As a result of the 4 September 2010 Darfield earthquake and the more damaging 22 February 2011 Christchurch earthquake, considerable damage occurred to a significant number of buildings in Christchurch. The damage that occurred to the Christchurch Roman Catholic Cathedral of the Blessed Sacrament (commonly known as the Christchurch Basilica) as a result of the Canterbury earthquakes is reported, and the observed failure modes are identified. A previous strengthening intervention is outlined and the estimated capacity of the building is discussed. This strengthening was completed in 2004, and addressed the worst aspects of the building's seismic vulnerability. Urgent work was undertaken post-earthquake to secure parts of the building in order to limit damage and prevent collapse of unstable parts of the building. The approach taken for this securing is outlined, and the performance of the building and the previously installed earthquake strengthening intervention is evaluated.A key consideration throughout the project was the interaction between the structural securing requirements that were driven by the requirement to limit damage and mitigate hazards, and the heritage considerations. Lessons learnt from the strengthening that was carried out, the securing work undertaken, and the approach taken in making the building "safe" are discussed. Some conclusions are drawn with respect to the effectiveness of strengthening similar building types, and the approach taken to secure the building under active seismic conditions. AM - Accepted Manuscript
A series of earthquakes has forced Christchurch to re-plan and rebuild. Discussions about rebuilding strategies have emphasized the intention of making it a city for the future, sustainable and vibrant. This paper discusses the relationship between microclimate and urban culture in Christchurch based upon the concept of urban comfort. It explores the relationships between environment, people and culture to help understand the local requirements for urban landscape design. In this paper we claim that cultural requirements also should be taken into account when looking for sustainable strategies. A distinctive feature of this research is its focus on the way people are adapting to both surviving prequake and new post‐quake environments. Preliminary findings from the first year of field work using participant observation and 61 in‐depth interviews with Christchurch residents are presented. The interviews were carried out in a variety of urban settings including: established sites (places sustaining relatively little damage) and emerging sites (those requiring rebuilding) during 2011‐2012. Evidence from the interviews highlight future challenges regarding sustainability and urban comfort issues. Post‐quake Christchurch presents a remarkable opportunity to design an urban landscape which provides environmental, economic, social and cultural sustainability. However, to achieve successful outcomes it is fundamental to respond to the local culture. Field data suggest that the strong connections between urban and rural settings present in local culture, lifestyle and landscape generate a particular aesthetic and recreation preference for urban spaces, which should be considered in the urban landscape design strategies.
Though there is a broad consensus that communities play a key role in disaster response and recovery, most of the existing work in this area focuses on the activities of donor agencies, formal civil defence authorities, and local/central government. Consequently, there is a paucity of research addressing the on-going actions and activities undertaken by communities and ‘emergent groups’ , particularly as they develop after the immediate civil defence or ‘response’ phase is over. In an attempt to address this gap, this inventory of community-led recovery initiatives was undertaken approximately one year after the most devastating February 2011 earthquake. It is part of on-going project at Lincoln University documenting – and seeking a better understanding of - various emergent communities’ roles in recovery, their challenges, and strategies for overcoming them. This larger project also seeks to better understand how collaborative work between informal and formal recovery efforts might be facilitated at different stages of the process. This inventory was conducted over the December 2011 – February 2012 period and builds on Landcare Research’s Christchurch Earthquake Activity Inventory which was a similar snapshot taken in April 2011. The intention behind conducting this updated inventory is to gain a longitudinal perspective of how community-led recovery activities evolve over time. Each entry is ordered alphabetically and contact details have been provided where possible. A series of keywords have also been assigned that describe the main attributes of each activity to assist searches within this document.This inventory was supported by the Lincoln University Research Fund and the Royal Society Marsden Fund.
Earthquake events can be sudden, stressful, unpredictable, and uncontrollable events in which an individual’s internal and external assumptions of their environment may be disrupted. A number of studies have found depression, and other psychological symptoms may be common after natural disasters. They have also found an association between depression, losses and disruptions for survivors. The present study compared depression symptoms in two demographically matched communities differentially affected by the Canterbury (New Zealand) earthquakes. Hypotheses were informed by the theory of learned helplessness (Abramson, Seligman & Teasdale, 1978). A door-to-door survey was conducted in a more physically affected community sample (N=67) and a relatively unaffected community sample (N=67), 4 months after the February 2011 earthquake. Participants were again assessed approximately 10 months after the quake. Measures of depression, acute stress, anxiety, aftershock anxiety, losses, physical disruptions and psychological disruptions were taken. In addition, prior psychological symptoms, medication, alcohol and cigarette use were assessed. Participants in the more affected community reported higher depression scores than the less affected community. Overall, elevated depressive score at time 2 were predicted by depression at time 1, acute stress and anxiety symptoms at time 2, physical disruptions following the quake and psychosocial functioning disruptions at time 2. These results suggest the influence of acute stress, anxiety and disruptions in predicting depression sometime after an earthquake. Supportive interventions directed towards depression, and other psychological symptoms, may prove helpful in psychological adjustment following ongoing disruptive stressors and uncontrollable seismic activity.
At 4.35am on Saturday 4 September 2010, a magnitude 7.1 earthquake struck near the township of Darfield in Canterbury leading to widespread damage in Christchurch and the wider central Canterbury region. Though it was reported no lives were lost, that was not entirely correct. Over 3,000 animals perished as a result of the earthquake and 99% of these deaths would have been avoidable if appropriate mitigation measures had been in place. Deaths were predominantly due to zoological vulnerability of birds in captive production farms. Other problems included lack of provision of animal welfare at evacuation centres, issues associated with multiple lost and found pet services, evacuation failure due to pet separation and stress impact on dairy herds and associated milk production. The Canterbury Earthquake has highlighted concerns over a lack of animal emergency welfare planning and capacity in New Zealand, an issue that is being progressed by the National Animal Welfare Emergency Management Group. As animal emergency management becomes better understood by emergency management and veterinary professionals, it is more likely that both sectors will have greater demands placed upon them by national guidelines and community expectations to ensure provisions are made to afford protection of animals in times of disaster. A subsequent and more devastating earthquake struck the region on Monday 22 February 2011; this article however is primarily focused on the events pertaining to the September 4 event.
It is reported that natural disasters such as earthquakes impact significantly upon survivors’ psychological wellbeing. Little is known however about the impact of disasters upon the professional performance of survivor employees such as teachers. Using a survey research design with an emphasis upon a qualitative data collection, 39 teachers from 6 schools in the eastern suburbs of Christchurch, New Zealand rated the impact of the 2010 and 2011 earthquakes upon their professional performance and 13 volunteered to participate in a follow up focus group interviews. The data collected was interpreted via three theoretical/policy frameworks: the New Zealand Teacher Council mandatory requirements for teachers, the basic psychological needs theory and the inclusive transactional model of stress. Contrary to expectations, relationships with learners, colleagues, learner's whanau (family) and the wider community were on the whole perceived to be positively impacted by the earthquakes, while participation in professional development was regarded in more negative terms. The results indicated that teachers were able to continue (despite some stress reactions) because the basic psychological needs of being a teacher were not disrupted and indeed in some cases were enhanced. A model of teacher performance following a natural disaster is presented. Recommendations and implications (including future research undertakings) arising from the study are indicated. It was noted that given the importance of the school in supporting community recovery following a disaster, support for them and consideration of the role of teachers and the preparation for this should be given some priority.
Background: Earthquakes are found to have lingering post-disaster effects on children that can be present for months or years after the disaster, including hyperarousal symptoms. Young children have the most difficulties in regulating their emotions, especially when they are highly aroused. Colouring-in mandala designs have been found to reduce hyperarousal symptoms of stress in young adults. The purpose of this study was to determine if the same effects of colouring-in mandalas would be seen with children showing signs of hyperarousal. Research Question: To identify what effect colouring-in mandala designs would have on the heart rate in a young child showing signs of hyperarousal. Method: Following approved procedures for informed consent, two 6-year-old girls from a Christchurch primary school were chosen for the study. Heart rate was measured using a Fitbit in a single subject design. The baseline, colouring-in and a second baseline phase were conducted during mathematics. The participants and their teacher reported on arousal, enjoyment, and positive and problem behaviours. The study took 26 school days to complete. Results: Compared with baseline, the average heart rate data showed no decrease in heart rate (i.e., calming effect) during the mandala colouring-in task phase. Conclusions: The participants enjoyed colouring-in the mandalas, but the average heart rate data did not show that colouring-in pre-drawn designs reduced heart rate, a measure of arousal. Major study limitations included; not having suitable participants or a suitable setting for the colouring-in task, and not being able to observe both participants.
KIRITAPU ALLAN to the Minister of Finance: What recent reports has he seen on the New Zealand economy? Hon PAULA BENNETT to the Prime Minister: Does she stand by all her Government’s statements, policies, and actions? Hon AMY ADAMS to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by all of the Government’s decisions, statements, and actions in relation to his portfolio? Hon RUTH DYSON to the Minister for Courts: What recent announcements has he made about settling long-standing insurance disputes following the Canterbury earthquakes? Hon JUDITH COLLINS to the Minister of Housing and Urban Development: Is the KiwiBuild programme delivering good value for money for New Zealand taxpayers? Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH to the Minister of Transport: Does he stand by all his statements, policies, and actions? GINNY ANDERSEN to the Minister of Police: What recent announcements has he made about the firearms buy-back scheme? Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE to the Minister of Health: How is the wellbeing of cancer patients in New Zealand affected by the Government’s policies and actions in health? TAMATI COFFEY to the Minister for Whānau Ora: What recent announcements has he made about Whānau Ora? MARK PATTERSON to the Minister of Internal Affairs: What recent announcement has she made regarding recognition of Fire and Emergency New Zealand volunteers? Hon NIKKI KAYE to the Associate Minister of Education: How many of the 600 learning support coordinators she promised does she estimate will be working in schools by the beginning of term 1 of the 2020 school year? ANDREW BAYLY to the Minister of Revenue: What concerns, if any, does he have regarding the operation of the latest phased rollout of the IRD Business Transformation Programme, especially in relation to KiwiSaver PIE tax arrangements?
METIRIA TUREI to the Minister of Education: In relation to the proposed school closures in Christchurch, does she agree with Manning Intermediate head Richard Chambers that "The Minister promised us that we would have two years no matter what. It was a guarantee she made to our community repeatedly, it was unequivocal"? MAGGIE BARRY to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on the New Zealand economy? DAVID SHEARER to the Prime Minister: Does he have confidence in all his Ministers? Dr CAM CALDER to the Minister of Education: In the context of the Government's Christchurch schools announcement, what is the process going forward? Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE to the Minister for Building and Construction: Does he believe that the contracting system currently used in the construction industry works appropriately and fairly in circumstances of insolvency; if so, why? NICKY WAGNER to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: What progress is being made on making the Christchurch city centre safe for rebuilding? IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements on withdrawing troops from Afghanistan? TIM MACINDOE to the Minister of Science and Innovation: How is the Government focussing New Zealand's science funding investment, and encouraging Kiwis to get involved in science? DAVID SHEARER to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements? ALFRED NGARO to the Minister for the Community and Voluntary Sector: What recent announcements has she made regarding government support for volunteering? EUGENIE SAGE to the Minister of Local Government: Does he have any concerns about the Hawkes Bay Regional Council's forecast of 530 percent increase in its debt by 2021/22? Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Prime Minister: Does he still have confidence in the Associate Minister of Health; if so, why?
Beam-column joints are addressed in the context of current design procedures and performance criteria for reinforced concrete ductile frames subjected to large earthquake motions. Attention is drawn to the significant differences between the pertinent requirements of concrete design codes of New Zealand and the United States for such joints. The difference between codes stimulated researchers and structural engineers of the United States, New Zealand, Japan and China to undertake an international collaborative research project. The major investigators of the project selected issues and set guidelines for co-ordinated testing of joint specimens designed according to the codes of the countries. The tests conducted at the University of Canterbury, New Zealand, are reported. Three full-scale beam-column-slab joint assemblies were designed according to existing code requirements of NZS 3101:1982, representing an interior joint of a one-way frame, an interior joint of a two-way frame, and an exterior joint of a two-way frame. Quasistatic cyclic loading simulating severe earthquake actions was applied. The overall performance of each test assembly was found to be satisfactory in terms of stiffness, strength and ductility. The joint and column remained essentially undamaged while plastic hinges formed in the beams. The weak beam-strong column behaviour sought in the design, desirable in tall ductile frames designed for earthquake resistance, was therefore achieved. Using the laws of statics and test observations, the action and flow of forces from the slabs, beams and column to the joint cores are explored. The effects of bond performance and the seismic shear resistance of the joints, based on some postulated mechanisms, are examined. Implications of the test results on code specifications are discussed and design recomendations are made.
Reconnaissance reports have highlighted the poor performance of non-ductile reinforced concrete buildings during the 2010-11 Canterbury earthquakes. These buildings are widely expected to result in significant losses under future earthquakes due to their seismic vulnerability and prevalence in densely populated urban areas. Wellington, for example, contains more than 70 pre-1970s multi-storey reinforced concrete buildings, ranging in height from 5 to 18 storeys. This study seeks to characterise the seismic performance and evaluate the likely failure modes of a typical pre-1970s reinforced concrete building in Wellington, by conducting advanced numerical simulations to evaluate its 3D nonlinear dynamic response. A representative 9-storey office building constructed in 1951 is chosen for this study and modelled in the finite element analysis programme DIANA, using a previously developed and validated approach to predict the failure modes of doubly reinforced walls with confined boundary regions. The structure consists of long walls and robust framing elements resulting in a stiff lateral load resisting system. Barbell-shaped walls are flanked by stiff columns with sufficient transverse reinforcement to serve as boundary regions. Curved shell elements are used to model the walls and their boundary columns, for which the steel reinforcement is explicitly modelled. Line elements are used to model the frame elements. The steel reinforcement in each member is explicitly modelled. The floor slabs are modelled using elastic shell elements. The model is analysed under short and long duration ground motions selected to match site specific targets in Wellington at the DBE and MCE intensity levels. The observed response of the building including drift profiles at each intesity level, strain localization effects around wall openings, and the influence of bidirectional loading are discussed.
Liquefaction is a phenomenon that results in a loss of strength and stability of a saturated soil mass due to dynamic excitation such as that imposed by an earthquake. The granular nature of New Zealand soils and the location of many of our cities and towns on fluvial foundations are such that the effects of liquefaction can be very important. Research was undertaken to build on the past work undertaken at the University of Canterbury studying the effects of the 1929 Murchison earthquake, the 1968 Inangahua earthquake and the 1991 Hawks Crag earthquakes on the West Coast. Additional archival information has been gathered from newspapers and reports and from discussions with people who experienced one or all of these large earthquakes that occurred on the West Coast during the 20th Century. Further, some twenty Cone Penetrometer Tests were carried out, with varying success, in Greymouth and Karamea using the Department of Civil Engineering's Drilling Rig. These, combined with the basic site investigation information, consolidate and add to the liquefaction case history data bank at the University of Canterbury. Many of the sites have liquefied in some but not all of the three earthquakes and thus provide both upper and lower bounds for the calibration of empirical models. While a lack of knowledge of the 1929 source location reduces the value of information from that event, the data form a useful set of liquefaction case histories and will become more so as further earthquakes occur. A list of critical sites for checking of the future earthquakes is provided and recommendations are made for the installation of downhole arrays of accelerometers and pore water pressure transducers at a number of sites.
Since September 2010 Christchurch, New Zealand, has experienced a number of significant earthquakes. In addition to loss of life, this has resulted in significant destruction to infrastructure, including road corridors; and buildings, especially in the central city, where it has been estimated that 60% of buildings will need to be rebuilt. The rebuild and renewal of Christchurch has initially focused on the central city under the direction of the Christchurch City Council. This has seen the development of a draft Central City Plan that includes a number of initiatives that should encourage the use of the bicycle as a mode of transport. The rebuild and renewal of the remainder of the city is under the jurisdiction of a specially set up authority, the Christchurch Earthquake Recovery Authority (CERA). CERA reports to an appointed Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery, who is responsible for coordinating the planning, spending, and actual rebuilding work needed for the recovery. Their plans for the renewal and rebuild of the remainder of the city are not yet known. This presentation will examine the potential role of the bicycle as a mode of transport in a rebuilt Christchurch. The presentation will start by describing the nature of damage to Christchurch as a result of the 2010 and 2011 earthquakes. It will then review the Central City Plan (the plan for the rebuild and renewal for central Christchurch) focusing particularly on those aspects that affect the role of the bicycle. The potential for the success of this plan will be assessed. It will specifically reflect on this in light of some recent research in Christchurch that examined the importance of getting infrastructure right if an aim of transport planning is to attract new people to cycle for utilitarian reasons.
The current study examined the psychological effects of recurring earthquake aftershocks in the city of Christchurch, New Zealand, which began in September 2010. Although it has been identified that exposure to ongoing adverse events such as continuing terrorist attacks generally leads to the development of increasing symptomology over time, differences in perceived controllability and blame between man-made and natural adverse events may contribute to differences in symptom trajectories. Residents of two Christchurch suburbs differentially affected by the earthquakes (N = 128) were assessed on measures of acute stress disorder, generalised anxiety, and depression, at two time points approximately 4-5 months apart, in order to determine whether symptoms intensified or declined over time in the face of ongoing aftershocks. At time 1, clinically significant levels of acute stress were identified in both suburbs, whereas clinical elevations in depression and anxiety were only evident in the most affected suburb. By time 2, both suburbs had fallen below the clinical range on all three symptom types, identifying a pattern of habituation to the aftershocks. Acute stress symptoms at time 2 were the most highly associated with the aftershocks, compared to symptoms of generalised anxiety and depression which were identified by participant reports to be more likely associated with other earthquake-related factors, such as insurance troubles and less frequent socialisation. The finding that exposure to ongoing earthquake aftershocks leads to a decline in symptoms over time may have important implications for the assessment of traumatic stress-related disorders, and provision of services following natural, as compared to man-made, adverse events.
We examined changes in psychological distress experienced by residents of Christchurch following two catastrophic earthquakes in late 2010 and early 2011, using data from the New Zealand Attitudes and Values Study (NZAVS), a national probability panel study of New Zealand adults. Analyses focused on the 267 participants (172 women, 95 men) who were living in central Christchurch in 2009 (i.e., before the Christchurch earthquakes), and who also provided complete responses to our yearly panel questionnaire conducted in late 2010 (largely between the two major earthquakes), late 2011, and late 2012. Levels of psychological distress were similar across the different regions of central Christchurch immediately following the September 2010 earthquake, and remained comparable across regions in 2011. By late 2012, however, average levels of psychological distress in the regions had diverged as a function of the amount of property damage experienced within each given region. Specifically, participants in the least damaged region (i.e., the Fendalton-Waimairi and Riccarton-Wigram wards) experienced greater drops in psychological distress than did those in the moderately damaged region (i.e., across the Spreydon-Heathcote and Hagley- Ferrymead wards). However, the level of psychological distress reported by participants in the most damaged region (i.e., across Shirley-Papanui and Burwood-Pegasus) were not significantly different to those in the least damaged region of central Christchurch. These findings suggest that different patterns of psychological recovery emerged across the different regions of Christchurch, with the moderately damaged region faring the worst, but only after the initial shock of the destruction had passed.
The Canterbury earthquakes of 2010 and 2011 caused significant damage and disruption to the city of Christchurch, New Zealand. A Royal Commission was established to report on the causes of building failure as a result of the earthquakes as well as look at the legal and best-practice requirements for buildings in New Zealand Central Business Districts. The Royal Commission made 189 recommendations on a variety of matters including managing damaged buildings after an earthquake, the adequacy of building codes and standards, and the processes of seismic assessments of existing buildings to determine their earthquake vulnerability. In response the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, the agency responsible for administering building regulation in New Zealand, established a work programme to assist with the Canterbury rebuild and to implement the lessons learned throughout New Zealand. The five primary work streams in the programme are: • Facilitating the Canterbury Rebuild • Structural Performance and Design Standards • Geotechnical and structural guidance • Existing Building Resilience • Post Disaster Building Management This paper provides more detail on each of the work streams. There has been significant collaboration between the New Zealand Government and the research community, technical societies, and engineering consultants, both within New Zealand and internationally, to deliver the programme and improve the resilience of the New Zealand built environment. This has presented major challenges for an extremely busy industry in the aftermath of the Canterbury earthquakes. The paper identifies the items of work that have been completed and the work that is still in progress at the time of writing.
Located on the edge of two tectonic plates, New Zealand has numerous fault lines and seismic risk across the whole country. The way this risk is communicated affects whether people prepare effectively or at all. Research has shown that perceptions of risk are affected by slight changes in wording, and that probabilities commonly reported by experts and media are often interpreted subjectively based on context. In the context of volcanoes, research has found that given a certain probability of a volcano in a specific time window, people perceive risk as higher in later time intervals within that window. The present study examines this pattern with regard to earthquakes and aftershocks in the New Zealand context. Participants in both Wellington (N = 102) and Christchurch (N = 98) were presented an expert statement of earthquake risk within a given time window in Wellington and aftershock risk in Christchurch, and asked to rate their perception of risk in specific intervals across the time window. For a Wellington earthquake, participants perceived risk as incrementally higher toward the end of the 50 year time window whereas for a Christchurch aftershock, risk perception increased slightly for the first three intervals of the 12 month time window. Likelihood of preparing was constant over the time windows, with Wellington citizens rating themselves more likely than Christchurch citizens to prepare for either an earthquake or aftershock, irrespective of current level of preparedness. These findings suggest that people view earthquakes as more likely later toward the end of a given time window and that they view aftershocks very differently to scientific predictions.
This report provides an initial overview and gap analysis of the multi-hazards interactions that might affect fluvial and pluvial flooding (FPF) hazard in the Ōpāwaho Heathcote catchment. As per the terms of reference, this report focuses on a one-way analysis of the potential effects of multi-hazards on FPF hazard, as opposed to a more complex multi-way analysis of interactions between all hazards. We examined the relationship between FPF hazard and hazards associated with the phenomena of tsunamis; coastal erosion; coastal inundation; groundwater; earthquakes; and mass movements. Tsunamis: Modelling research indicates the worst-case tsunami scenarios potentially affecting the Ōpāwaho Heathcote catchment are far field. Under low probability, high impact tsunami scenarios waves could travel into Pegasus Bay and the Avon-Heathcote Estuary Ihutai, reaching the mouth and lower reaches of the Heathcote catchment and river, potentially inundating and eroding shorelines in sub-catchments 1 to 5, and temporarily blocking fluvial drainage more extensively. Any flooding infrastructure or management actions implemented in the area of tsunami inundation would ideally be resilient to tsunami-induced inundation and erosion. Model results currently available are a first estimate of potential tsunami inundation under contemporary sea and land level conditions. In terms of future large tsunami events, these models likely underestimate effects in riverside sub-catchments, as well as effects under future sea level, shoreline and other conditions. Also of significance when considering different FPF management structures, it is important to be mindful that certain types of flood structures can ‘trap’ inundating water coming from ocean directions, leading to longer flood durations and salinization issues. Coastal erosion: Model predictions indicate that sub-catchments 1 to 3 could potentially be affected by coastal erosion by the timescale of 2065, with sub-catchments 1-6 predicted to be potentially affected by coastal erosion by the time scale of 2115. In addition, the predicted open coast effects of this hazard should not be ignored since any significant changes in the New Brighton Spit open coast would affect erosion rates and exposure of the landward estuary margins, including the shorelines of the Ōpāwaho Heathcote catchment. Any FPF flooding infrastructure or management activities planned for the potentially affected sub-catchments needs to recognise the possibility of coastal erosion, and to have a planned response to the predicted potential shoreline translation. Coastal inundation: Model predictions indicate coastal inundation hazards could potentially affect sub-catchments 1 to 8 by 2065, with a greater area and depth of inundation possible for these same sub-catchments by 2115. Low-lying areas of the Ōpāwaho Heathcote catchment and river channel that discharge into the estuary are highly vulnerable to coastal inundation since elevated ocean and estuary water levels can block the drainage of inland systems, compounding FPF hazards. Coastal inundation can overwhelm stormwater and other drainage network components, and render river dredging options ineffective at best, flood enhancing at worst. A distinction can be made between coastal inundation and coastal erosion in terms of the potential impacts on affected land and assets, including flood infrastructure, and the implications for acceptance, adaptation, mitigation, and/or modification options. That is, responding to inundation could include structural and/or building elevation solutions, since unlike erosion, inundation does not necessarily mean the loss of land. Groundwater: Groundwater levels are of significant but variable concern when examining flooding hazards and management options in the Ōpāwaho Heathcote catchment due to variability in soils, topographies, elevations and proximities to riverine and estuarine surface waterbodies. Much of the Canterbury Plains part of the Ōpāwaho Heathcote catchment has a water table that is at a median depth of <1m from the surface (with actual depth below surface varying seasonally, inter-annually and during extreme meteorological events), though the water table depth rapidly shifts to >6m below the surface in the upper Plains part of the catchment (sub-catchments 13 to 15). Parts of Waltham/Linwood (sub-catchments 5 & 6) and Spreydon (sub-catchment 10) have extensive areas with a particularly high water table, as do sub-catchments 18, 19 and 20 south of the river. In all of the sub-catchments where groundwater depth below surface is shallow, it is necessary to be mindful of cascading effects on liquefaction hazard during earthquake events, including earthquake-induced drainage network and stormwater infrastructure damage. In turn, subsidence induced by liquefaction and other earthquake processes during the CES directly affected groundwater depth below surface across large parts of the central Ōpāwaho Heathcote catchment. The estuary margin of the catchment also faces increasing future challenges with sea level rise, which has the potential to elevate groundwater levels in these areas, compounding existing liquefaction and other earthquake associated multi-hazards. Any increases in subsurface runoff due to drainage system, development or climate changes are also of concern for the loess covered hill slopes due to the potential to enhance mass movement hazards. Earthquakes: Earthquake associated vertical ground displacement and liquefaction have historically affected, or are in future predicted to affect, all Ōpāwaho Heathcote sub-catchments. During the CES, these phenomena induced a significant cascades of changes in the city’s drainage systems, including: extensive vertical displacement and liquefaction induced damage to stormwater ‘greyware’, reducing functionality of the stormwater system; damage to the wastewater system which temporarily lowered groundwater levels and increased stormwater drainage via the wastewater network on the one hand, creating a pollution multi-hazard for FPF on the other hand; liquefaction and vertical displacement induced river channel changes affected drainage capacities; subsidence induced losses in soakage and infiltration capacities; changes occurred in topographic drainage conductivity; estuary subsidence (mainly around the Ōtākaro Avon rivermouth) increased both FPF and coastal inundation hazards; estuary bed uplift (severe around the Ōpāwaho Heathcote margins), reduced tidal prisms and increased bed friction, producing an overall reduction the waterbody’s capacity to efficiently flush catchment floodwaters to sea; and changes in estuarine and riverine ecosystems. All such possible effects need to be considered when evaluating present and future capacities of the Ōpāwaho Heathcote catchment FPF management systems. These phenomena are particularly of concern in the Ōpāwaho Heathcote catchment since stormwater networks must deal with constraints imposed by stream and river channels (past and present), estuarine shorelines and complex hill topography. Mass movements: Mass movements are primarily a risk in the Port Hills areas of the Ōpāwaho Heathcote catchment (sub-catchments 1, 2, 7, 9, 11, 16, 21), though there are one or two small but susceptible areas on the banks of the Ōpāwaho Heathcote River. Mass movements in the form of rockfalls and debris flows occurred on the Port Hills during the CES, resulting in building damage, fatalities and evacuations. Evidence has also been found of earthquake-triggered tunnel gully collapsesin all Port Hill Valleys. Follow-on effects of these mass movements are likely to occur in major future FPF and other hazard events. Of note, elevated groundwater levels, coastal inundation, earthquakes (including liquefaction and other effects), and mass movement exhibit the most extensive levels of multi-hazard interaction with FPF hazard. Further, all of the analysed multi-hazard interactions except earthquakes were found to consistently produce increases in the FPF hazard. The implications of these analyses are that multihazard interactions generally enhance the FPF hazard in the Ōpāwaho Heathcote catchment. Hence, management plans which exclude adjustments for multi-hazard interactions are likely to underestimate the FPF hazard in numerous different ways. In conclusion, although only a one-way analysis of the potential effects of selected multi-hazards on FPF hazard, this review highlights that the Ōpāwaho Heathcote catchment is an inherently multi- hazard prone environment. The implications of the interactions and process linkages revealed in this report are that several significant multi-hazard influences and process interactions must be taken into account in order to design a resilient FPF hazard management strategy.
Environmental assessment in New Zealand is governed by the provisions of the Resource Management Act (RMA) 1991. The Act requires persons wishing to undertake certain activities to apply for resource consent from their local or regional council - a procedure termed the Resource Consent Process. The key component of a resource consent application is an Assessment of Environmental Effects (AEE) report; a statement of the environmental effects of a proposed activity. Problems arise when environmental assessments are complicated by uncertain and abnormal circumstances such as natural hazards. Natural hazards (including earthquakes, floods, tsunami, and coastal erosion) can be catastrophic to an environment. If hazards are not avoided or successfully mitigated, they can result in serious consequences to proposed development and to the environment which the proposal relates. The aim of this study is to assess the adequacy of the resource consent process (as outlined in the Resource Management Act 1991) for dealing with proposed development affected by natural hazards. This study reviews the context of the resource consent process for dealing with natural hazards to identify potential issues in the assessment process. Guidance criteria for assessing natural hazards (termed Natural Hazard Assessment) are developed to evaluate against two resource consent applications affected by natural hazards. The findings of the consent process review and case study evaluation are discussed to determine the adequacy of the consent process for dealing with natural hazards. From the review of the consent process it was evident that the process has a number of problems for accommodating natural hazards into the assessment. Although many important traits are provided for in the process, such traits are not always reflected in environmental assessments. Evaluation of two resource consent applications against the process of Natural Hazard Assessment (NHA) showed that these consent applications did not adequately detail key information relating to natural hazards. Many problems evident in these applications were not amended by the Consent Authorities in the review process and subsequently consent was granted to information-deficient applications. Problematic issues identified in this study include: • A distinct lack of guidance (legal or otherwise) for the applicant and Consent Authority regarding the boundaries of inclusion of an effect; • Deficiencies in planning documents are reflected in AEE reports, the review of the consent application and in the end-decision; • Under-utilisation of "experts" throughout the consent process; • Minimal identification and account for the degree of uncertainty throughout the consent process; • Resource consents are being granted even though information in consent applications, and the means for assessing the information is deficient. These issues reflect that decisions are not being made based on all elements involved in a potential hazard. Subsequently, the resource consent process is not adequate for dealing with all aspects of natural hazards. The Natural Hazard Assessment process provides educated assessment criteria to assess development affected by natural hazards. By accounting for the problems evident in the consent process, the introduction of a three-tier identification, risk and vulnerability assessment, and evaluation process to account for uncertainties, Natural Hazard Assessment provides a platform for a thorough assessment of natural hazards. The application of the principles of Natural Hazard Assessment to the consent applications affected by natural hazards showed that many key issues were not covered in the assessment under the consent process. The nature of a natural event is that one may not occur in a given region over many lifetimes, however they will occur at some stage and planning and environmental assessment needs to provide for the associated hazards. Implementation of Natural Hazard Assessment is needed to help provide answers for the problems experienced in the resource consent process. Natural Hazard Assessment would allow decision-makers to make informed judgements on the situation at hand, leading to better planning and land-use options. Change to current practice is needed, as following the current path of environmental assessment will be the hazard in the end.
SARAH DOWIE to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on New Zealand’s trade exports? EUGENIE SAGE to the Minister for Land Information: Has he asked Land Information New Zealand to withdraw the 997-hectare Riversdale Flats from the proposed sale of Mt White Station pastoral lease; if not, why not? PHIL TWYFORD to the Minister for Social Housing: Will she confirm that as of 30 June the Government has only delivered 323 of the additional 1,400 emergency beds they promised at the start of November last year? STUART SMITH to the Minister of Transport: What update can he provide on the reinstatement of State Highway 1 following the Kaikōura earthquakes? STEFFAN BROWNING to the Minister for the Environment: Does he have confidence in the Environmental Protection Authority’s review of glyphosate? Dr DAVID CLARK to the Minister of Health: Does he support the establishment of a cross-agency working group with Canterbury District Health Board on their finances, funding, and facilities? DAVID SEYMOUR to the Minister of Health: Does he stand by all his answers to Oral Question No. 6 on 6 June regarding intraoperative radiotherapy for breast cancer? BARBARA KURIGER to the Minister of Immigration: What recent announcements has he made in relation to immigration settings? Hon NANAIA MAHUTA to the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations: Does he believe that the signing of the Pare Hauraki Collective Settlement with the inclusion of redress disputed by Tauranga Moana iwi is a breach of Te Tiriti o Waitangi? CHRIS BISHOP to the Associate Minister of Education: What recent announcements have the Government made on school property in the Wellington region? PITA PARAONE to the Minister for Māori Development: Does he stand by all his statements; if so, why? JENNY SALESA to the Minister of Education: Is she satisfied that the Government is doing all that it can to ensure an adequate supply of teachers, particularly in Auckland?
Questions to Ministers 1. CRAIG FOSS to the Minister of Finance: What challenges does the Government face in putting together Budget 2011? 2. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his pre-Budget statement "The key sector which is not saving right now is the Government"; if so, what steps has he taken to increase government revenue? 3. Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement "…we can use this time to transform the economy to make us stronger…"; if so, does this transformation involve an economy that uses fewer natural resources and produces less pollution? 4. Hon PHIL GOFF to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements on KiwiSaver? 5. NICKY WAGNER to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: What reports has he received on progress made to provide winter heating for residents affected by the Canterbury earthquakes? 6. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Prime Minister: What advice did he receive from the most recent food bank he visited about the current cost of living? 7. JACQUI DEAN to the Minister for the Environment: What practical initiatives is the Government taking in preparation for Rugby World Cup 2011 to protect the environment and New Zealand's important clean green brand? 8. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Minister of Finance: What was the annual rate of GDP growth for the year ended December 2010 projected in Budget 2010, and what was the actual rate of growth for that period according to Statistics New Zealand? 9. AARON GILMORE to the Minister of Education: What recent decisions have been made regarding schooling in Christchurch? 10. SUE MORONEY to the Minister of Education: When was construction completed on the new early childhood education centre at Weymouth Primary School and why is the centre empty? 11. COLIN KING to the Minister of Agriculture: What steps has the Government recently taken to support innovation in the Manuka honey industry? 12. CARMEL SEPULONI to the Minister of Justice: Does he stand by his statement "This Government is committed to ensuring that everyone…has access to justice"?
Questions to Ministers 1. Hon PHIL GOFF to the Prime Minister: Does he have confidence in all his Ministers? 2. METIRIA TUREI to the Acting Minister of Energy and Resources: What emergency response, safety, and environmental protection provisions, if any, were included in the permit granted to Anadarko Petroleum Corporation to undertake deepwater oil exploration and drilling in the Canterbury Basin? 3. SIMON BRIDGES to the Minister of Finance: What signs are there that New Zealanders are saving more? 4. GRANT ROBERTSON to the Prime Minister: Does he have confidence in his Minister of Health? 5. JOHN HAYES to the Minister for Communications and Information Technology: What benefit will rural communities receive from the Rural Broadband Initiative signed last month? 6. SUE MORONEY to the Prime Minister: Does he have confidence in his Minister of Education? 7. MELISSA LEE to the Minister of Corrections: How are Corrections Department staff showing support for their Christchurch colleagues following the earthquake? 8. DAVID SHEARER to the Minister of Defence: Does he agree with all of the statements made by the Minister of Foreign Affairs on that Minister's use of RNZAF aircraft to travel to Vanuatu in February of this year? 9. KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI to the Minister of Customs: What recent reports has he received on the success of SmartGate? 10. CLARE CURRAN to the Prime Minister: Does he have confidence in the Minister for Communications and Information Technology? 11. KEITH LOCKE to the Minister of Defence: Did the New Zealand Defence Force, when preparing their response dated 2 May 2011, talk to any of the Afghan civilians interviewed by Jon Stephenson in the Metro article "Eyes Wide Shut" and seen on the subsequent 60 Minutes TV special; if so, who? 12. HONE HARAWIRA to the Acting Minister of Energy and Resources: Does the survey and drilling arrangement between the Government and Petrobras have the prior and informed consent of Te-Whanau-a-Apanui; if not, will this lack of consent breach the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples?
Questions to Ministers 1. AMY ADAMS to the Minister of Finance: What will be the focus of the Budget on 19 May? 2. Hon PHIL GOFF to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements on the sale of State-owned assets? 3. SHANE ARDERN to the Minister of Customs: What recent reports has he received regarding interceptions of methamphetamine by Customs officers at the border? 4. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement that "we've done as good a job as we can in the conditions we've got to try and help low-income New Zealanders"? 5. KEITH LOCKE to the Minister of Defence: Has New Zealand's SAS detained anyone during its operations or joint operations with other forces, since being redeployed to Afghanistan in 2009? 6. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by his statement that "I have seen almost no criticism of the Government's plan to rebalance the economy" given the statement from the Chair of the 2025 Taskforce, Don Brash, that "There is certainly no evidence yet that current policies will deliver the kind of accelerated growth we need"? 7. NICKY WAGNER to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: What process will the Government use to rebuild and restore damaged infrastructure in Canterbury? 8. Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Is he satisfied that the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Act 2011 provides him with all the powers necessary to facilitate the recovery of Canterbury? 9. Hon JOHN BOSCAWEN to the Minister of Finance: By how much has Government expenditure increased as a percentage of GDP since he became Minister of Finance? 10. DAVID SHEARER to the Prime Minister: Does he have confidence in his Minister of Foreign Affairs? 11. KATRINA SHANKS to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: Why has the Government announced a Green Paper on how we value, nurture and protect children? 12. Hon TREVOR MALLARD to the Prime Minister: Does he have confidence in all his Ministers?
Questions to Ministers 1. RAHUI KATENE to the Associate Minister of Health: When was the Core Clinical Committee established in Kawerau and how are iwi involved in the membership and functions of this joint taskforce to tackle youth suicide? 2. DAVID BENNETT to the Minister for Infrastructure: What progress is the Government making on its infrastructure investment programme? 3. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Prime Minister: What advice did he rely on when commenting in Australia on the safety of the Pike River coal mine? 4. NICKY WAGNER to the Minister of Corrections: What support has the Corrections Department provided in Canterbury since the first earthquake struck in September last year? 5. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Finance: Does he believe that in the current economic environment kiwi companies should be considered favourably with regards to big government contracts? 6. TIM MACINDOE to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: What parenting support is being made available for first-time parents? 7. Hon TREVOR MALLARD to the Prime Minister: In light of the answer given on his behalf to Oral Question No 2 on 15 June, is it his opinion that real average after-tax wages do not go up when high-income earners get tax cuts and low-income workers lose their jobs? 8. PAUL QUINN to the Minister of Customs: What recent reports has he received on developments to technology at the border? 9. GRANT ROBERTSON to the Minister of Health: Has sufficient funding been allocated in Vote Health to meet the increasing costs facing organisations working in the health sector? 10. KEVIN HAGUE to the Minister of Labour: Was she satisfied before the first explosion in the Pike River coal mine, that her Government had done all it could to ensure the workplace safety of people working in underground coal mines; if so, why? 11. COLIN KING to the Minister of Fisheries: What recent announcement has he made about the recovery of the western hoki stock? 12. DARIEN FENTON to the Minister of Labour: Does she stand by all her answers to Oral Question No 10 yesterday?
MAGGIE BARRY to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on the economy? Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Minister of Māori Affairs: Is he satisfied with the financial management of the Whānau Integration, Innovation and Engagement Fund, administered by Te Puni Kōkiri? Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Finance: What is the projected growth, if any, of New Zealand’s international liabilities under this Government’s policies, and what are the components of those liabilities? EUGENIE SAGE to the Minister for the Environment: Is water quality in New Zealand being negatively affected by livestock in rivers and lakes? Dr CAM CALDER to the Minister of Corrections: What progress has been made on the proposal to build a public-private prison at Wiri? Hon PHIL GOFF to the Minister of Foreign Affairs: Will proposed changes to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade undermine its ability to carry out its role in promoting New Zealand’s trade, security and consular interests? LOUISE UPSTON to the Minister of Women's Affairs: What commitment is the Government willing to make to increase the number of women on State sector boards? DENIS O'ROURKE to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Is he satisfied with the rate of progress of the Christchurch earthquake recovery? Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM to the Minister for Climate Change Issues: Did New Zealand meet the 28 February deadline for its submission to the United Nations on increasing the level of ambition in global greenhouse gas mitigation, as agreed by parties in the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action; if not, why not? DARIEN FENTON to the Minister of Labour: Does she stand by her answer to Written Question No 00916 (2012) that “the Government is focused on building a more competitive economy, which will lead to more jobs and higher wages”? JOHN HAYES to the Minister of Defence: What updates can he give on new Defence Force capability? CLARE CURRAN to the Minister of Broadcasting: Is he confident that current Government broadcasting policy upholds the standards of an independent and free press; if so, why?
ANDREW LITTLE to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement, "There's actually quite legitimate business in New Zealand for servicing foreign trusts"? JAMES SHAW to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements? ALASTAIR SCOTT to the Minister of Finance: What recent reports has he received on the state of the Crown accounts ahead of Budget 2016? RON MARK to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements? ALFRED NGARO to the Minister for Social Housing: What support will Budget 2016 provide for people in need of emergency housing? Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister of Health: What is the total amount of efficiencies since 2011/12 made by the 20 district health boards and how much have they made for the February year to date? JULIE ANNE GENTER to the Minister of Revenue: Does he stand by his statement, "these are the facts: there is no tax avoidance or evasion in New Zealand in respect of foreign trusts … There is no wealth hidden in New Zealand with these foreign trusts"? MAUREEN PUGH to the Minister for Communications: What recent announcements has she made on progress of the Government's Ultra-Fast Broadband programme? GRANT ROBERTSON to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by his statement made in Budget 2015 that "the unemployment rate is expected to fall below 5% in 2016"? BARBARA KURIGER to the Minister of Education: What recent announcements has she made on Communities of Learning? Dr MEGAN WOODS to the Minister responsible for the Earthquake Commission: Has EQC's position that it will reinstate earthquake damage to a condition substantially the same as "when new" been applied to every home repaired in the Canterbury Home Repair Programme; if so, why does the EQC customer guide state that customers' homes will be returned to a "pre-earthquake state"? MAHESH BINDRA to the Minister of Corrections: Does she have confidence in the Department of Corrections' ability to keep both staff and prisoners safe?
Hon SIMON BRIDGES to the Prime Minister: Does she stand by all her Government’s policies and actions? KIRITAPU ALLAN to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he seen on the need for innovation in the New Zealand economy? Hon AMY ADAMS to the Minister of Finance: Does he agree with the Prime Minister’s comment, “I absolutely believe that our agenda will grow the economy, will make sure businesses are in a position to grow and prosper, because I need that economic growth to be able to lift the well-being of all New Zealanders”? Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH to the Minister for Economic Development: Does he still think the ANZ survey of business confidence is junk? Dr DUNCAN WEBB to the Minister of Justice: What recent announcements has he made about the Family Court? Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE to the Minister of Immigration: Does he stand by all of his statements and actions? JONATHAN YOUNG to the Minister of Energy and Resources: What advice, if any, did she receive in respect of the obligation to act in accordance with the Minerals Programme for Petroleum regarding the Government’s decision to offer no new offshore permits? ANDREW BAYLY to the Minister for Building and Construction: What procedures, if any, will she put into place to ensure Government agencies adhere to MBIE’s Government procurement guidelines for construction projects? Hon Dr NICK SMITH to the Minister of Justice: Does he stand by all of his statements on the Electoral (Integrity) Amendment Bill and the potential chilling effect it will have on the expression of dissenting views? CHRIS BISHOP to the Minister of Internal Affairs: Does she stand by all her statements around the Government inquiry into the appointment of the Deputy Commissioner of Police? Dr LIZ CRAIG to the Minister of Health: What confidence can the public take from the review of the National Bowel Screening Programme that was released this morning? STUART SMITH to the Minister of Justice: What advice, if any, has he received on the need for the Canterbury Earthquakes Insurance Tribunal?
Hon STEVEN JOYCE to the Minister of Finance: Can he confirm he plans to increase net core Crown debt from $59.5 billion as at 30 June 2017 to $67.6 billion by 2022; and can he confirm debt will not increase by any more than that? MARAMA DAVIDSON to the Minister of Conservation: What has been the Department of Conservation’s biggest recent success in predator control to better protect our native plants and wildlife? Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN to the Minister of Health: What measurable outcomes, if any, will his policies deliver? SIMON O'CONNOR to the Minister of Corrections: Does he stand by his Government’s intention to reduce the prison population by 30 percent over the next 15 years; if so, how? KIERAN McANULTY to the Minister of Transport: Has he received any reports commissioned under the previous Government that show the value of investment in rail? Hon JACQUI DEAN to the Minister of Tourism: Does he stand by all his statements? Hon GERRY BROWNLEE to the Prime Minister: Does she stand by all her statements? Dr DUNCAN WEBB to the Minister for Greater Christchurch Regeneration: What was the expected date, prior to the General Election, that the Residential Advisory Service would cease operations, and what steps has she taken since becoming Minister to ensure the service continues for people affected by the Canterbury and Kaikōura earthquakes? BRETT HUDSON to the Associate Minister of State Services (Open Government): Does she stand by her statement in Parliament yesterday that this will be “the most open, most transparent Government that New Zealand has ever had”; if so, how? Hon LOUISE UPSTON to the Minister for Children: Is she committed to implementing the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child in full? TAMATI COFFEY to the Associate Minister of Finance: How is the Government preserving the right of New Zealanders to own land in New Zealand? JAMI-LEE ROSS to the Minister of Local Government: What steps will she take to support the local government sector to achieve greater efficiency and control spending?
Hon PAULA BENNETT to the Prime Minister: Does she stand by all her statements? Dr DEBORAH RUSSELL to the Minister of Finance: What does the Treasury’s 2018 Investment Statement show about the state of the Government’s balance sheet? Hon AMY ADAMS to the Minister of Finance: How much capital expenditure is this Government forecast to spend in the period 2018-2022 compared to the previous Government over these same years, and how much of the difference is funded by an increase in debt? Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH to the Minister for Economic Development: Does this Government have a broad economic development strategy; if so, what is it? Dr DUNCAN WEBB to the Minister responsible for the Earthquake Commission: What announcements has the Government made about changes to how the Earthquake Commission operates? Hon DAVID BENNETT to the Minister of Corrections: Does he stand by his statement on the Marae programme that “the problem right now is that corrections doesn’t have any flexibility…we’re in a real bind”? Hon SCOTT SIMPSON to the Associate Minister for the Environment: Does she agree with the statements in the Annual Report of the Environmental Protection Authority, “we have our share of science deniers, who oppose fluoride, 1080, vaccinations, glyphosate, genetic modification, and much more” and “our Chief Scientist is prominent in emphasising the evidence, data, and science that underpins EPA decision making”; if so, why? JENNY MARCROFT to the Minister for Regional Economic Development: What recent announcements has he made pertaining to the Provincial Growth Fund? SIMEON BROWN to the Minister of Justice: Should maximum legislated sentences reflect the seriousness of the crime committed? Hon NICKY WAGNER to the Minister for Greater Christchurch Regeneration: Does she stand by all her answers to written questions? ANGIE WARREN-CLARK to the Minister for the Environment: What does he think New Zealanders have to celebrate on World Water Day? MELISSA LEE to the Minister of Broadcasting, Communications and Digital Media: Does she stand by all her Government’s policies and actions in the Broadcasting, Communications and Digital Media portfolio?
Questions to Ministers Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by his statement that a publicly-owned insurer is a "dumb idea"? Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements regarding Government policy? Hon TAU HENARE to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on the economy – and especially on further signs of improving economic momentum and increasing business and consumer confidence? Hon SHANE JONES to the Prime Minister: Does he have confidence in his Ministers? Hon PETER DUNNE to the Minister of Foreign Affairs: What advice has he received on the call from Amnesty International opposing the appointment of Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa as Chair of the Commonwealth for the next two years, and host of next week's Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting? Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE to the Minister responsible for the Earthquake Commission: Does he still believe that New Zealanders can have confidence in EQC? MARK MITCHELL to the Minister of Commerce: What steps is the Government taking to introduce more competition into the housing construction market? JAN LOGIE to the Minister of Justice: When she said, in response to whether the pre-trial and trial process precludes some sexual violence victims from complaining "quite clearly, it does not"; did she mean that few sexual violence victims are deterred from complaining by the process itself? Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Prime Minister: Does he have confidence in the Minister for State Owned Enterprises? JACQUI DEAN to the Minister of Corrections: What recent announcements has she made on the redevelopment of prison facilities? PHIL TWYFORD to the Minister of Housing: Does he stand by his statement that the housing situation in Christchurch is "a challenge, not a crisis"? CHRIS AUCHINVOLE to the Minister for Arts, Culture and Heritage: How does the Government intend to mark the centenary of the First World War?