Hon PAULA BENNETT to the Prime Minister: Does he have confidence in all his Ministers? WILLOW-JEAN PRIME to the Minister of Finance: Will this Government’s policies help transition the economy; if so, how? Hon AMY ADAMS to the Associate Minister of Finance: What is the purpose of the Overseas Investment Amendment Bill? Hon MARK MITCHELL to the Minister of Justice: Does he stand by his statement in answer to Oral Question No 8 on Tuesday that “The member is alluding to the offender I referred to in a question last week, relating to the pinching of a prison officer’s bottom”? Dr DUNCAN WEBB to the Minister for Greater Christchurch Regeneration: What announcements has she made about learning the lessons from the Canterbury earthquake sequence to help New Zealanders prepare for the future? Hon PAULA BENNETT to the Minister for Women: Is it her responsibility to stand up for and improve the outcomes for women in New Zealand? PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN to the Minister for Social Development: Will low- and middle-income families be better off because of the Families Package; if so, how? JAMI-LEE ROSS to the Minister of Transport: Does he stand by all his statements, actions, and legislative drafting instructions on matters to do with fuel taxes? ANGIE WARREN-CLARK to the Minister for the Environment: Is the Government assisting the primary sector and regional councils in measuring nutrient use and greenhouse gas emissions; if so, how? Hon ALFRED NGARO to the Minister for Children: Does she stand by her Ministry’s policies and actions in finding caregivers for children in care? Hon Dr NICK SMITH to the Minister for Ethnic Communities: Are the statements in the Onehunga Community News that “The Office of Ethnic Communities is moving into premises in Onehunga, which will be shared with list MP Priyanca Radhakrishnan” and the quote by her parliamentary under-secretary saying, “We’ve boosted support that we’re providing in terms of connecting with ethnic communities, so we have more staff members working in our ethnic communities’ outreach teams” correct? MARK PATTERSON to the Minister for Trade and Export Growth: What announcements has the Government made regarding trade with the European Union?
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?
SHANE ARDERN to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on the economy?
DAVID SHEARER to the Prime Minister: Does he expect all his Ministers to comply with the responsibilities set out in the Cabinet Manual?
JONATHAN YOUNG to the Minister of Justice: What steps is the Government taking to improve public services in law and order?
GRANT ROBERTSON to the Minister of Local Government: Will he take the same approach to compliance with the Cabinet Manual as Minister for Local Government as he did as Minister for ACC?
DENIS O'ROURKE to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Does he stand by all his recent statements?
EUGENIE SAGE to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement, “I am not going to do something silly with the Department of Conservation estate”?
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Minister for Economic Development: What, if any, are the capital costs, write-downs and redundancy costs expected from the merger of the Ministry of Economic Development with the Ministry of Science and Innovation, Department of Labour and Department of Building and Housing?
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON to the Minister of Health: What progress is being made in relation to the Government’s key result of increasing infant immunisation rates and reducing the incidence of rheumatic fever?
Hon MARYAN STREET to the Minister of Health: Does he support Pharmac’s provisional decision to engage Auckland company, Pharmaco, to be the sole supplier of new diabetic meters?
PESETA SAM LOTU-IIGA to the Minister for Social Development: Has she received any reports on the Future Focus welfare changes in 2010?
Hon PHIL GOFF to the Minister of Foreign Affairs: Have New Zealand heads of mission overseas been recalled to a meeting in Wellington on 2 April, and if so what is the cost of holding this meeting?
Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM to the Minister for Climate Change Issues: Is he concerned by a recent report of an international team of scientists that, even with a two degree celsius rise in average global temperature, future generations could face sea levels of up to 12 to 22 metres higher than at present?
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?
Christchurch has experienced a series of over 13,500 earthquakes between September 2010 and January 2012. Some children who have been exposed to earthquakes may experience post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms (PTSD) including difficulty concentrating, feeling anxious, restlessness and confusion. Other children may be resilient to the effects of disaster. Western models of resilience relate to a child’s social support and their capacity to cope. The Māori model of wellbeing relates to whanau (family), wairua (spiritual connections), tinana (the physical body) and hinengaro (the mind and emotions). Children’s concepts of helping, caring and learning may provide insight into resilience without introducing the topic of earthquakes into the conversation, which in itself may provoke an episode of stress. Many researchers have studied the effects of earthquakes on children. However, few studies have examined positive outcomes and resilience or listened to the children’s voices. The objective of this study was to listen to the voices of children who experienced the Canterbury earthquake period in order to gain a deeper understanding of the ideas associated resilience. Individual interviews were conducted with 17 five-year-old participants during their first term of primary school. After the interviews, the teacher shared demographic information and reports on the children’s stress and coping. Six children were identified as New Zealand European and eleven children identified as New Zealand Māori. Children had different views of helping, caring and learning. Themes of resilience from Western and Kaupapa Māori models were identified in transcripts of the children's voices and drawings. Māori children voiced more themes of resilience associated with the Western model, and in the Tapa Whā model, Māori children's transcripts were more likely to be inclusive of all four components of well-being. How five-year-old children, having experienced an earthquake disaster during their preschool years, talk or draw pictures about helping, caring and learning can provide insight into resilience, especially in situations where it is not advisable to re-traumatise children by discussing the disaster event. Future research should interview parents/caregivers and whānau to gain further insights. Considering information from both a Western and a Tapa Whā perspective can also provide new insights into resilience in young children. A limitation of this study is that qualitative studies are not always free from a researcher’s interpretation and are, therefore, subjective.
Questions to Ministers
1. PESETA SAM LOTU-IIGA to the Minister of Finance: What progress has the Government made in building a more competitive economy and getting on top of New Zealand's longstanding reliance on foreign debt?
2. Hon PHIL GOFF to the Prime Minister: Does he have confidence in his Minister of Finance?
3. KEVIN HAGUE to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements regarding the safety of mining in New Zealand; and does he consider his Government has met all its responsibilities arising out of the Pike River mine disaster?
4. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Minister of Finance: What are the latest official forecasts for the current account balance and the net international investment position over the next four years under his Government's policies?
5. JONATHAN YOUNG to the Minister of Justice: What progress has been made on the development of alternative court processes for child witnesses?
6. Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE to the Minister of Finance: In light of his statement yesterday regarding foreign-owned assets that "we need to generate the kind of savings that will help New Zealand buy back those assets", is it still the Government's policy to sell State assets if it is re-elected, given that up to 30 percent of the shares he proposes selling could go to overseas buyers?
7. Hon JOHN BOSCAWEN to the Minister of Finance: Does he think that implementing the 2025 Taskforce's recommendations in November 2009 would have avoided New Zealand's double credit downgrade; if not, why not?
8. GRANT ROBERTSON to the Minister of Health: Has he been advised of a reduction in funding for home-based health support services in the Wellington region?
9. TIM MACINDOE to the Minister of Corrections: Has she received any progress reports on the implementation of the Government's Prisoner Skills and Employment Strategy?
10. STUART NASH to the Minister of Finance: By how many percent has the GDP per capita gap between Australia and New Zealand widened since his Government took office?
11. NIKKI KAYE to the Minister for Communications and Information Technology: How many schools will benefit from ultra-fast broadband in the first year of the roll-out?
12. BRENDON BURNS to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Does he stand by all of his statements on Canterbury's earthquake recovery?
Questions to Members
1. SU'A WILLIAM SIO to the Chairperson of the Social Services Committee: Will she call a meeting to consider the Inquiry into the identification, rehabilitation, and care and protection of child offenders; if not, why not?
DAVID SHEARER to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement: “I’m not going to go and relitigate every comment I’ve made prior to this point because I don’t think that would actually be helpful”?
TODD McCLAY to the Minister of Finance: How has the Government balanced the need for responsible fiscal management with its continued support for New Zealand families?
METIRIA TUREI to the Prime Minister: Ka whakatau a ia i te kōrero i whakaputaina māna, arā, “I do not accept the view that we are a deeply unequal country. I do not think the evidence suggests that, and people drawing that conclusion are wrong”?
Translation: Does he stand by the statement made on his behalf, “I do not accept the view that we are a deeply unequal country. I do not think the evidence suggests that, and people drawing that conclusion are wrong”?
JACQUI DEAN to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: What recent announcements has the Government made around the rebuild of the Christchurch city centre?
Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA to the Minister of Māori Affairs: Does he stand by all his statements?
MAGGIE BARRY to the Minister of Health: Has any progress been made on the Zero Fees for Under Sixes scheme taking coverage over and above the 70 percent of children covered in 2008 achieved by the previous Government?
Hon TREVOR MALLARD to the Associate Minister of Education: What progress has been made on the charter schools policy?
ALFRED NGARO to the Minister for Social Development: What announcements has she made on the release of the White Paper for Vulnerable Children?
CLARE CURRAN to the Minister of Transport: Does he stand by his statement in his press release of 24 May 2012 that “KiwiRail has successfully undertaken a significant investment programme over the previous two years, including: New locomotives and wagons, and refurbishment of the current locomotive fleet”?
Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by the statement made on his behalf that there are no plans to sell KiwiRail?
MELISSA LEE to the Minister for Ethnic Affairs: What reports has she received about the Office of Ethnic Affairs working with the Red Cross?
JULIE ANNE GENTER to the Minister of Transport: What alternatives did the Government investigate before committing itself to the Road of National Significance between Puhoi and Wellsford, which is now projected to cost $1.76 billion up from $1.69 billion two years ago?
Collective identity construction in organisations engaged in an inter-organisational collaboration (IOC), especially temporary IOCs set up in disaster situations, has received scant attention in the organisational studies literature yet collective identity is considered to be important in fostering effective IOC operations. This doctoral study was designed to add to our understanding about how collective identity is constituted throughout the entire lifespan of a particular temporary coopetitive (i.e., simultaneously collaborative and competitive) IOC formed in a post-disaster environment. To achieve this purpose, a qualitative case study of the Stronger Christchurch Infrastructure Rebuild Team (SCIRT), a time-bound coopetition formed to repair the horizontal infrastructure in Christchurch, New Zealand after the devastating 2011 Canterbury earthquakes, was undertaken. Using data from semi-structured interviews, field observations, and organisational documents and other artefacts, an inductive analytic method was employed to explore how internal stakeholders engaged with and co- constructed a collective SCIRT identity and reconciled this with their home organization identity. The analysis revealed that the SCIRT collective identity was an ongoing process, involving the interweaving of social, temporal, material and geospatial dimensions constructed through intersecting cycles of senior managers’ sensegiving and employees’ sensemaking across SCIRT’s five and a half years of existence. Senior management deliberately undertook identity work campaigns that used organisational rituals, artefacts, and spatial design to disseminate and encourage a sense of “we are all SCIRT”. However, there was no common sense of “we-ness”. Identification with SCIRT was experienced differently among different groups of employees and across time. Employees’ differing senses of collective identity were accounted for by their past, present, and anticipated future relationships with their home organisation, and also (re)shaped by the geosocial environments in which they worked. The study supports previous research claiming that collective identity is a process of recursive sensegiving and sensemaking between senior managers and employees. However, it extends the literature by revealing the imbricated nature of collective identity, how members’ sense of “who we are” can change across the entire lifetime of a temporary IOC, and how sociomateriality, temporality, and geosocial effects strongly intervene in employees’ emerging senses of collective identity. Moreover, the study demonstrates how the ongoing identity work can be embedded in a time-space frame that further accentuates the influence of temporality, especially the anticipated future, organisational rituals, artefacts, and the geosocial environment. The study’s primary contribution to theory is a processual model of collective identity that applies specifically to a temporary IOC involving coopetition. In doing so, it represents a more finely nuanced and situational model than existing models. At a practical level, this model suggests that managers need to appreciate that organisational artefacts, rituals, and the prevailing organisational geosocial environment are inextricably linked in processes that can be manipulated to enhance the construction of collective identity.
Questions to Ministers
1. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Minister of Finance: Does he agree with 57 percent of New Zealanders who, according to a recent UMR poll, support the introduction of a temporary earthquake levy to pay for the rebuilding of Christchurch?
2. Hon PHIL GOFF to the Prime Minister: What, according to the 2010 Investment Statement of the Government of New Zealand, was the average total shareholder return over the last five years from State-owned Enterprises and the average bond rate, and is that consistent with his statement that "it is the Government's intention to use the proceeds of those initial public offerings to actually invest in other assets that the Government would have to fund through the Government bond rate"?
3. DAVID BENNETT to the Minister for Infrastructure: What progress has the Government made on its infrastructure programme?
4. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement "this Government is not prepared to turn its back on our most vulnerable citizens when they most need our help"?
5. Hon JOHN BOSCAWEN to the Acting Minister of Energy and Resources: Is it government policy for New Zealand to become a "highly attractive global destination" for oil exploration, with expansion of the oil and coal sectors leading to a "step change" in the country's economic growth as set out in the document Developing Our Energy Potential; if not, why not?
6. Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: Is the Government considering extending the business assistance package for employers and employees beyond the 14-week period currently signalled; if not, why not?
7. JACQUI DEAN to the Minister of Police: What reports has she received on the latest trends in the level of crime in New Zealand?
8. Hon TREVOR MALLARD to the Prime Minister: Did he tell a meeting in Timaru last week "The entire time I've been Prime Minister I've had Treasury in my office week after week, month after month, telling me South Canterbury Finance was going bankrupt"?
9. CHRIS AUCHINVOLE to the Minister for the Environment: What advice has he received on major resource consents being considered under the Government's new national consenting policy?
10. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Acting Minister of Energy and Resources: Does she agree that the joint scheme initiated by the Green Party and the Government, Warm Up New Zealand: Heat Smart, is the best initiative in the Draft New Zealand Energy Strategy because it is providing hundreds of thousands of New Zealand households with warm, dry, energy efficient homes, and creating thousands of clean green jobs?
11. Hon SHANE JONES to the Minister of Fisheries: Does he still have no major concerns about the way foreign boats were used by New Zealand companies as the Nelson Mail reports he said last year?
12. TIM MACINDOE to the Minister of Housing: What recent announcements has he made regarding the Government's Housing Innovation Fund?
Questions to Ministers
1. CRAIG FOSS to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on the economy moving away from government spending, housing speculation and borrowing, and towards savings and exporting?
2. Hon PETE HODGSON to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his answer to question No 11 yesterday that Sammy Wong did not accompany Pansy Wong on any ministerial trips to China?
3. HONE HARAWIRA to the Associate Minister of Health: What is the rationale behind the move to prohibit the display of tobacco products for sale in retail outlets?
4. Hon DARREN HUGHES to the Minister of Transport: Has he received any feedback or information in support of lowering the adult blood alcohol concentration to 0.05 that has given him any doubt or cause for reflection this year about his decision to retain the level at 0.08?
5. TIM MACINDOE to the Minister of Housing: What recent announcement has he made about the direction of social housing in New Zealand?
6. BRENDON BURNS to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Is the Government's response package, announced last week to assist Canterbury businesses affected by the 4 September earthquake, universally supported by the Government and its supporters?
7. CATHERINE DELAHUNTY to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: Does she agree with the Alternative Welfare Working Group that welfare reform should be focused on "the relentless pursuit of well-being"?
8. Hon NANAIA MAHUTA to the Minister of Energy and Resources: Will the mining of lignite form part of his New Zealand Energy Strategy?
9. LOUISE UPSTON to the Minister of Education: What were the results of the Programme for International Assessment (PISA), which looked at New Zealand students' achievement in reading, maths and scientific literacy?
10. DARIEN FENTON to the Minister of Transport: How many emails has he received on the decision of the New Zealand Transport Agency to start charging CarJam and similar web-based information services for accessing the Agency's stored basic motor vehicle information?
11. JACQUI DEAN to the Minister of Agriculture: What recent steps has the Government taken to control bovine TB?
12. Hon TREVOR MALLARD to the Minister of Education: Which Minister is to be responsible for the enforcement of the Education Act 1989 in relation to limited attendance early childhood centres following the passing of the Education Amendment Bill (No 2)?
Questions to Members
1. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Chairperson of the Finance and Expenditure Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Student Loan Scheme Bill?
2. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Chairperson of the Finance and Expenditure Committee: How many submitters on the Student Loan Scheme Bill have requested to be heard in person?
3. CHRIS HIPKINS to the Chairperson of the Local Government and Environment Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Sustainable Biofuel Bill?
4. CHRIS HIPKINS to the Chairperson of the Local Government and Environment Committee: How many submitters on the Sustainable Biofuel Bill have requested to be heard in person?
5. CHRIS HIPKINS to the Chairperson of the Local Government and Environment Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Southland District Council (Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy) Empowering Bill?
6. CHRIS HIPKINS to the Chairperson of the Local Government and Environment Committee: How many submitters on the Southland District Council (Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy) Empowering Bill have requested to be heard in person?
7. CHRIS HIPKINS to the Chairperson of the Government Administration Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Identity Information Confirmation Bill?
8. CHRIS HIPKINS to the Chairperson of the Government Administration Committee: How many submitters on the Identity Information Confirmation Bill have requested to be heard in person?
9. Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA to the Chairperson of the Māori Affairs Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill?
10. Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA to the Chairperson of the Māori Affairs Committee: How many submitters on the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill have requested to be heard in person?
11. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Chairperson of the Finance and Expenditure Committee: Has the Finance and Expenditure Committee conducted the 2009/10 financial review of the Office of the Retirement Commissioner?
12. DARIEN FENTON to the Chairperson of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Land Transport (Driver Licensing) Amendment Bill?
13. DARIEN FENTON to the Chairperson of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee: How many submitters on the Land Transport (Driver Licensing) Amendment Bill have requested to be heard in person?
14. DARIEN FENTON to the Chairperson of the Transport and Industrial Relations Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Land Transport (Road Safety and Other Matters) Amendment Bill?
15. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Chairperson of the Justice and Electoral Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Lawyers and Conveyancers Amendment Bill?
16. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Chairperson of the Justice and Electoral Committee: How many submitters on the Lawyers and Conveyancers Amendment Bill have requested to be heard in person?
17. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Chairperson of the Justice and Electoral Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Legal Services Bill?
18. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Chairperson of the Justice and Electoral Committee: How many submitters on the Legal Services Bill have requested to be heard in person?
19. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Chairperson of the Justice and Electoral Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Sale and Supply of Liquor and Liquor Enforcement Bill?
20. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Chairperson of the Justice and Electoral Committee: How many submitters on the Sale and Supply of Liquor and Liquor Enforcement Bill have requested to be heard in person?
21. Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR to the Chairperson of the Primary Production Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Food Bill?
22. Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR to the Chairperson of the Primary Production Committee: How many submitters on the Food Bill have requested to be heard in person?
23. Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR to the Chairperson of the Primary Production Committee: How many submissions have been received on the Dairy Industry Restructuring (New Sunset Provisions) Amendment Bill?
24. Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR to the Chairperson of the Primary Production Committee: How many submitters on the Dairy Industry Restructuring (New Sunset Provisions) Amendment Bill have requested to be heard in person?
Land cover change information in urban areas supports decision makers in dealing with public policy planning and resource management. Remote sensing has been demonstrated as an efficient and accurate way to monitor land cover change over large extents. The Canterbury Earthquake Sequence (CES) caused massive damage in Christchurch, New Zealand and resulted in significant land cover change over a short time period. This study combined two types of remote sensing data, aerial imagery (RGB) and LiDAR, as the basis for quantifying land cover change in Christchurch between 2011 – 2015, a period corresponding to the five years immediately following the 22 February 2011 earthquake, which was part of the CES. An object based image analysis (OBIA) approach was adopted to classify the aerial imagery and LiDAR data into seven land cover types (bare land, building, grass, shadow, tree and water). The OBIA approach consisted of two steps, image segmentation and object classification. For the first step, this study used multi-level segmentation to better segment objects. For the second step, the random forest (RF) classifier was used to assign a land cover type to each object defined by the segmentation. Overall classification accuracies for 2011 and 2015 were 94.0% and 94.32%, respectively. Based on the classification result, land cover changes between 2011 and 2015 were then analysed. Significant increases were found in road and tree cover, while the land cover types that decreased were bare land, grass, roof, water. To better understand the reasons for those changes, land cover transitions were calculated. Canopy growth, seasonal differences and forest plantation establishment were the main reasons for tree cover increase. Redevelopment after the earthquake was the main reason for road area growth. By comparing the spatial distribution of these transitions, this study also identified Halswell and Wigram as the fastest developing suburbs in Christchurch. These results provided quantitative information for the effects of CES, with respect to land cover change. They allow for a better understanding for the current land cover status of Christchurch. Among those land cover changes, the significant increase in tree cover aroused particularly interest as urban forests benefit citizens via ecosystem services, including health, social, economic, and environmental benefits. Therefore, this study firstly calculated the percentages of tree cover in Christchurch’s fifteen wards in order to provide a general idea of tree cover change in the city extent. Following this, an automatic individual tree detection and crown delineation (ITCD) was undertaken to determine the feasibility of automated tree counting. The accuracies of the proposed approach ranged between 56.47% and 92.11% in thirty different sample plots, with an overall accuracy of 75.60%. Such varied accuracies were later found to be caused by the fixed tree detection window size and misclassifications from the land cover classification that affected the boundary of the CHM. Due to the large variability in accuracy, tree counting was not undertaken city-wide for both time periods. However, directions for further study for ITCD in Christchurch could be exploring ITCD approaches with variable window size or optimizing the classification approach to focus more on producing highly accurate CHMs.
Fine grained sediment deposition in urban environments during natural hazard events can impact critical infrastructure and properties (urban terrain) leading to reduced social and economic function and potentially adverse public health effects. Therefore, clean-up of the sediments is required to minimise impacts and restore social and economic functionality as soon as possible. The strategies employed to manage and coordinate the clean-up significantly influence the speed, cost and quality of the clean-up operation. Additionally, the physical properties of the fine grained sediment affects the clean-up, transport, storage and future usage of the sediment. The goals of the research are to assess the resources, time and cost required for fine grained sediment clean-up in an urban environment following a disaster and to determine how the geotechnical properties of sediment will affect urban clean-up strategies. The thesis focuses on the impact of fine grained sediment (<1 mm) deposition from three liquefaction events during the Canterbury earthquake sequence (2010-2011) on residential suburbs and transport networks in Christchurch. It also presents how geotechnical properties of the material may affect clean-up strategies and methods by presenting geotechnical analysis of tephra material from the North Island of New Zealand. Finally, lessons for disaster response planning and decision making for clean-up of sediment in urban environments are presented. A series of semi-structured interviews of key stakeholders supported by relevant academic literature and media reports were used to record the clean-up operation coordination and management and to make a preliminary qualification of the Christchurch liquefaction ejecta clean-up (costs breakdown, time, volume, resources, coordination, planning and priorities). Further analysis of the costs and resources involved for better accuracy was required and so the analysis of Christchurch City Council road management database (RAMM) was done. In order to make a transition from general fine sediment clean-up to specific types of fine disaster sediment clean-up, adequate information about the material properties is required as they will define how the material will be handled, transported and stored. Laboratory analysis of young volcanic tephra from the New Zealand’s North Island was performed to identify their geotechnical properties (density, granulometry, plasticity, composition and angle of repose). The major findings of this research were that emergency planning and the use of the coordinated incident management system (CIMS) system during the emergency were important to facilitate rapid clean-up tasking, management of resources and ultimately recovery from widespread and voluminous liquefaction ejecta deposition in eastern Christchurch. A total estimated cost of approximately $NZ 40 million was calculated for the Christchurch City clean-up following the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquake sequence with a partial cost of $NZ 12 million for the Southern part of the city, where up to 33% (418 km) of the road network was impacted by liquefaction ejecta and required clearing of the material following the 22 February 2011 earthquake. Over 500,000 tonnes of ejecta has been stockpiled at Burwood landfill for all three liquefaction inducing earthquake events. The average cost per kilometre for the event clean-up was $NZ 5,500/km (4 September 2010), $NZ 11,650/km (22 February 2011) and $NZ 11,185/km (13 June 2011). The duration of clean-up time of residential properties and the road network was approximately two to three months for each of the three liquefaction ejecta events; despite events volumes and spatial distribution of ejecta. Interviews and quantitative analysis of RAMM data revealed that the experience and knowledge gained from the Darfield earthquake (4 September 2010) clean-up increased the efficiency of the following Christchurch earthquake induced liquefaction ejecta clean-up events. Density, particle size, particle shape, clay content and moisture content, are the important geotechnical properties that need to be considered when planning for a clean-up method that incorporates collection, transport and disposal or storage. The geotechnical properties for the tephra samples were analysed to increase preparedness and reaction response of potentially affected North Island cities from possible product from the active volcanoes in their region. The geotechnical results from this study show that volcanic tephra could be used in road or construction material but the properties would have to be further investigated for a New Zealand context. Using fresh volcanic material in road, building or flood control construction requires good understanding of the material properties and precaution during design and construction to extra care, but if well planned, it can be economically beneficial.
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.
Background: We are in a period of history where natural disasters are increasing in both frequency and severity. They are having widespread impacts on communities, especially on vulnerable communities, those most affected who have the least ability to prepare or respond to a disaster. The ability to assemble and effectively manage Interagency Emergency Response Teams (IERTs) is critical to navigating the complexity and chaos found immediately following disasters. These teams play a crucial role in the multi-sectoral, multi-agency, multi-disciplinary, and inter-organisational response and are vital to ensuring the safety and well-being of vulnerable populations such as the young, aged, and socially and medically disadvantaged in disasters. Communication is key to the smooth operation of these teams. Most studies of the communication in IERTs during a disaster have been focussed at a macro-level of examining larger scale patterns and trends within organisations. Rarely found are micro-level analyses of interpersonal communication at the critical interfaces between collaborating agencies. This study set out to understand the experiences of those working at the interagency interfaces in an IERT set up by the Canterbury District Health Board to respond to the needs of the vulnerable people in the aftermath of the destructive earthquakes that hit Canterbury, New Zealand, in 2010-11. The aim of the study was to gain insights about the complexities of interpersonal communication (micro-level) involved in interagency response coordination and to generate an improved understanding into what stabilises the interagency communication interfaces between those agencies responding to a major disaster. Methods: A qualitative case study research design was employed to investigate how interagency communication interfaces were stabilised at the micro-level (“the case”) in the aftermath of the destructive earthquakes that hit Canterbury in 2010-11 (“the context”). Participant recruitment was undertaken by mapping which agencies were involved within the IERT and approaching representatives from each of these agencies. Data was collected via individual interviews using a semi-structured interview guide and was based on the “Critical Incident Technique”. Subsequently, data was transcribed verbatim and subjected to inductive analysis. This was underpinned theoretically by Weick’s “Interpretive Approach” and supported by Nvivo qualitative data analysis software. Results: 19 participants were interviewed in this study. Out of the inductive analysis emerged two primary themes, each with several sub-factors. The first major theme was destabilising/disruptive factors of interagency communication with five sub-factors, a) conflicting role mandates, b) rigid command structures, c) disruption of established communication structures, d) lack of shared language and understanding, and e) situational awareness disruption. The second major theme stabilising/steadying factors in interagency communication had four sub-factors, a) the establishment of the IERT, b) emergent novel communication strategies, c) establishment of a liaison role and d) pre-existing networks and relationships. Finally, there was a third sub-level identified during inductive analysis, where sub-factors from both primary themes were noted to be uniquely interconnected by emergent “consequences” arising out of the disaster context. Finally, findings were synthesised into a conceptual “Model of Interagency Communication at the Micro-level” based on this case study of the Canterbury earthquake disaster response. Discussion: The three key dimensions of The People, The Connections and The Improvisations served as a framework for the discussion of what stabilises interagency communication interfaces in a major disaster. The People were key to stabilising the interagency interfaces through functioning as a flexible conduit, guiding and navigating communication at the interagency interfaces and improving situational awareness. The Connections provided the collective competence, shared decision-making and prior established relationships that stabilised the micro-level communication at interagency interfaces. And finally, The Improvisations i.e., novel ideas and inventiveness that emerge out of rapidly changing post-disaster environments, also contributed to stabilisation of micro-level communication flows across interagency interfaces in the disaster response. “Command and control” hierarchical structures do provide clear processes and structures for teams working in disasters to follow. However, improvisations and novel solutions are also needed and often emerge from first responders (who are best placed to assess the evolving needs in a disaster where there is a high degree of uncertainty). Conclusion: This study highlights the value of incorporating an interface perspective into any study that seeks to understand the processes of IERTs during disaster responses. It also strengthens the requirement for disaster management frameworks to formally plan for and to allow for the adaptive responsiveness of local teams on the ground, and legitimise and recognise the improvisations of those in the role of emergent boundary spanners in a disaster response. This needs to be in addition to existing formal disaster response mechanisms. This study provides a new conceptual model that can be used to guide future case studies exploring stability at the interfaces of other IERTs and highlights the centrality of communication in the experiences of members of teams in the aftermath of a disaster. Utilising these new perspectives on stabilising communication at the interagency interfaces in disaster responses will have practical implications in the future to better serve the needs of vulnerable people who are at greatest risk of adverse outcomes in a disaster.
As a global phenomenon, many cities are undergoing urban renewal to accommodate rapid growth in urban population. However, urban renewal can struggle to balance social, economic, and environmental outcomes, whereby economic outcomes are often primarily considered by developers. This has important implications for urban forests, which have previously been shown to be negatively affected by development activities. Urban forests serve the purpose of providing ecosystem services and thus are beneficial to human wellbeing. Better understanding the effect of urban renewal on city trees may help improve urban forest outcomes via effective management and policy strategies, thereby maximising ecosystem service provision and human wellbeing. Though the relationship between certain aspects of development and urban forests has received consideration in previous literature, little research has focused on how the complete property redevelopment cycle affects urban forest dynamics over time. This research provides an opportunity to gain a comprehensive understanding of the effect of residential property redevelopment on urban forest dynamics, at a range of spatial scales, in Christchurch, New Zealand following a series of major earthquakes which occurred in 2010 – 2011. One consequence of the earthquakes is the redevelopment of thousands of properties over a relatively short time-frame. The research quantifies changes in canopy cover city-wide, as well as, tree removal, retention, and planting on individual residential properties. Moreover, the research identifies the underlying reasons for these dynamics, by exploring the roles of socio-economic and demographic factors, the spatial relationships between trees and other infrastructure, and finally, the attitudes of residential property owners. To quantify the effect of property redevelopment on canopy cover change in Christchurch, this research delineated tree canopy cover city-wide in 2011 and again in 2015. An object-based image analysis (OBIA) technique was applied to aerial imagery and LiDAR data acquired at both time steps, in order to estimate city-wide canopy cover for 2011 and 2015. Changes in tree canopy cover between 2011 and 2015 were then spatially quantified. Tree canopy cover change was also calculated for all meshblocks (a relatively fine-scale geographic boundary) in Christchurch. The results show a relatively small magnitude of tree canopy cover loss, city-wide, from 10.8% to 10.3% between 2011 and 2015, but a statistically significant change in mean tree canopy cover across all the meshblocks. Tree canopy cover losses were more likely to occur in meshblocks containing properties that underwent a complete redevelopment cycle, but the loss was insensitive to the density of redevelopment within meshblocks. To explore property-scale individual tree dynamics, a mixed-methods approach was used, combining questionnaire data and remote sensing analysis. A mail-based questionnaire was delivered to residential properties to collect resident and household data; 450 residential properties (321 redeveloped, 129 non- redeveloped) returned valid questionnaires and were identified as analysis subjects. Subsequently, 2,422 tree removals and 4,544 tree retentions were identified within the 450 properties; this was done by manually delineating individual tree crowns, based on aerial imagery and LiDAR data, and visually comparing the presence or absence of these trees between 2011 and 2015. The tree removal rate on redeveloped properties (44.0%) was over three times greater than on non-redeveloped properties (13.5%) and the average canopy cover loss on redeveloped properties (52.2%) was significantly greater than on non-redeveloped properties (18.8%). A classification tree (CT) analysis was used to model individual tree dynamics (i.e. tree removal, tree retention) and candidate explanatory variables (i.e. resident and household, economic, land cover, and spatial variables). The results indicate that the model including land cover, spatial, and economic variables had the best predicting ability for individual tree dynamics (accuracy = 73.4%). Relatively small trees were more likely to be removed, while trees with large crowns were more likely to be retained. Trees were most likely to be removed from redeveloped properties with capital values lower than NZ$1,060,000 if they were within 1.4 m of the boundary of a redeveloped building. Conversely, trees were most likely to be retained if they were on a property that was not redeveloped. The analysis suggested that the resident and household factors included as potential explanatory variables did not influence tree removal or retention. To conduct a further exploration of the relationship between resident attitudes and actions towards trees on redeveloped versus non-redeveloped properties, this research also asked the landowners from the 450 properties that returned mail questionnaires to indicate their attitudes towards tree management (i.e. tree removal, tree retention, and tree planting) on their properties. The results show that residents from redeveloped properties were more likely to remove and/or plant trees, while residents from non- redeveloped properties were more likely to retain existing trees. A principal component analysis (PCA) was used to explore resident attitudes towards tree management. The results of the PCA show that residents identified ecosystem disservices (e.g. leaf litter, root damage to infrastructure) as common reasons for tree removal; however, they also noted ecosystem services as important reasons for both tree planting and tree retention on their properties. Moreover, the reasons for tree removal and tree planting varied based on whether residents’ property had been redeveloped. Most tree removal occurred on redeveloped properties because trees were in conflict with redevelopment, but occurred on non- redeveloped properties because of perceived poor tree health. Residents from redeveloped properties were more likely to plant trees due to being aesthetically pleasing or to replace trees removed during redevelopment. Overall, this research adds to, and complements, the existing literature on the effects of residential property redevelopment on urban forest dynamics. The findings of this research provide empirical support for developing specific legislation or policies about urban forest management during residential property redevelopment. The results also imply that urban foresters should enhance public education on the ecosystem services provided by urban forests and thus minimise the potential for tree removal when undertaking property redevelopment.
