Search

found 1447 results

Images for new building; more images...

Images, Alexander Turnbull Library

Minister for Christchurch Recovery, Gerry Brownlee drives a huge tractor among debris that spells out 'Due Process' and says 'In order to get Christchurch back on its feet again we have to bring parliament to its knees. Context - The minister says he is happy with the speed of the work being done, as he wants tomake sure those involved in the rebuild portion of the recovery effort are well prepared. The bill establishes the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority (Cera) and empowers it to lead reconstruction efforts in Christchurch. It gives Cera specific powers to get information from any source, to requisition and build on land and to carry out demolitions. It can also take over local authorities if they are not working effectively on recovery work. Quantity: 1 digital cartoon(s).

Images, Alexander Turnbull Library

The cartoon shows the Minister for Earthquake Recovery, Gerry Brownlee, who wears a jacket with 'CERA' printed on it, reading from the 'Doomsday Book'. He reads 'The following suburbs and my hopes of a reputation as an effective minister, are now officially listed as munted...' Context - On 23rd June Prime Minister, John Key, officially announced which streets and suburbs in earthquake-ravaged Christchurch would be abandoned. For many residents, there has been too much delay and too little information regarding progress towards resolving questions about which land can or cannot be used for rebuilding for Gerry Brownlee's reputation to remain unsullied. Quantity: 1 digital cartoon(s).

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

On 22 February 2011, Canterbury and its largest city Christchurch experienced its second major earthquake within six months. The region is facing major economic and organisational challenges in the aftermath of these events. Approximately 25% of all buildings in the Christchurch CBD have been “red tagged” or deemed unsafe to enter. The New Zealand Treasury estimates that the combined cost of the February earthquake and the September earthquake is approximately NZ$15 billion[2]. This paper examines the national and regional economic climate prior to the event, discusses the immediate economic implications of this event, and the challenges and opportunities faced by organisations affected by this event. In order to facilitate recovery of the Christchurch area, organisations must adjust to a new norm; finding ways not only to continue functioning, but to grow in the months and years following these earthquakes. Some organisations relocated within days to areas that have been less affected by the earthquakes. Others are taking advantage of government subsidised aid packages to help retain their employees until they can make long-term decisions about the future of their organisation. This paper is framed as a “report from the field” in order to provide insight into the early recovery scenario as it applies to organisations affected by the February 2011 earthquake. It is intended both to inform and facilitate discussion about how organisations can and should pursue recovery in Canterbury, and how organisations can become more resilient in the face of the next crisis.

Audio, Radio New Zealand

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?

Research Papers, Lincoln University

On September the 4th 2010 and February 22nd 2011 the Canterbury region of New Zealand was shaken by two massive earthquakes. This paper is set broadly within the civil defence and emergency management literature and informed by recent work on community participation and social capital in the building of resilient cities. Work in this area indicates a need to recognise both the formal institutional response to the earthquakes as well as the substantive role communities play in their own recovery. The range of factors that facilitate or hinder community involvement also needs to be better understood. This paper interrogates the assumption that recovery agencies and officials are both willing and able to engage communities who are themselves willing and able to be engaged in accordance with recovery best practice. Case studies of three community groups – CanCERN, Greening the Rubble and Gap Filler – illustrate some of the difficulties associated with becoming a community during the disaster recovery phase. Based on my own observations and experiences, combined with data from approximately 50 in-depth interviews with Christchurch residents and representatives from community groups, the Christchurch City Council, the Earthquake Commission and so on, this paper outlines some practical strategies emerging communities may use in the early disaster recovery phase that then strengthens their ability to ‘participate’ in the recovery process.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

Disasters can create the equivalent of 20 years of waste in only a few days. Disaster waste can have direct impacts on public health and safety, and on the environment. The management of such waste has a great direct cost to society in terms of labor, equipment, processing, transport and disposal. Disaster waste management also has indirect costs, in the sense that slow management can slow down a recovery, greatly affecting the ability of commerce and industry to re-start. In addition, a disaster can lead to the disruption of normal solid waste management systems, or result in inappropriate management that leads to expensive environmental remediation. Finally, there are social impacts implicit in disaster waste management decisions because of psychological impact we expect when waste is not cleared quickly or is cleared too quickly. The paper gives an overview of the challenge of disaster waste management, examining issues of waste quantity and composition; waste treatment; environmental, economic, and social impacts; health and safety matters; and planning. Christchurch, New Zealand, and the broader region of Canterbury were impacted during this research by a series of shallow earthquakes. This has led to the largest natural disaster emergency in New Zealand’s history, and the management of approximately 8 million tons of building and infrastructure debris has become a major issue. The paper provides an overview of the status of disaster waste management in Christchurch as a case study. A key conclusion is the vital role of planning in effective disaster waste management. In spite of the frequency of disasters, in most countries the ratio of time spent on planning for disaster waste management to the time spent on normal waste management is extremely low. Disaster waste management also requires improved education or training of those involved in response efforts. All solid waste professionals have a role to play to respond to the challenges of disaster waste management.

Research papers, University of Canterbury Library

The 22 February 2011, Mw6.2-6.3 Christchurch earthquake is the most costly earthquake to affect New Zealand, causing 181 fatalities and severely damaging thousands of residential and commercial buildings, and most of the city lifelines and infrastructure. This manuscript presents an overview of observed geotechnical aspects of this earthquake as well as some of the completed and on-going research investigations. A unique aspect, which is particularly emphasized, is the severity and spatial extent of liquefaction occurring in native soils. Overall, both the spatial extent and severity of liquefaction in the city was greater than in the preceding 4th September 2010 Darfield earthquake, including numerous areas that liquefied in both events. Liquefaction and lateral spreading, variable over both large and short spatial scales, affected commercial structures in the Central Business District (CBD) in a variety of ways including: total and differential settlements and tilting; punching settlements of structures with shallow foundations; differential movements of components of complex structures; and interaction of adjacent structures via common foundation soils. Liquefaction was most severe in residential areas located to the east of the CBD as a result of stronger ground shaking due to the proximity to the causative fault, a high water table approximately 1m from the surface, and soils with composition and states of high susceptibility and potential for liquefaction. Total and differential settlements, and lateral movements, due to liquefaction and lateral spreading is estimated to have severely compromised 15,000 residential structures, the majority of which otherwise sustained only minor to moderate damage directly due to inertial loading from ground shaking. Liquefaction also had a profound effect on lifelines and other infrastructure, particularly bridge structures, and underground services. Minor damage was also observed at flood stop banks to the north of the city, which were more severely impacted in the 4th September 2010 Darfield earthquake. Due to the large high-frequency ground motion in the Port hills numerous rock falls and landslides also occurred, resulting in several fatalities and rendering some residential areas uninhabitable.