from Peter Dunne before it obtained his email logs" and does he think it should have? SIMON O'CONNOR to the Minister of Transport: How will the Government progress the delivery of the next generation of transport projects for Auckland? Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Finance: Are the proceeds from selling power companies and other assets being used to pay down debt, to build schools and hospitals, to fund irrigation projects, to rebuild Christchurch, or to fund Auckland transport projects? IAN McKELVIE to the Minister of Police: What updates has she received on how Police are using technology to prevent crime? JACINDA ARDERN to the Minister of Finance: Does he agree with The Economist that "inequality is one of the biggest social, economic and political challenges of our time"; if so, what is his Government doing to address the fact that New Zealand now has the widest income gap since detailed records began? PAUL FOSTER-BELL to the Minister of Justice: How is the Government improving its justice and other services to local communities? Hon LIANNE DALZIEL to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: When was he first made aware of the September IANZ report which warned the Christchurch City Council that "Continued accreditation beyond May 2013 will depend on a satisfactory outcome of that assessment" and was he advised by CERA or a Ministerial colleague? JONATHAN YOUNG to the Minister of Broadcasting: What progress has been made on the regional rollout of the digital switchover for New Zealand television viewers? GARETH HUGHES to the Minister of Conservation: Will he implement the recommendations to protect Maui's dolphins contained in the report of this year's meeting of the International Whaling Commission Scientific Committee; if not, why not Questions to Members JACINDA ARDERN to the Chairperson of the Social Services Committee: On which date and time, if any, did he receive the Minister for Social Development's written responses to the pre-hearing questions for the 2013/14 Estimates review for Vote Social Development? JACINDA ARDERN to the Chairperson of the Social Services Committee: On what date did the Minister for Social Development appear before the Committee to answer questions regarding the 2013/14 Estimates review for Vote Social Development? Dr MEGAN WOODS to the Chairperson of the Education and Science Committee: Did he consider inviting the Minister to appear again to answer questions around responses to questions on the 2013/14 Estimates for Vote Education, if so, did he receive any advice about the Minister's willingness to appear again?
In recent work on commons and commoning, scholars have argued that we might delink the practice of commoning from property ownership, while paying attention to modes of governance that enable long-term commons to emerge and be sustained. Yet commoning can also occur as a temporary practice, in between and around other forms of use. In this article we reflect on the transitional commoning practices and projects enabled by the Christchurch post-earthquake organisation Life in Vacant Spaces, which emerged to connect and mediate between landowners of vacant inner city demolition sites and temporary creative or entrepreneurial users. While these commons are often framed as transitional or temporary, we argue they have ongoing reverberations changing how people and local government in Christchurch approach common use. Using the cases of the physical space of the Victoria Street site “The Commons” and the virtual space of the Life in Vacant Spaces website, we show how temporary commoning projects can create and sustain the conditions of possibility required for nurturing commoner subjectivities. Thus despite their impermanence, temporary commoning projects provide a useful counter to more dominant forms of urban development and planning premised on property ownership and “permanent” timeframes, in that just as the physical space of the city being opened to commoning possibilities, so too are the expectations and dispositions of the city’s inhabitants, planners, and developers.
In recent work on commons and commoning, scholars have argued that we might delink the practice of commoning from property ownership, while paying attention to modes of governance that enable long-term commons to emerge and be sustained. Yet commoning can also occur as a temporary practice, in between and around other forms of use. In this article we reflect on the transitional commoning practices and projects enabled by the Christchurch post-earthquake organisation Life in Vacant Spaces, which emerged to connect and mediate between landowners of vacant inner city demolition sites and temporary creative or entrepreneurial users. While these commons are often framed as transitional or temporary, we argue they have ongoing reverberations changing how people and local government in Christchurch approach common use. Using the cases of the physical space of the Victoria Street site “The Commons” and the virtual space of the Life in Vacant Spaces website, we show how temporary commoning projects can create and sustain the conditions of possibility required for nurturing commoner subjectivities. Thus despite their impermanence, temporary commoning projects provide a useful counter to more dominant forms of urban development and planning premised on property ownership and “permanent” timeframes, in that just as the physical space of the city being opened to commoning possibilities, so too are the expectations and dispositions of the city’s inhabitants, planners, and developers.
Though there is a broad consensus that communities play a key role in disaster response and recovery, most of the existing work in this area focuses on the activities of donor agencies, formal civil defence authorities, and local/central government. Consequently, there is a paucity of research addressing the on-going actions and activities undertaken by communities and ‘emergent groups’ , particularly as they develop after the immediate civil defence or ‘response’ phase is over. In an attempt to address this gap, this inventory of community-led recovery initiatives was undertaken approximately one year after the most devastating February 2011 earthquake. It is part of on-going project at Lincoln University documenting – and seeking a better understanding of - various emergent communities’ roles in recovery, their challenges, and strategies for overcoming them. This larger project also seeks to better understand how collaborative work between informal and formal recovery efforts might be facilitated at different stages of the process. This inventory was conducted over the December 2011 – February 2012 period and builds on Landcare Research’s Christchurch Earthquake Activity Inventory which was a similar snapshot taken in April 2011. The intention behind conducting this updated inventory is to gain a longitudinal perspective of how community-led recovery activities evolve over time. Each entry is ordered alphabetically and contact details have been provided where possible. A series of keywords have also been assigned that describe the main attributes of each activity to assist searches within this document.This inventory was supported by the Lincoln University Research Fund and the Royal Society Marsden Fund.
Questions to Ministers 1. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Minister of Justice: Is it his view that the justice system should provide rehabilitation and give people the chance to change? 2. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Is he satisfied with progress on the recovery from the Canterbury earthquake so far? 3. DAVID BENNETT to the Minister of Broadcasting: What recent announcements have been made regarding digital switchover? 4. SUE MORONEY to the Minister of Education: What policy initiatives has she developed for early childhood education? 5. AARON GILMORE to the Minister of Civil Defence: What is the update on the Canterbury Civil Defence states of emergency? 6. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Minister of Finance: Did the Treasury evaluate the net effect on South Canterbury Finance's position of the February 2010 acquisition of Helicopters (NZ) Ltd and Scales Corporation shares, including the effect of the transaction on the recoverability or impairment of South Canterbury Finance's $75 million loan to its parent company, Southbury Group Ltd? 7. LOUISE UPSTON to the Minister of Energy and Resources: Will Cantabrians whose chimneys have been significantly damaged by the recent earthquake be covered by the Earthquake Commission to replace their old log burners or open fires with new efficient heaters? 8. Hon TREVOR MALLARD to the Minister of Education: What support will be available in 2011 to schools that have very poor numeracy national standards results in 2010? 9. SANDRA GOUDIE to the Minister of Corrections: What support is the Corrections Department offering to Canterbury community groups and individuals to help with earthquake recovery? 10. DARIEN FENTON to the Minister of Labour: Does she stand by her statement to the House on 14 September 2010 that the 90-day trial provisions "do not take away rights"? 11. CHESTER BORROWS to the Minister of Housing: What is the Government doing to assist people whose homes are not habitable following the Canterbury earthquake? 12. PHIL TWYFORD to the Minister of Local Government: When he said in the House yesterday that the Auckland Transition Agency "ran a tender to deliver an enterprise resource planning system" was he referring to merely the $14.3 million contract for the implementation of the Enterprise Resource Planning system or was he referring to the full contract of $53.8 million to deliver the Enterprise Resource Planning system? Questions to Members 1. DARIEN FENTON to the Chairperson of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2)?
PAUL GOLDSMITH to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on progress in lifting New Zealand’s household savings and reducing household debt? EUGENIE SAGE to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Did the advice he has received on Christchurch City Council assets contemplate a sell off or sell down of shares in companies supervised by Christchurch City Holdings Ltd or of other council assets; if so, which ones? Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by his answer to yesterday’s primary question “as I understand it, there are no regional statistics that specifically isolate the number of people leaving any particular region to move overseas” and has the Treasury reported to him the existence of official statistics on permanent and long-term migration compiled by local council area and region? SCOTT SIMPSON to the Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills and Employment: What changes is the Government making to improve results from industry training? Hon LIANNE DALZIEL to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Which of the assets identified by CERA in response to his request has he ruled out asking Christchurch City Council to sell? KATRINA SHANKS to the Minister of Justice: What changes is she making to improve the Family Court? Le'aufa'amulia ASENATI LOLE-TAYLOR to the Minister for Whānau Ora: Does she stand by her statement that “I don’t object to any vulnerable family receiving Whānau Ora support, because that’s what the money is for”? Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister of Housing: Does he stand by all his comments on housing; if not, why not? Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM to the Minister of Foreign Affairs: What is the total number and cost of uncontested contracts given by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade to external consultants in the last two financial years? MARK MITCHELL to the Minister for Communications and Information Technology: Has she received any reports on the progress of the Government’s Ultra-Fast Broadband and Rural Broadband Initiatives? DARIEN FENTON to the Minister of Labour: Does she stand by her statement regarding foreign chartered fishing vessels “If breaches of labour law occur – such as underpayment of wages or illegal deductions or breaches of the Code of Practice, the Department of Labour will be able to investigate them and take action”? NICKY WAGNER to the Minister for the Environment: What recent announcements has she made in relation to the Waste Minimisation Fund?
Effective management of waste and debris generated by a disaster event is vital to ensure rapid and efficient response and recovery that supports disaster risk reduction (DRR). Disaster waste refers to any stream of debris that is created from a natural disaster that impacts the environment, infrastructure, and property. This waste can be problematic due to extensive volumes, environmental contamination and pollution, public health risks, and the disruption of response and recovery efforts. Due to the complexities in dealing with these diverse and voluminous materials, having disaster waste management (DWM) planning in place pre-event is crucial. In particular, coordinated, interagency plans that have been informed by estimates of waste volumes and types are vital to ensure management facilities, personnel, and recovery resources do not become overwhelmed. Globally, a priority when formulating DWM plans is the robust estimation of disaster waste stream types and volumes. This is a relatively under-researched area, despite the growing risk of natural disasters and increasingly inadequate waste management facilities. In Aotearoa New Zealand, a nation-wide DWM planning tool has been proposed for local government use, and waste amounts from events such as the Christchurch Earthquakes have been estimated. However, there has been little work undertaken to estimate waste types and volumes with a region-specific, multi-hazard focus, which is required to facilitate detailed regional DWM planning. This research provides estimates of potential disaster waste volumes and types in the Waitaha-Canterbury region of the South Island (Te Waipounamu) for three key hazard scenarios: a M8.0 Alpine Fault earthquake with a south-to-north rupture pattern, a far-sourced tsunami using a maximum credible event model for a Peru-sourced event, and major flooding using geospatial datasets taken from available local government modelling. Conducted in partnership with Environment Canterbury and Canterbury CDEM, this estimation work informed stakeholder engagement through multi-agency workshops at the district level. This research was comprised of two key parts. The first was enhancing and extending a disaster waste estimation model used in Wellington and applying it to the Canterbury region to quantify waste volumes and types. The second part was using this model and its estimates to inform engagement with stakeholders in multi-agency, district-level workshops in Kaikōura, Hurunui, and Waimakariri. In these workshops, the waste estimates were used to catalyse discussion around potential issues associated with the management of disaster waste. Regionally, model estimates showed that the earthquake scenario would generate the highest total volume of disaster waste (1.94 million m³), compared to the tsunami scenario (1.89 million m³) and the flood scenario (173,900 m³). Flood waste estimates are likely underrepresented due to limited flood modelling coverage, but still provide a valuable comparison. Whilst waste estimates differ significantly between districts, waste volumes were shown to be not solely dependent on building/population density. The district-level workshops showed that DWM challenges revolved around logistical constraints, public concerns, governance complexities, and environmental issues. Future work should further enhance this estimation model and apply it to other regions of Aotearoa New Zealand, to help develop a set of cohesive DWM plans for each region. The waste estimation model could also be adapted and applied internationally. The findings from this research provide a foundation for advancing DWM planning and stakeholder engagement in the Waitaha-Canterbury region. By offering region-specific waste estimates across multiple hazard scenarios, this work supports district councils and emergency managers in developing informed, proactive strategies for disaster preparedness and response. The insights gained from district-level workshops highlight key challenges that must be addressed in future planning. These outcomes contribute to a broader research agenda for DWM in Aotearoa New Zealand, and offer a framework adaptable to international contexts.