Questions to Ministers
1. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister of Finance: When he said recently "where the Government does have some influence, we are working hard to keep prices low", which prices was he referring to?
2. DAVID BENNETT to the Minister of Finance: What are some of the likely impacts on the Government's finances of the Christchurch earthquake?
3. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Acting Minister for Economic Development: Does he stand by all his statements on economic development?
4. Dr JACKIE BLUE to the Minister for ACC: How many claims has ACC received since the tragic earthquake on 22 February and what steps has the Government taken to facilitate prompt compensation for those seriously injured?
5. Hon MARYAN STREET to the Minister of Civil Defence: What is the basis for according priority to entry of the red zone in the Christchurch central business district?
6. NIKKI KAYE to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: What support is the Government giving to non-government organisations in Christchurch affected by the earthquake?
7. Hon TREVOR MALLARD to the Prime Minister: What role did he or his department play in the decision to shift the Rugby World Cup quarter finals, from AMI Stadium to Eden Park?
8. JACQUI DEAN to the Minister of Corrections: What progress has been made toward the Government's commitment to encourage private sector investment in the New Zealand corrections system?
9. Hon DARREN HUGHES to the Minister for Tertiary Education: What specific policy changes has the Government made to increase the number of apprenticeships and other building-skills training programmes since the September Canterbury earthquake?
10. SUE KEDGLEY to the Minister of Commerce: Will he use his powers under Part 4 of the Commerce Act 1986 to call for an investigation into the dairy wholesale and retail milk market, following the release of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry's review of the domestic milk market in New Zealand; if not, why not?
11. CAROL BEAUMONT to the Minister of Women's Affairs: Does she support the retention of the stand-alone and independent Ministry of Women's Affairs?
12. JOHN HAYES to the Minister of Agriculture: What steps has the Government recently made to progress agricultural greenhouse gas research?
Questions to Ministers
1. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Minister of Finance: Does he agree with Reserve Bank Governor Alan Bollard's assessment that the economic recovery is proving to be "slow and fragile"?
2. CRAIG FOSS to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on the economy?
3. Hon TREVOR MALLARD to the Minister for Economic Development: What specific actions has he taken since becoming Minister of Economic Development to secure the New Zealand film industry?
4. KATRINA SHANKS to the Minister of Housing: What reports has he received about the stakeholder engagement carried out by the Housing Shareholders' Advisory Group?
5. Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Will he support my recommendation to set up an advocacy support service to provide earthquake-affected residents with help in dealing with their private insurers to prevent them being shunted between these insurers and the Earthquake Commission?
6. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Minister of Conservation: What steps, if any, is she taking to protect the unique, rare and threatened Nevis "Gollum galaxiid", a native fish species found only in the Nevis River in Central Otago?
7. GRANT ROBERTSON to the Minister for Tertiary Education: How does removing $55 million from industry training help the growth of the productive economy?
8. CHRIS AUCHINVOLE to the Minister for the Environment: What progress is the Government making in improving New Zealand's freshwater management?
9. SUE MORONEY to the Minister of Education: Does she stand by all her statements about subsidies and fee controls in early childhood education?
10. Hon RODNEY HIDE to the Attorney-General: Is it Government policy to exempt the holders of customary marine title from the application of the Resource Management Act 1991 and provide the holders with the sole right to give, or deny, a Resource Management Act permission right with no right of appeal or objection against the decision, as described in Bell Gully's Newsletter Update October 2010 on the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill?
11. Hon NANAIA MAHUTA to the Minister responsible for Whānau Ora: Is she satisfied with the process to shortlist Whānau Ora providers?
12. PESETA SAM LOTU-IIGA to the Minister of Energy and Resources: Why is the Government funding the Energy Spot advertising campaign?
Questions to Ministers 1. TODD McCLAY to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on the Government's financial position? 2. DAVID SHEARER to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements? 3. METIRIA TUREI to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his reported statement that "anyone expecting details of a 'cosy sort of little deal' would be disappointed" by the Deputy Auditor-General's report into the SkyCity Convention Centre negotiations. 4. DENIS O'ROURKE to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: What criteria did he use in deciding that owners of vacant sections in the red zone of Christchurch should only be compensated at half of the sections' most recent rateable value? 5. KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI to the Minister for Economic Development: What economic opportunities will a new convention centre bring for Auckland? 6. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Prime Minister: Did he or his office receive the 12 November 2009 report from Ministry officials to the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, summarising the process with SkyCity for the building of a convention centre; if so, did he read it? 7. MIKE SABIN to the Associate Minister for Social Development: What steps is the Government taking to reduce welfare fraud? 8. Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE to the Minister for State Owned Enterprises: What contingency plans, if any, does the Government have in place regarding its asset sale programme should the Tiwai Point aluminium smelter reduce production? 9. KEVIN HAGUE to the Minister of Trade: Will New Zealand support Australia's objection to signing up to investor-state dispute provisions in the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement; if not, why not? 10. Hon LIANNE DALZIEL to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Why is he offering only 50 percent of rating valuation for commercial or bare land in the residential red zone where the land could not be insured? 11. MARK MITCHELL to the Minister of Corrections: What announcements has she made on improving prisoner employment training in New Zealand prisons? 12. CHRIS HIPKINS to the Minister of Education: Does she stand by all her decisions in relation to schools in Christchurch?
Questions to Ministers 1. TODD McCLAY to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on the Government's financial position? 2. DAVID SHEARER to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements? 3. METIRIA TUREI to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his reported statement that "anyone expecting details of a 'cosy sort of little deal' would be disappointed" by the Deputy Auditor-General's report into the SkyCity Convention Centre negotiations. 4. DENIS O'ROURKE to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: What criteria did he use in deciding that owners of vacant sections in the red zone of Christchurch should only be compensated at half of the sections' most recent rateable value? 5. KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI to the Minister for Economic Development: What economic opportunities will a new convention centre bring for Auckland? 6. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Prime Minister: Did he or his office receive the 12 November 2009 report from Ministry officials to the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, summarising the process with SkyCity for the building of a convention centre; if so, did he read it? 7. MIKE SABIN to the Associate Minister for Social Development: What steps is the Government taking to reduce welfare fraud? 8. Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE to the Minister for State Owned Enterprises: What contingency plans, if any, does the Government have in place regarding its asset sale programme should the Tiwai Point aluminium smelter reduce production? 9. KEVIN HAGUE to the Minister of Trade: Will New Zealand support Australia's objection to signing up to investor-state dispute provisions in the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement; if not, why not? 10. Hon LIANNE DALZIEL to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Why is he offering only 50 percent of rating valuation for commercial or bare land in the residential red zone where the land could not be insured? 11. MARK MITCHELL to the Minister of Corrections: What announcements has she made on improving prisoner employment training in New Zealand prisons? 12. CHRIS HIPKINS to the Minister of Education: Does she stand by all her decisions in relation to schools in Christchurch?
DENIS O'ROURKE to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Is he satisfied with progress on all aspects of the Canterbury earthquake recovery?
JACINDA ARDERN to the Minister of Police: Does she have confidence in the Police investigation of alleged sexual violation against young women and underage girls in West Auckland?
PAUL GOLDSMITH to the Minister of Finance: What progress has the National-led Government made in building a more productive and competitive economy capable of supporting more jobs and higher incomes for New Zealanders?
METIRIA TUREI to the Minister of Police: When was she first advised that Police had received a complaint from a girl who alleged she had been raped by members of a group calling themselves the Roast Busters?
Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister for Communications and Information Technology: Will the Government enforce its broadband contract with Chorus?
CLAUDETTE HAUITI to the Minister for the Environment: What announcements has the Government made in relation to the national policy statement for freshwater?
PHIL TWYFORD to the Minister of Housing: What reports has he received on the effect of loan-to-value restrictions on the housing market?
Hon PHIL HEATLEY to the Minister for Social Development: What reports has she received about the number of people receiving benefits?
CAROL BEAUMONT to the Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills and Employment: How does women's participation rate of 1 percent in building and construction industry training assist with the Christchurch rebuild?
Dr CAM CALDER to the Minister of Education: What recent announcements has she made to strengthen the status of the teaching profession?
EUGENIE SAGE to the Associate Minister of Health: Does she agree with the Canterbury Medical Officer of Health that increasing nitrate levels in Canterbury groundwater are a health risk, particularly for pregnant women and babies; if not, why not?
HONE HARAWIRA to the Minister of Finance: What is his budget plan, if any, to immediately address growing poverty in New Zealand, which has got so bad that charitable organisations have today said they are expecting an influx of more than 40,000 struggling families for Christmas dinner because they can't afford to put food on the table?
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement that "the Government has actively supported the filming of the Hobbit movies in New Zealand because of the enormous economic benefits they are bringing to the country, including the creation of around 3,000 jobs"?
DAVID SHEARER to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all the statements made in his prime ministerial speeches and in his Address in Reply speeches?
TODD McCLAY to the Minister of Finance: What will be the focus of the Government's economic programme in 2013?
METIRIA TUREI to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement that "I am keen to see New Zealanders be able to afford to buy a home", given that the home ownership rate has continued to decline under his watch and home buying is becoming less affordable?
Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Finance: Is he aware that anticipated Core Crown Revenue for the period 2012-2016 decreased by $13.2 billion between the October 2011 PREFU and the December 2012 HYEFU; if so, why has the Government lost $13.2 billion in projected revenue in little over a year?
COLIN KING to the Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills and Employment: What recent announcements has the Government made about boosting the number of people being trained in apprenticeships?
JACINDA ARDERN to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement "I am deeply concerned about every child in New Zealand who is in poverty"?
Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Prime Minister: Why didn't he mention climate change yesterday when he outlined his Government's priorities for the year in his statement to Parliament?
Hon ANNETTE KING to the Prime Minister: Following his decision to appoint a new Minister of Housing, what new policies, if any, does he expect his new Minister to implement to address the growing housing affordability issues in New Zealand?
NICKY WAGNER to the Minister responsible for the Earthquake Commission: What progress has been made in the repair of homes in Canterbury by the EQR Repair Programme?
CHRIS HIPKINS to the Minister of State Services: What were the factors that contributed to the strained relations that resulted in the resignation of Lesley Longstone as Secretary of Education?
JACQUI DEAN to the Minister of Corrections: What steps is the Government taking to improve prisoner employment training in New Zealand prisons?
Questions to Ministers
1. JONATHAN YOUNG to the Minister of Finance: What advice has he received about factors that lie behind the current turmoil we are witnessing on world financial markets, and what are the implications for New Zealand?
2. KEVIN HAGUE to the Minister of Labour: Does she still agree, as she did on 13 July 2011, with the comment made by Rt Hon John Key on 22 November 2010 that "I have no reason to believe that New Zealand safety standards are any less than Australia's and in fact our safety record for the most part has been very good"?
3. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his answers to Oral Question No 1 yesterday when he said that the Leader of the Opposition is "just plain wrong" in relation to skills training?
4. KATRINA SHANKS to the Minister for the Environment: How have Government reforms to the Resource Management Act helped increase competition in the grocery business?
5. Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE to the Attorney-General: Will he meet with earthquake victims' families to hear directly why they need independent legal representation; if not, why not?
6. Hon JOHN BOSCAWEN to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by his statement that "I think the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research is referring to some longer-term issues around demographic change and healthcare costs, and we share the chief executive's concern"?
7. DARIEN FENTON to the Minister of Labour: What is the timeline of the ministerial inquiry into the treatment of foreign fishing crews in New Zealand waters?
8. CHRIS AUCHINVOLE to the Minister for Communications and Information Technology: What progress is being made on the Government's goal of delivering fast broadband to rural areas?
9. Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Does he agree that an appropriate part of the "red zone" area along the Avon River through Christchurch should be transformed into a "green space" for memorial and recreational public purposes?
10. STUART NASH to the Minister of Finance: Does he believe the tax system is fair for all New Zealanders?
11. KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: What steps has the Government taken to manage gateways between benefits?
12. KELVIN DAVIS to the Minister of Education: Does she stand by all of her answers to Oral Question No 8 yesterday?
DAVID SHEARER to the Prime Minister: Does he believe that Hon John Banks has behaved in a manner that “upholds, and is seen to uphold the highest ethical standards” as required by the Cabinet Manual?
BARBARA STEWART to the Prime Minister: Did Mr Banks explain to the Prime Minister’s Chief of Staff that he would use “obfuscation” in his dealings with the media over the “anonymous” donations from Kim Dotcom?
MAGGIE BARRY to the Minister of Finance: How does the Government intend to strengthen the Public Finance Act 1989 in the Budget this month?
Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Finance: In the most recent World Economic Outlook published by the IMF in April 2012, which of the 34 advanced economies listed is forecast to have a worse current account deficit (as a percentage of GDP) than New Zealand in 2013?
METIRIA TUREI to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all the answers he gave to Oral Question No 4 yesterday?
KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI to the Minister for Economic Development: What action is the Government taking to improve co-ordination of the business growth agenda?
Hon PHIL GOFF to the Minister of Foreign Affairs: What damage, if any, has been done to staff confidence and retention by the change proposals for his Ministry announced on 23 February 2012, and does he intend to announce on 10 May 2012 a reversal of many of the proposals?
SIMON O'CONNOR to the Minister of Labour: What steps is the Government taking to improve workplace health and safety?
GARETH HUGHES to the Minister of Conservation: Does her proposed extension of the Marine Mammal Sanctuary for Maui’s dolphins allow the use of set nets, drift nets, and trawl nets within the sanctuary?
IAN McKELVIE to the Minister of Corrections: What reports has she received about trade training within prisons?
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Has he required that all his Ministers involved in the Canterbury earthquake recovery read the briefing paper dated 10 May 2011 prepared by Chief Science Advisor, Professor Sir Peter Gluckman, into the psychosocial consequences of the Canterbury earthquakes; if not, why not?
NIKKI KAYE to the Minister of Education: What evidence has she seen of excellent achievement in scholarship exams?
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?
Dr JIAN YANG to the Minister of Finance: What changes has the Government made in recent years to make the tax system fairer and to help families and businesses get ahead?
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Minister of Internal Affairs: On what basis was the recall and cancellation of New Zealand Passport LN138690 undertaken?
Hon DAVID PARKER to the Associate Minister of Finance: Does he still believe that a 33 cent top marginal income tax rate is the reason for fewer departures to Australia in 2014?
CATHERINE DELAHUNTY to the Minister of Education: Did she write a new preference factor for Partnership School applicants on the 14 November education report "Confirming Round Two of Applications to Operate Partnership Schools"; if so, on what advice?
CHRIS AUCHINVOLE to the Minister of Conservation: What reports has he received on the extent of the damage to West Coast forests from Cyclone Ita and what estimates are there of the area affected and the volume of wood felled?
PHIL TWYFORD to the Minister of Housing: How many homes out of the 5,000 earthquake damaged Housing New Zealand homes have completed repairs as part of its Repair 5000 programme?
TIM MACINDOE to the Minister of Education: What recent announcements has she made to celebrate and recognise highly effective and innovative practice happening across the education system?
Hon PHIL GOFF to the Minister of Defence: Has there been a reduction in the capacity of the Army in the last three years to sustain an overseas deployment; if so, why?
MELISSA LEE to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: What support is the Ministry of Social Development providing to people in Christchurch still dealing with the impact of the earthquakes?
GARETH HUGHES to the Minister of Conservation: Does he agree with the statement given on behalf of the Minister of Energy and Resources that "there has not been a single observation of a Māui's dolphin in the block offer area"?
CAROL BEAUMONT to the Minister of Justice: Given the magnitude of the problem of family violence, is it acceptable to her that none of the Family Violence Death Review Committee's recommendations from their last annual report have been completed, and no action has been taken on a number of recommendations around funding family violence training for professionals, and addressing the need for better multi-agency practice addressing family violence?
KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI to the Minister of Statistics: What is the Government doing to modernise the next census?
1. Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Prime Minister: Has he had time to read and digest the judgement of Justice Miller regarding the Crafar farm deal; if so, does he stand by his comments made in the House yesterday?
2. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister for Land Information: Does he believe he and the Government have conducted themselves competently and appropriately in relation to the decision to approve the purchase of the Crafar farms by a foreign buyer; if not, what did they do wrong?
3. JONATHAN YOUNG to the Minister of Finance: What reports has the Government issued on the economy?
4. JACINDA ARDERN to the Minister for Social Development: Does she have confidence that Work and Income meets their own "case management approach" expectations?
5. JAN LOGIE to the Minister for Social Development: Does she have concerns that changes to the eligibility for the Training Incentive Allowance are causing single parent beneficiaries to consider working in the sex industry?
6. Dr CAM CALDER to the Minister of Health: What improvements have there been to services for patients as a result of greater collaboration between District Health Boards?
7. Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE to the Minister for State Owned Enterprises: Does he still intend to sell 49 per cent of the four State-owned energy companies?
8. JAMI-LEE ROSS to the Minister of Local Government: What analysis has he received on rate increases across New Zealand's 78 councils following the enactment of new local government legislation in 2002?
9. Hon LIANNE DALZIEL to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Does he stand by the part of his statement of 27 January, announcing the extension of the red zone offer to retirement villages, that letters of offer would be sent to each resident and CERA would work with village owners as quickly as possible to ensure the residents are assisted; if not, why not?
10. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Minister for Land Information: Did Overseas Investment Office officials meet with Chinese political consul Cheng Lei late last year; if so, did they discuss Shanghai Pengxin's bid for the Crafar farms?
11. CLARE CURRAN to the Minister of Broadcasting: What is the name of the documentary which was withheld in the papers released publicly by NZ On Air titled "Records of decisions made at working group meeting"?
12. Hon TAU HENARE to the Minister for Economic Development: What progress has he made declaring the Volvo Ocean Race Stopover a major event under the Major Events Management Act 2007?
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?
Museums around the world are often affected by major catastrophes, and yet planning for these disasters is an often neglected aspect of museum practice. New Zealand is not immune from these events, as can be seen in the recent series of serious earthquakes in Christchurch in 2010 and 2011. This dissertation considers how prepared the New Zealand museum sector is to handle unexpected events that negatively affect its buildings, staff, operations and treasured collections. The central research question was: What is the overall state of emergency planning in the New Zealand museum sector? There was a significant gap in the literature, especially in the local context, as there has been only one other comparable study conducted in Britain, and nothing locally. This dissertation makes a valuable contribution to the field of museum studies by drawing on theory from relevant areas such as crises management literature and by conducting original empirical research on a topic which has received little attention hitherto. The research employed a number of methods, including a review of background secondary sources, a survey and interviews. After contextualising the study with a number of local examples, Ian online survey was then developed an which enabled precise understanding of the nature of current museum practices and policies around emergency planning. Following this I conducted several interviews with museum professionals from a variety of institutional backgrounds which explored their thoughts and feelings behind the existing practices within the industry. The findings of the research were significant and somewhat alarming: almost 40% of the museum and galleries in New Zealand do not have any emergency plan at all, and only 11% have what they considered ‘complete’ plans. The research revealed a clear picture of the current width and depth of planning, as well as practices around updating the plans and training related to them. Within the industry there is awareness that planning for emergencies is important, but museum staff typically lack the knowledge and guidance needed to conduct effective emergency planning. As a result of the analysis, several practical suggestions are presented aimed at improving emergency planning practices in New Zealand museums. However this study has implications for museum studies and for current museum practice everywhere, as many of the recommendations for resolving the current obstacles and problems are applicable anywhere in the world, suggesting that New Zealand museums could become leaders in this important area.
Exploring women’s experiences of entering, working in, or leaving the Christchurch construction industry between 2010 and 2018 led to the creation of the theory of “deferential tailoring.” Deferential tailoring explains how women shape their responses to industry conditions as an intentional behavioural adjustment process. Most importantly, this theory provides insight into women’s unseen efforts to build positive workplace relationships, their capability to advance, and challenges to existing views of gender roles in this context. Research on women in construction focusses primarily on identifying and explaining barriers that impact on women’s entry, progression, and retention in the industry. There is an absence of process studies that explain the actions women take to manage industry conditions in business-as-usual, let alone post-disaster contexts. In the eight years following the 2010 Canterbury (New Zealand) earthquakes, rapid changes to the construction industry meant women had unprecedented access and new opportunities in this historically male-dominated domain. This setting provided a unique context within which to investigate how women respond to industry opportunities and challenges. The aim of this interpretive research was to construct a response theory, particular to women working in the Christchurch construction industry. Applying a constructivist grounded theory approach, theoretical sampling, coding and memo writing allowed for the collection and comparative analysis of 36 semi-structured interviews conducted with women working in a cross-section of industry occupations. Three inter- related categories were built: capitalising on opportunity, building capability and token tolerance, which together constitute the deferential tailoring process. Akin to building an invisible glass scaffold, women intentionally regulate their behaviours to successfully seize opportunities and manage social challenges. In building this scaffold, women draw heavily on personal values and positive, proactive attributes as a response to industry conditions. In contrast to previous research, which suggests that women conform to the male-dominated norms of the industry, the theory of deferential tailoring proposes that women are prepared to regulate their behaviour to address the gendered norms that impact on their work experiences. This research contributes towards an evolving body of knowledge that aims to understand how women’s entry into the construction industry, retention, and workplace relationships can be improved. By expanding the view of how women respond to industry conditions over time, this research has generated knowledge that addresses gaps in construction industry literature relating to the management of coping strategies, capitalising on opportunities, and building positive workplace relationships. Knowledge and concepts generated from this research could be integrated into recruitment and training programmes to enhance women’s professional development, shift perceptions of women’s work, and address cultural norms that impact on women’s retention in the construction industry.
Case study analysis of the 2010-2011 Canterbury Earthquake Sequence (CES), which particularly impacted Christchurch City, New Zealand, has highlighted the value of practical, standardised and coordinated post-earthquake geotechnical response guidelines for earthquake-induced landslides in urban areas. The 22nd February 2011 earthquake, the second largest magnitude event in the CES, initiated a series of rockfall, cliff collapse and loess failures around the Port Hills which severely impacted the south-eastern part of Christchurch. The extensive slope failure induced by the 22nd February 200 earthquake was unprecedented; and ground motions experienced significantly exceeded the probabilistic seismic hazard model for Canterbury. Earthquake-induced landslides initiated by the 22nd February 2011 earthquake posed risk to life safety, and caused widespread damage to dwellings and critical infrastructure. In the immediate aftermath of the 22nd February 2011 earthquake, the geotechnical community responded by deploying into the Port Hills to conduct assessment of slope failure hazards and life safety risk. Coordination within the voluntary geotechnical response group evolved rapidly within the first week post-earthquake. The lack of pre-event planning to guide coordinated geotechnical response hindered the execution of timely and transparent management of life safety risk from coseismic landslides in the initial week after the earthquake. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with municipal, management and operational organisations involved in the geotechnical response during the CES. Analysis of interview dialogue highlighted the temporal evolution of priorities and tasks during emergency response to coseismic slope failure, which was further developed into a phased conceptual model to inform future geotechnical response. Review of geotechnical responses to selected historical earthquakes (Northridge, 1994; Chi-Chi, 1999; Wenchuan, 2008) has enabled comparison between international practice and local response strategies, and has emphasised the value of pre-earthquake preparation, indicating the importance of integration of geotechnical response within national emergency management plans. Furthermore, analysis of the CES and international earthquakes has informed pragmatic recommendations for future response to coseismic slope failure. Recommendations for future response to earthquake-induced landslides presented in this thesis include: the integration of post-earthquake geotechnical response with national Civil Defence and Emergency Management; pre-earthquake development of an adaptive management structure and standard slope assessment format for geotechnical response; and emergency management training for geotechnical professionals. Post-earthquake response recommendations include the development of geographic sectors within the area impacted by coseismic slope failure, and the development of a GIS database for analysis and management of data collected during ground reconnaissance. Recommendations provided in this thesis aim to inform development of national guidelines for geotechnical response to earthquake-induced landslides in New Zealand, and prompt debate concerning international best practice.
It is not a matter of if a major earthquake will happen in New Zealand, it is when. Earthquakes wreak havoc, cut off power and water supply, lines of communication, sewer, supply chains, and transport infrastructure. People get injured and whole communities can get cut off the rest of the country for extended periods of time. Countries taking measures to increase the population's preparedness tend to suffer less severe consequences than those that do not. Disaster management authorities deliver comprehensive instructions and preparation guidance, yet communities remain grossly underprepared. There are multiple factors that influence motivation for preparedness. Personal experience is one of the most significant factors that influence preparedness motivation. Not many people will experience a severe and damaging earthquake in their lifetime. A serious game (SG) that is a computer simulation of an earthquake is a tool that can let participants experience the earthquake and its aftermath from the safety of their computer. The main result of this research is a positive answer to the question: Can a serious game motivate people to prepare for earthquakes at least just as good as a personal experience of at least a moderate earthquake? There are different levels of immersion this serious game can be implemented at. In this thesis the same earthquake experience scenario – SG “ShakeUp” is implemented as a desktop application and a virtual reality (VR) application. A user study is conducted with the aim of comparing the motivation level achieved by the two versions of the SG “ShakeUp”. In this study no benefits of using VR over traditional desktop application were found: participants trying both versions of the SG “ShakeUp” reported similar levels of motivation to prepare for earthquakes immediately after the experiment. This means that both versions of the experience were equally effective in motivating participants to prepare for earthquakes. An additional benefit of this result is that the cheaper and easier to deliver desktop version can be widely used in various education campaigns. Participants reported being more motivated to prepare for earthquakes by either version of the SG “ShakeUp” than by any other contributing factor, including their previous earthquake experience or participation in a public education campaign. Both versions of the SG “ShakeUp” can successfully overcome personal bias, unrealistic optimism, pessimism, lack of perceived control over one’s earthquake preparation actions, fatalism, and sense of helplessness in the face of the earthquakes and motivate the individual to prepare for earthquakes. Participants without the prior earthquake experience benefit most from the SG “ShakeUp” regardless of the version tried, compared to the participants who had experienced an earthquake: significantly more of them will reconsider their current level of earthquake preparedness; about 24% more of them attribute their increased level of motivation to prepare for earthquakes to the SG “ShakeUp”. For every earthquake preparation action there is about 25% more people who felt motivated to do it after trying the SG “ShakeUp” than those who have done this preparation action before the experiment. After trying either version of the SG “ShakeUp”, people who live in a free standing house and those who live in a rental property reported highest levels of intent to carry on with the preparation actions. The proposed application prototype has been discussed with the University of Canterbury Earthquake Centre and received very positive feedback as having potential for practical use by various disaster management authorities and training institutions. The research shows that the SG “ShakeUp” motivates people to prepare for earthquakes as good as a personal earthquake experience and can be successfully used in various education campaigns.
Abstract The original intention for the Partnership Community Worker (PCW) project in 2006 was for it to be an extension of the Pegasus Health General Practice and furthermore to be a bridge between the community and primary healthcare. It was believed that a close working relationship between the Practice Nurse and the PCW would help the target population of Māori, Pacifica and low income people to address and overcome their perceived barriers to healthcare which included: finance, transport, anxiety, cultural issues, communication, or lack of knowledge. Seven years later although the PCW project has been deemed a success in the Canterbury District Health Board annual reports (2013-14) and community and government agencies, including the Christchurch Resettlement Service (2012), many of the Pegasus Health General Practices have not utilised the project to its full extent, hence the need for this research. I was interested in finding out in the first instance if the model had changed and, if so why, and in the second instance if the promotional material currently distributed by Pegasus Health Primary Health Organisation reflected the daily practice of the PCW. A combination of methods were used including: surveys to the Pegasus Health General Practices, interviews with PCWs, interviews with managers of both the PCW host organisations and referring agencies to the PCW project. All the questions asked of all the participants in this research were focussed on their own perception of the role of the PCW. Results showed that the model has changed and although the publications were not reflecting the original intention of the project they did reflect the daily practice of the PCWs who are now struggling to meet much wider community expectations and needs. Key Results: Partnership Community Worker (PCW) interviews: Seventeen PCWs of the 19 employed were interviewed face to face. A number expressed interest in more culturally specific training and some are pursuing qualifications in social work; for many pay parity is an issue. In addition, many felt overwhelmed by the expectations around clients with mental health issues and housing issues now, post-earthquakes. Medical Practice surveys: Surveys were sent to eighty-two Pegasus Health medical practices and of these twenty five were completed. Results showed the full capacity of the PCW role was not clearly understood by all with many believing it was mostly a transport service. Those who did understand the full complexity of the role were very satisfied with the outcomes. PCW Host Community Manager Interviews: Of the ten out of twelve managers interviewed, some wished for more communication with Pegasus Health management because they felt aspects of both the PCW role and their own role as managers had become blurred over time. Referring organisations: Fifteen of the fifty referring community or government organisations participated. The overall satisfaction of the service was high and some acknowledged the continuing need for PCWs to be placed in communities where they were well known and trusted. Moreover results also showed that both the Canterbury earthquakes 2010-2011 and the amalgamation of Partnership Health PHO and Pegasus Health Charitable Limited in 2013 have contributed to the change of the model. Further future research may also be needed to examine the long term effects on the people of Canterbury involved in community work during the 2011-2014 years.
The increase of the world's population located near areas prone to natural disasters has given rise to new ‘mega risks’; the rebuild after disasters will test the governments’ capabilities to provide appropriate responses to protect the people and businesses. During the aftermath of the Christchurch earthquakes (2010-2012) that destroyed much of the inner city, the government of New Zealand set up a new partnership between the public and private sector to rebuild the city’s infrastructure. The new alliance, called SCIRT, used traditional risk management methods in the many construction projects. And, in hindsight, this was seen as one of the causes for some of the unanticipated problems. This study investigated the risk management practices in the post-disaster recovery to produce a specific risk management model that can be used effectively during future post-disaster situations. The aim was to develop a risk management guideline for more integrated risk management and fill the gap that arises when the traditional risk management framework is used in post-disaster situations. The study used the SCIRT alliance as a case study. The findings of the study are based on time and financial data from 100 rebuild projects, and from surveying and interviewing risk management professionals connected to the infrastructure recovery programme. The study focussed on post-disaster risk management in construction as a whole. It took into consideration the changes that happened to the people, the work and the environment due to the disaster. System thinking, and system dynamics techniques have been used due to the complexity of the recovery and to minimise the effect of unforeseen consequences. Based on an extensive literature review, the following methods were used to produce the model. The analytical hierarchical process and the relative importance index have been used to identify the critical risks inside the recovery project. System theory methods and quantitative graph theory have been used to investigate the dynamics of risks between the different management levels. Qualitative comparative analysis has been used to explore the critical success factors. And finally, causal loop diagrams combined with the grounded theory approach has been used to develop the model itself. The study identified that inexperienced staff, low management competency, poor communication, scope uncertainty, and non-alignment of the timing of strategic decisions with schedule demands, were the key risk factors in recovery projects. Among the critical risk groups, it was found that at a strategic management level, financial risks attracted the highest level of interest, as the client needs to secure funding. At both alliance-management and alliance-execution levels, the safety and environmental risks were given top priority due to a combination of high levels of emotional, reputational and media stresses. Risks arising from a lack of resources combined with the high volume of work and the concern that the cost could go out of control, alongside the aforementioned funding issues encouraged the client to create the recovery alliance model with large reputable construction organisations to lock in the recovery cost, at a time when the scope was still uncertain. This study found that building trust between all parties, clearer communication and a constant interactive flow of information, established a more working environment. Competent and clear allocation of risk management responsibilities, cultural shift, risk prioritisation, and staff training were crucial factors. Finally, the post-disaster risk management (PDRM) model can be described as an integrated risk management model that considers how the changes which happened to the environment, the people and their work, caused them to think differently to ease the complexity of the recovery projects. The model should be used as a guideline for recovery systems, especially after an earthquake, looking in detail at all the attributes and the concepts, which influence the risk management for more effective PDRM. The PDRM model is represented in Causal Loops Diagrams (CLD) in Figure 8.31 and based on 10 principles (Figure 8.32) and 26 concepts (Table 8.1) with its attributes.
The city of Ōtautahi/Christchurch experienced a series of earthquakes that began on September 4th, 2010. The most damaging event occurred on February 22nd, 2011 but significant earthquakes also occurred on June 13th and December 23rd with aftershocks still occurring well into 2012. The resulting disaster is the second deadliest natural disaster in New Zealand’s history with 185 deaths. During 2011 the Canterbury earthquakes were one of the costliest disasters worldwide with an expected cost of up to $NZ30 billion.
Hundreds of commercial buildings and thousands of houses have been destroyed or are to be demolished and extensive repairs are needed for infrastructure to over 100,000 homes. As many as 8,900 people simply abandoned their homes and left the city in the first few months after the February event (Newell, 2012), and as many as 50,000 may leave during 2012. In particular, young whānau and single young women comprised a disproportionate number of these migrants, with evidence of a general movement to the North Island.
Te Puni Kōkiri sought a mix of quantitative and qualitative research to examine the social and economic impacts of the Christchurch earthquakes on Māori and their whānau. The result of this work will be a collection of evidence to inform policy to support and assist Māori and their whānau during the recovery/rebuild phases. To that end, this report triangulates available statistical and geographical information with qualitative data gathered over 2010 and 2011 by a series of interviews conducted with Māori who experienced the dramatic events associated with the earthquakes.
A Māori research team at Lincoln University was commissioned to undertake the research as they were already engaged in transdisciplinary research (began in the May 2010), that focused on quickly gathering data from a range of Māori who experienced the disaster, including relevant economic, environmental, social and cultural factors in the response and recovery of Māori to these events.
Participants for the qualitative research were drawn from Māori whānau who both stayed and left the city. Further data was available from ongoing projects and networks that the Lincoln research team was already involved in, including interviews with Māori first responders and managers operating in the CBD on the day of the February event. Some limited data is also available from younger members of affected whānau.
Māori in Ōtautahi/Christchurch City have exhibited their own culturally-attuned collective responses to the disaster. However, it is difficult to ascertain Māori demographic changes due to a lack of robust statistical frameworks but Māori outward migration from the city is estimated to range between 560 and 1,100 people.
The mobility displayed by Māori demonstrates an important but unquantified response by whānau to this disaster, with emigration to Australia presenting an attractive option for young Māori, an entrenched phenomenon that correlates to cyclical downturns and the long-term decline of the New Zealand economy. It is estimated that at least 315 Māori have emigrated from the Canterbury region to Australia post-quake, although the disaster itself may be only one of a series of events that has prompted such a decision.
Māori children made up more than one in four of the net loss of children aged 6 to 15 years enrolled in schools in Greater Christchurch over the year to June 2011. Research literature identifies depression affecting a small but significant number of children one to two years post-disaster and points to increasing clinical and organisational demands for Māori and other residents of the city.
For those residents in the eastern or coastal suburbs – home to many of the city’s Māori population - severe damage to housing, schools, shops, infrastructure, and streets has meant disruption to their lives, children’s schooling, employment, and community functioning. Ongoing abandonment of homes by many has meant a growing sense of unease and loss of security, exacerbated by arson, burglaries, increased drinking, a stalled local and national economy, and general confusion about the city’s future.
Māori cultural resilience has enabled a considerable network of people, institutions, and resources being available to Māori , most noticeably through marae and their integral roles of housing, as a coordinating hub, and their arguing for the wider affected communities of Christchurch.
Relevant disaster responses need to be discussed within whānau, kōhanga, kura, businesses, communities, and wider neighbourhoods. Comprehensive disaster management plans need to be drafted for all iwi in collaboration with central government, regional, and city or town councils.
Overall, Māori are remarkably philosophical about the effects of the disaster, with many proudly relishing their roles in what is clearly a historic event of great significance to the city and country. Most believe that ‘being Māori’ has helped cope with the disaster, although for some this draws on a collective history of poverty and marginalisation, features that contribute to the vulnerability of Māori to such events.
While the recovery and rebuild phases offer considerable options for Māori and iwi, with Ngāi Tahu set to play an important stakeholder in infrastructural, residential, and commercial developments, some risk and considerable unknowns are evident. Considerable numbers of Māori may migrate into the Canterbury region for employment in the rebuild, and trades training strategies have already been established.
With many iwi now increasingly investing in property, the risks from significant earthquakes are now more transparent, not least to insurers and the reinsurance sector. Iwi authorities need to be appraised of insurance issues and ensure sufficient coverage exists and investments and developments are undertaken with a clear understanding of the risks from natural hazards and exposure to future disasters.
