Group case study report prepared for lecturers Ton Buhrs and Roy Montgomery by students of ERST 635 at Lincoln University, 2013.The New Zealand Government’s decision to establish a unitary authority in the Auckland Region has provided much of the context and impetus for this review of current governance arrangements in the Canterbury region, to determine whether or not they are optimal for taking the communities of greater Christchurch into the future. A number of local governance academics, as well as several respected political pundits, have prophesised that the Auckland ‘Super City’ reforms of 2009 will have serious implications and ramifications for local governance arrangements in other major cities, particularly Wellington and Christchurch. Wellington councils have already responded to the possibility of change by undertaking a series of reports on local governance arrangements, as well as a major review led by Sir Geoffrey Palmer, to investigate options for governance reform. Alongside these developments, the Christchurch earthquakes beginning in September 2010 have raised a myriad of new and complex governance issues, which may or may not be able to be addressed under the status quo, while the replacement of Regional Councillors’ with centrally-appointed Commissioners is suggestive of government dissatisfaction with current arrangements. With these things in mind, the research group has considered local government in Canterbury and the greater Christchurch area in the wider governance context. It does not limit discussion to only the structure of local government in Canterbury but rather, as the brief (Appendix 1) indicates, considers more broadly the relationship between central, regional, and local tiers of government, as well as the relationship between local government and local communities.
As far as suburbs with bad reputations go, Aranui in Christchurch often seems to dominate local public perceptions. High crime, high unemployment, low incomes, run-down state houses and uncared-for neighbourhoods have been the key words and phrases used over many decades. This reputation achieved national standing over the same period and in 2001 Aranui gained the dubious distinction of becoming the pilot project for the Labour Government’s state housing Community Renewal Programme initiated in 2001. It is common to read “Don’t buy or rent here” comments on websites and blogs advising prospective immigrants on where to live. One of the dispiriting moments in Aranui’s history came in September 2009 with the discovery of two bodies under the floorboards of a Hampshire Street property and the subsequent charge of double-homicide and conviction of local resident Jason Somerville for the murder of his wife Rebecca Chamberlain and neighbour Tisha Lowry.
Planning in New Zealand in 2014 has largely been dominated by housing and urban development, potential local government and legislative reforms, and water issues. This volume’s peer reviewed research, which combines Issues 1 and 2, focuses on these issues, but with perspectives and issues that are outside the mainstream. In our lead research article, John Ryks and his co-authors review the opportunities from Treaty settlements and legislative provisions and challenges for Māori participation in urban development, such as the balancing of matawaka and mana whenua perspectives. Water issues are picked up by Ronlyn Duncan and Phil Holland who each take constructively critical views toward some currently well-regarded approaches to resolutions. We have reflective and somewhat contrasting contributions from two highly respected semi-retired planners, Malcolm Douglass (FNZPI) and Derek Hall, that challenge aspects of New Zealand’s current approach to planning. In our outreach part of this Volume we include the response of some political parties to questions put to them about planning by LPR team member Nicole Read. Finally, Lincoln University appears to have turned a corner after the earthquakes, at least in the planning programmes.
The world experiences a number of disasters each year. Following a disaster, the affected area moves to a phase of recovery which involves multiple stakeholders. An important element of recovery is planning the rebuild of the affected environment guided by the legislative framework to which planning is bound to (March & Kornakova, 2017). Yet, there appears to be little research that has investigated the role of planners in a recovery setting and the implications of recovery legislative planning frameworks. This study was conducted to explore the role of the planner in the Canterbury earthquake recovery process in New Zealand and the impact of the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Act 2011 (CER Act) on planners’ roles and how they operated.
The methodology comprised a combination of document analysis of legislation and related recovery material and 21 semi-structured interviews with key planners, politicians and professionals involved in the recovery. The results suggest that the majority of planners interviewed were affected by the CER Act in their role and how they operated, although institutional context, especially political constraints, was a key factor in determining the degree of impact. It is argued that planners played a key role in recovery and were generally equipped in terms of skills needed in a recovery setting. In order to better utilise planners in post-disaster recovery or disaster risk management, two suggestions are proposed. Firstly, better promote planners and their capabilities to improve awareness of what planners can do. Secondly, educate and build an understanding between central government politicians and planners over each others role to produce better planning outcomes.
