Christchurch Earthquake bulletin edition 79

Christchurch

LABOUR MPs

20 July 2011 MEDIA STATEMENT
Christchurch Earthquake bulletin edition 79

The Labour Party’s Christchurch electorate MPs, Clayton Cosgrove (Waimakariri), Ruth Dyson (Port Hills), Lianne Dalziel (Christchurch East) and Brendon Burns (Christchurch Central) have started a regular bulletin to keep people in their electorates and media informed about what is happening at grass roots level.

CLAYTON COSGROVE: I find it deplorable that the Government, which has $5.5 million at its disposal, has refused to provide families of the victims of February’s earthquake with independent legal counsel for the Royal Commission’s Inquiry into the deaths of their loved ones. The unprecedented decision is not only morally indefensible, but inconsistent as well. The Government did the right thing by families affected by the Pike River tragedy, yet is denying such help for families of those tragically lost in the worst natural disaster this country has seen in 50 years. Such state assistance should be fundamental. Reports that National ‘didn’t see any point’ in funding legal representation are difficult to fathom. At the same time it has been revealed that National has doubled the income of individuals appointed to the CERA Review Panel ---an independent group set up to provide advice to Ministers’ on Orders in Council associated with the recovery effort--- to more than $1000 per day. I am not arguing against these individuals, but at a time where the Government is refusing basic legal advice for victims’ families, National’s double standard in relation to panel members is even more unacceptable. All families want to do is to honour the memories of their loved ones by ensuring every question is answered and that nothing is glossed over in this inquiry. Families have the right to sleep at night knowing that they have done everything they can to honour their loved one’s life. We all understand Ministers need to seek advice and counsel. Why can’t victim’s families be accorded a similar privilege?

RUTH DYSON: Yesterday’s meeting in Sydenham drew 200 people keen to hear the first report back from the city council on the Sydenham master plan. It has only been weeks since the process started and a huge amount of energy has been put in. Messages from the community consultation were really well picked up by the council’s team—such as more green space, a clearly defined entrance and exit to Sydenham and a good residential and commercial mix. One critical concern that remains are the costings--- how much money there is and what it is allowed to be used for. There are also more controversial ideas such as selling Carlyle Park, which the community believes is underused and selling one third of Buchan Park. The money from both sales could be used to purchase land from commercial owners on Colombo Street in order to create more green spaces there. Within a fortnight, the full draft plan will be available on the council website. While yesterday’s meeting is likely to be the last public one, the draft will be open to written submissions and interactive web-based consultation before the council signs it off. The level of public engagement in this pilot process has been really encouraging. People have said to me that they felt inspired, not so much by the detail but by the fact there is an accessible planning process in place. The opportunity to voice an opinion has been hugely valuable for community cohesion. I am looking forward to today’s Lyttelton meeting. Quite a few people have expressed surprise following yesterday’s story in the Press about the dumping of rubble at Lyttelton Port. The story revealed that the community were misled about a Port Company proposal which saw the dumping of rubble linked to reclamation in the coal handling area I raised this issue with both Nick Smith and Gerry Brownlee and they both denied it.

LIANNE DALZIEL: I have just seen Ngāi Tahu around the Prestons Road development. In late June the City Council revised its position on including land for the proposed subdivision to the north-east of Christchurch into the urban limit. A number of constituents have raised concerns about whether there is going to be land available for development here, and whether any land is going to be available in the eastern suburbs. The council has now accepted Prestons Road to be within the parameters of the urban planning process. However there have been some concerns about the quality of this land. Many have said it’s not called Marshland Road for nothing! However, in looking at the land it is important to note that the bulk of the land is in fact high dune—which means it is compacted sand which doesn’t and hasn’t liquefied since September last year. So the prospects look very good. One of the questions that I am also asked by constituents is whether there will be smaller section sizes available. There is a demand for such sections as many existing subdivisions in the east will not be rebuilt. The answer is yes. This development allows for a range of high and low density housing. One issue that remains is time constraints. With normal planning processes we could be talking years. But if all of the planning and consent processes could be truncated we could see sections available in 12 months which is much more realistic. This would line up with the Government’s offer for red zoned residents. A second concern is the cost of sections. For a significant number of my constituents their current land value based on their 2007 Rating Valuation does not represent the market value of an unimproved section and/or is insufficient to buy an equivalent sized section in the current market. This is because of the way the land value is worked out when there is an existing house. Essentially the land component of the Rating Valuation is what remains after improvements are deducted from the Capital Value. This has led to wildly varying land values even within the same street. This in turn means there isn’t enough value in the land to buy another section and take advantage of the rebuild that their insurer would otherwise offer. I will continue to talk to the Government about a solution. I am keen to arrange for a representative from the Prestons Road team to talk to my constituents so they are aware of what is available.

BRENDON BURNS: Last Friday, I was able to spend a few minutes inside my former electorate office at 202 Hereford St. The building lost its entire front on February 22 - mercifully with no loss of life after Laurie, a constituent and experienced builder had, just a few days earlier, alerted me to concerns that it simply was not safe. With the building earmarked for demolition this week, I had the chance to visit. I'm pleased I chose Laurie to accompany me. The assigned engineer had never visited the building before. After an inspection, we spent a few minutes inside. Even the safer rear of the building was now full of bricks and masonry. We quickly retrieved salvageable materials before getting out. The demolition of 202 Hereford means only the ugly windowless new Calendar Girls is still standing in a 100 metre stretch from Joe's Garage cafe back towards Latimer Square. While these buildings had to go, I grieve for the loss of our city's heritage. Meanwhile, an iconic building for the St Albans community is destined to fall today. The community centre lost its city-side wall in September. There were hopes its facade might be saved but the centre sustained further damage in the February and June earthquakes. The centre began life as the St Albans library around 1921. In recent years it's been the base for a lively residents' association which was not shy of voicing some strong criticism of the city council through the pages of a well-constructed monthly community newspaper, the St Albans News.

ENDS