The question of whether forced relocation is beneficial or detrimental to the displaced households is a controversial and important policy question. After the 2011 earthquake in Christchurch, the government designated some of the worst affected areas as Residential Red Zones. Around 20,000 people were forced to move out of these Residential Red Zone areas, and were compensated for that. The objective of this paper is twofold. First, we aim to estimate the impact of relocation on the displaced households in terms of their income, employment, and their mental and physical health. Second, we evaluate whether the impact of relocation varies by the timing of to move, the destination (remaining within the Canterbury region or moving out of it) and demographic factors (gender, age, ethnicity). StatisticsNZ’s Integrated Data Infrastructure (IDI) from 2008 to 2017, which includes data on all households in Canterbury, and a difference-in-difference (DID) technique is used to answer these questions. We find that relocation has a negative impact on the income of the displaced household group. This adverse impact is more severe for later movers. Compared to the control group (that was not relocated), the income of relocated households was reduced by 3% for people who moved immediately after the earthquake in 2011, and 14% for people who moved much later in 2015.
A natural disaster will inevitably strike New Zealand in the coming years, damaging educational facilities. Delays in building quality replacement facilities will lead to short-term disruption of education, risking long-term inequalities for the affected students. The Christchurch earthquake demonstrated the issues arising from a lack of school planning and support. This research proposes a system that can effectively provide rapid, prefabricated, primary schools in post-disaster environments. The aim is to continue education for children in the short term, while using construction that is suitable until the total replacement of the given school is completed. The expandable prefabricated architecture meets the strength, time, and transport requirements to deliver a robust, rapid relief temporary construction. It is also adaptable to any area within New Zealand. This design solution supports personal well-being and mitigates the risk of educational gaps, PTSD linked with anxiety and depression, and many other mental health disorders that can impact students and teachers after a natural disaster.
The September and February earthquakes were terrifying and devastating. In February, 185 people were killed (this number excludes post earthquake related deaths) and several thousand injured. Damage to infrastructure above and below ground in and around Christchurch was widespread and it will take many years and billions of dollars to rebuild. The ongoing effects of the big quakes and aftershocks are numerous, with the deepest impact being on those who lost family and friends, their livelihoods and homes. What did Cantabrians do during the days, weeks and months of uncertainty and how have we responded? Many grieved, some left, some stayed, some arrived, many shovelled (liquefaction left thousands of tons of silt to be removed from homes and streets), and some used their expertise or knowledge to help in the recovery. This book highlights just some of the projects staff and students from The Faculty of Environment, Society and Design have been involved in from September 2010 to October 2012. The work is ongoing and the plan is to publish another book to document progress and new projects.
The Evaluating Maternity Units (EMU) study is a mixed method project involving a prospective cohort study, surveys (two postnatal questionnaires) and focus groups. It is an Australasian project funded by the Australian Health and Medical Research Council. Its primary aim was to compare the birth outcomes of two groups of well women – one group who planned to give birth at a primary maternity unit, and a second group who planned to give birth at a tertiary hospital. The secondary aim was to learn about women’s views and experiences regarding their birthplace decision-making, transfer, maternity care and experiences, and any other issues they raised. The New Zealand arm of the study was carried out in Christchurch, and was seriously affected by the earthquakes, halting recruitment at 702 participants. Comprehensive details were collected from both midwives and women regarding antenatal and early labour changes of birthplace plans and perinatal transfers from the primary units to the tertiary hospital. Women were asked about how they felt about plan changes and transfers in the first survey, and they were discussed in some focus groups. The transfer findings are still being analysed and will be presented. This study is set within the local maternity context, is recent, relevant and robust. It provides midwives with contemporary information about transfers from New Zealand primary maternity units and women’s views and experiences. It may help inform the conversations midwives have with each other, and with women and their families/whānau, regarding the choices of birthplace for well childbearing women.
This paper presents the preliminary conclusions of the first stage of Wellington Case Study project (Regulating For Resilience in an Earthquake Vulnerable City) being undertaken by the Disaster Law Research Group at the University of Canterbury Law School. This research aims to map the current regulatory environment around improving the seismic resilience of the urban built environment. This work provides the basis for the second stage of the project which will map the regulatory tools onto the reality of the current building stock in Wellington. Using a socio-legal methodology, the current research examines the regulatory framework around seismic resilience for existing buildings in New Zealand, with a particularly focus on multi-storey in the Wellington CBD. The work focusses both on the operation and impact of the formal seismic regulatory tools open to public regulators (under the amended Building Act) as other non-seismic regulatory tools. As well as examining the formal regulatory frame, the work also provides an assessment of the interactions between other non-building acts (such as Health and Safety at Work Act 2015) on the requirements of seismic resilience. Other soft-law developments (particularly around informal building standards) are also examined. The final output of this work will presents this regulatory map in a clear and easily accessible manner and provide an assessment of the suitability of this at times confusing and patchy legal environment as Wellington moves towards becoming a resilient city. The final conclusion of this work will be used to specifically examine the ability of Wellington to make this transition under the current regulatory environment as phase two of the Wellington Case Study project.
The Canterbury earthquake sequence in New Zealand’s South Island induced widespread liquefaction phenomena across the Christchurch urban area on four occasions (4 Sept 2010; 22 Feb; 13 June; 23 Dec 2011), that resulted in widespread ejection of silt and fine sand. This impacted transport networks as well as infiltrated and contaminated the damaged storm water system, making rapid clean-up an immediate post-earthquake priority. In some places the ejecta was contaminated by raw sewage and was readily remobilised in dry windy conditions, creating a long-term health risk to the population. Thousands of residential properties were inundated with liquefaction ejecta, however residents typically lacked the capacity (time or resources) to clean-up without external assistance. The liquefaction silt clean-up response was co-ordinated by the Christchurch City Council and executed by a network of contractors and volunteer groups, including the ‘Farmy-Army’ and the ‘Student-Army’. The duration of clean-up time of residential properties and the road network was approximately 2 months for each of the 3 main liquefaction inducing earthquakes; despite each event producing different volumes of ejecta. Preliminary cost estimates indicate total clean-up costs will be over NZ$25 million. Over 500,000 tonnes of ejecta has been stockpiled at Burwood landfill since the beginning of the Canterbury earthquakes sequence. The liquefaction clean-up experience in Christchurch following the 2010-2011 earthquake sequence has emerged as a valuable case study to support further analysis and research on the coordination, management and costs of large volume deposition of fine grained sediment in urban areas.
Christchurch earthquake events have raised questions on the adequacy of performance-based provisions in the current national building code. At present, in the building code the performance objectives are expressed in terms of safety and health criteria that could affect building occupants. In general, under the high intensity Christchurch events, buildings performed well in terms of life-safety (with a few exceptions) and it proved that the design practices adopted for those buildings could meet the performance objectives set by the building code. However, the damage incurred in those buildings resulted in unacceptably high economic loss. It is timely and necessary to revisit the objectives towards building performance in the building code and to include provisions for reducing economic implications in addition to the current requirements. Based on the observed performance of some buildings, a few specific issues in the current design practices that could have contributed to extensive damage have been identified and recommended for further research leading towards improved performance of structures. In particular, efforts towards innovative design/construction solutions with low-damage concepts are encouraged. New Zealand has been one of the leading countries in developing many innovative technologies. However, such technically advanced research findings usually face challenges towards implementation. Some of the reasons include: (i) lack of policy requirements; (iii) absence of demonstrated performance of new innovations to convince stakeholders; and (iv) non-existence of design guidelines. Such barriers significantly affect implementation of low damage construction and possible strategies to overcome those issues are discussed in this paper.
Predicting building collapse due to seismic motion is critical in design and more so after a major event. Damaged structures can appear sound, but collapse under following major events. There can thus be significant risk in decision making after a major seismic event concerning the safe occupation of a building or surrounding areas, versus the unknown impact of unknown major aftershocks. Model-based pushover analyses are effective if the structural properties are well understood, which is not valid post-event when this risk information is most useful. This research combines Hysteresis Loop Analysis (HLA) structural health monitoring (SHM) and Incremental Dynamic Analysis (IDA) methods to determine collapse capacity and probability of collapse for a specific structure, at any time, a range of earthquake excitations to ensure robustness. The nonlinear dynamic analysis method presented enables constant updating of building performance predictions using post-event SHM results. The resulting combined methods provide near real-time updating of collapse fragility curves as events progress, quantifying the change of collapse probability or seismic induced losses for decision-making - a novel, higher resolution risk analysis than previously available. The methods are not computationally expensive and there is no requirement for a validated numerical model. Results show significant potential benefits and a clear evolution of risk. They also show clear need for extending SHM toward creating improved predictive models for analysis of subsequent events, where the Christchurch series of 2010-2011 had significant post-event aftershocks after each main event. Finally, the overall method is generalisable to any typical engineering demand parameter.
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?
Territorial authorities in New Zealand are responding to regulatory and market forces in the wake of the 2011 Christchurch earthquake to assess and retrofit buildings determined to be particularly vulnerable to earthquakes. Pending legislation may shorten the permissible timeframes on such seismic improvement programmes, but Auckland Council’s Property Department is already engaging in a proactive effort to assess its portfolio of approximately 3500 buildings, prioritise these assets for retrofit, and forecast construction costs for improvements. Within the programme structure, the following varied and often competing factors must be accommodated: * The council’s legal, fiscal, and ethical obligations to the people of Auckland per building regulations, health and safety protocols, and economic growth and urban development planning strategies; * The council’s functional priorities for service delivery; * Varied and numerous stakeholders across the largest territorial region in New Zealand in both population and landmass; * Heritage preservation and community and cultural values; and * Auckland’s prominent economic role in New Zealand’s economy which requires Auckland’s continued economic production post-disaster. Identifying those buildings most at risk to an earthquake in such a large and varied portfolio has warranted a rapid field assessment programme supplemented by strategically chosen detailed assessments. Furthermore, Auckland Council will benefit greatly in time and resources by choosing retrofit solutions, techniques, and technologies applicable to a large number of buildings with similar configurations and materials. From a research perspective, the number and variety of buildings within the council’s property portfolio will provide valuable data for risk modellers on building typologies in Auckland, which are expected to be fairly representative of the New Zealand building stock as a whole.
Post-traumatic stress symptoms are a common reaction to experiencing a traumatic event such as a natural disaster. Young children may be at an increased risk for such mental health problems as these catastrophic events may coincide with developmentally sensitive periods of development. Treatments currently recommended for children with post-traumatic stress symptoms insufficiently acknowledge the role of neurobiological stress related systems responsible for these symptoms. As such, alternative approaches to the treatment of posttraumatic symptoms have been explored, with nature-based interventions offering a potential alternative based on two different theories that uphold the stress reducing benefits of natural environments. To date, there are a limited number of experimental studies that have explored the use of nature-based interventions with children, and no known research that has used a simulated nature experience with child participants. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of a simulated nature experience on the physiological and behavioural responses of children with post-traumatic stress symptoms that experienced the Christchurch earthquakes. A single-case research design with repeated measures of heart rate and teacherreported behaviour was gathered across a 20-day period. Heart rate data was collected before and after participants watched a 10-minute nature video, while data from a teacher rating scale provided information about the participants’ behaviours in the 30-minute period after they watched the nature video. Comparisons made to data collected during two different baseline phases indicated that the nature video intervention had no recognisable effects on the participants’ physiological and behavioural stress responses. Limitations to the current study are discussed as possible reasons for the incompatibility between the current study’s results and the findings from previous research. Suggestions are made for any future replications of the study.
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?
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?
The Avon River and the Avon-Heathcote Estuary/Ihutai are features of the urban environment of Christchurch City and are popular for recreational and tourist activities. These include punting, rowing, organized yachting, water skiing, shoreline walking, bird watching, recreational fishing and aesthetic appreciation. The Canterbury earthquakes of 2010 and 2011 significantly affected the estuarine and river environments, affecting both the valued urban recreation resources and infrastructure. The aim of the research is to evaluate recreational opportunities using a questionnaire, assess levels of public participation in recreation between winter 2014 and summer 2014-2015 and evaluate the quality of recreational resources. The objective is to determine the main factors influencing recreational uses before and after the February 2011 earthquake and to identify future options for promoting recreational activities. Resource evaluation includes water quality, wildlife values, habitats, riparian strip and the availability of facilities and infrastructure. High levels of recreational participation usually occurred at locations that provided many facilities along with their suitability for family activities, scenic beauty, relaxation, amenities and their proximity to residences. Some locations included more land-based activities, while some included more water-based activities. There were greater opportunities for recreation in summer compared to winter. Activities that were negatively affected by the earthquake such as rowing, kayaking and sailing have resumed. But activities at some places may be limited due to the lack of proper tracks, jetty, public toilets and other facilities and infrastructure. Also, some locations had high levels of bacterial pollution, excessive growth of aquatic plants and a low number of amenity values. These problems need to be solved to facilitate recreational uses. In recovering from the earthquake, the enhancement of recreation in the river and the Estuary will lead to a better quality of life and the improved well-being and psychological health of Christchurch residents. It was concluded that the Avon River and the Avon-Heathcote Estuary/Ihutai continue to provide various opportunities of recreation for users.
Following a natural disaster, children are prone to various reactions and maladaptive responses as a result of exposure to a highly stressful and potentially traumatic event. Children’s responses can range from an acute stress response to post-traumatic-stress disorder or may fall somewhere in between. While responses to highly stressful events vary, a common finding is that children will develop sleep problems. This was found following the Christchurch September 2010 and February 2011 earthquakes. The purpose of this study was to investigate the context and phenomenology of the sleep problems of a small number of children experiencing these and the 2016 Kaikoura earthquakes, including possible mechanisms of effect. Participants were four families, including four mothers, one father and four children. The design of this study was unique. Interview data was subjected to a content analysis, extracted themes were organised according to an ecological-transactional framework and then the factors were subject to an analysis, based on the principles of clinical reasoning, in order to identify possible mechanisms of effect. Parents reported 16 different sleep problems across children, as well as other behaviours possibly indicative of post-traumatic stress response. In total, 34 themes and 26 interactions were extracted in relation to factors identified across participants about the children’s sleep and the families’ earthquake experiences. This demonstrated how complex it is to explore the development of sleep problems in the context of disaster. Key factors identified by parents that likely played a key role in the development and perpetuation of sleep problems included earthquake related anxiety, parental mental health and conflict, the child’s emotional and behavioural problems and other negative life events following the earthquakes. The clinical implications of the analysis included being aware that such families, may not have had access to specialized support around their children’s sleep. This was much needed due to the strain such problems place on the family, especially in a post-disaster community such as Christchurch.
School travel is a major aspect of a young person’s everyday activity. The relationship between the built environment that youth experience on their way to and from school, influences a number of factors including their development, health and wellbeing. This is especially important in low income areas where the built environment is often poorer, but the need for it to be high quality and accessible is greater. This study focusses on the community of Aranui, a relatively low income suburb in Christchurch, New Zealand. It pays particular attention to Haeata Community Campus, a state school of just under 800 pupils from year one through to year thirteen (ages 5-18). The campus opened in 2017 following the closure of four local schools (three primary and one secondary), as part of the New Zealand Government’s Education Renewal scheme following the Christchurch earthquakes of 2010/11. Dedicated effort toward understanding the local built environment, and subsequent travel patterns has been argued to be insufficiently considered. The key focus of this research was to understand the importance of the local environment in encouraging active school travel. The present study combines geospatial analysis, quantitative survey software Maptionnaire, and statistical models to explore the features of the local environment that influence school travel behaviour. Key findings suggest that distance to school and parental control are the most significant predictors of active transport in the study sample. Almost 75% of students live within two kilometres of the school, yet less than 40% utilise active transport. Parental control may be the key contributing factor to the disproportionate private vehicle use. However, active school travel is acknowledged as a complex process that is the product of many individual, household, and local environment factors. To see increased active transport uptake, the local environment needs to be of greater quality. Meaning that the built environment should be improved to be youth friendly, with greater walkability and safe, accessible cycling infrastructure.
© 2019, Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature. Prediction of building collapse due to significant seismic motion is a principle objective of earthquake engineers, particularly after a major seismic event when the structure is damaged and decisions may need to be made rapidly concerning the safe occupation of a building or surrounding areas. Traditional model-based pushover analyses are effective, but only if the structural properties are well understood, which is not the case after an event when that information is most useful. This paper combines hysteresis loop analysis (HLA) structural health monitoring (SHM) and incremental dynamic analysis (IDA) methods to identify and then analyse collapse capacity and the probability of collapse for a specific structure, at any time, a range of earthquake excitations to ensure robustness. This nonlinear dynamic analysis enables constant updating of building performance predictions following a given and subsequent earthquake events, which can result in difficult to identify deterioration of structural components and their resulting capacity, all of which is far more difficult using static pushover analysis. The combined methods and analysis provide near real-time updating of the collapse fragility curves as events progress, thus quantifying the change of collapse probability or seismic induced losses very soon after an earthquake for decision-making. Thus, this combination of methods enables a novel, higher-resolution analysis of risk that was not previously available. The methods are not computationally expensive and there is no requirement for a validated numerical model, thus providing a relatively simpler means of assessing collapse probability immediately post-event when such speed can provide better information for critical decision-making. Finally, the results also show a clear need to extend the area of SHM toward creating improved predictive models for analysis of subsequent events, where the Christchurch series of 2010–2011 had significant post-event aftershocks.
DAVID BENNETT to the Minister of Finance: How is the Government's economic programme supporting stronger regional job growth? Hon SHANE JONES to the Minister of Commerce: Is he aware of demands being made by the Countdown supermarket group for retrospective payments from New Zealand suppliers, with threats Countdown will not stock their products? JULIE ANNE GENTER to the Minister for Economic Development: Why is the Government holding up economic development in Auckland's CBD, according to Auckland City officials, by delaying the opening of the City Rail Link until 2025? ALFRED NGARO to the Minister for Social Development: What reports has she received about the state of the nation in relation to social outcomes? DENIS O'ROURKE to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Is he aware of any proposals to transport asbestos-contaminated material from the Christchurch rebuild to sub-standard landfills? Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister of Health: Is he satisfied New Zealanders are receiving timely and affordable healthcare? MARK MITCHELL to the Minister of Housing: What reports has he received on positive progress being advanced on the Government's housing agenda? DARIEN FENTON to the Minister of Labour: Does he agree with the Prime Minister's statement on the minimum wage that "I think we've been pretty fair in what we've done in the past and we probably will be in the future"? CLAUDETTE HAUITI to the Minister of Science and Innovation: How are the National Science Challenges bringing together the best scientific talent across New Zealand? HONE HARAWIRA to the Minister for Economic Development: Will he commit to spending the $41m on reducing child poverty, after signalling that he might not now give that money to Team New Zealand to compete in the next America's Cup? Dr RAJEN PRASAD to the Minister of Immigration: When he said in response to an oral question on 29 January 2014 that it was "a pretty simple process…to alert immigration authorities", what was his understanding of the process a complainant would go through? CHRIS AUCHINVOLE to the Associate Minister of Transport: What progress is being made in improving road safety?
TODD McCLAY to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on progress in building a faster-growing economy? GRANT ROBERTSON to the Prime Minister: Does he have confidence in his Ministers; if so, why? Dr PAUL HUTCHISON to the Minister of Health: What progress can he report on the numbers of patients receiving elective surgery? JACINDA ARDERN to the Minister for Social Development: Does she stand by her answer to oral questions on Tuesday that "There is in New Zealand no actual poverty line" and "I do not see the measurement as a priority"? Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Prime Minister: Does he agree with the statement made by the Hon Bill English, in relation to the release of Natasha Fuller's private details by his Social Development Minister, that, "People who enter into public debate are welcome to do so … and should provide their full information to the public"? CHRIS AUCHINVOLE to the Minister of Broadcasting: What percentage of households in Hawkes Bay and on the West Coast of the South Island have gone digital ahead of the digital switchover in these regions on 30 September? CHARLES CHAUVEL to the Minister of Justice: What assistance will be available to families unable to afford the fee of over $900 she proposes to introduce in order to access the new Family Dispute Resolution Service? JOHN HAYES to the Minister for Courts: In light of the opening of the temporary courthouse in Masterton last week, what is the range of services that courts can now offer in Masterton? DENIS O'ROURKE to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Was restoration of the Christchurch Cathedral included in the Christchurch Central City Recovery Plan; if not, why not? SUE MORONEY to the Minister of Women's Affairs: Is she satisfied with the action this Government has taken to improve the lives of women in New Zealand? JAN LOGIE to the Minister for Social Development: Is she concerned that Wellington Rape Crisis is shutting its doors one day a week because of funding shortfalls? IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY to the Minister of Transport: Which commuter rail services, if any, do not receive funding from the New Zealand Transport Agency?
This thesis investigates life-safety risk in earthquakes. The first component of the thesis utilises a dataset of earthquake injuries and deaths from recent earthquakes in New Zealand to identify cause, context, and risk factors of injury and death in the 2011 MW6.3 Christchurch earthquake and 2016 MW7.8 Kaikōura earthquake. Results show that nearly all deaths occurred from being hit by structural elements from buildings, while most injuries were caused by falls, strains and being hit by contents or non-structural elements. Statistical analysis of injured cases compared to an uninjured control group found that age, gender, building damage, shaking intensity, and behaviour during shaking were the most significant risk factors for injury during these earthquakes. The second part of the thesis uses the empirical findings from the first section to develop two tools for managing life-safety risk in earthquakes. The first tool is a casualty estimation model for health system and emergency response planning. An existing casualty model used in New Zealand was validated against observed data from the 2011 Christchurch earthquake and found to underestimate moderate and severe injuries by an order of magnitude. The model was then updated to include human behaviour such as protective actions, falls and strain type injuries that are dependent on shaking intensity, as well as injuries and deaths outside buildings. These improvements resulted in a closer fit to observed casualties for the 2011 Christchurch earthquake. The second tool that was developed is a framework to set seismic loading standards for design based on fatality risk targets. The proposed framework extends the risk-targeted hazard method, by moving beyond collapse risk targets, to fatality risk targets for individuals in buildings and societal risk in cities. The framework also includes treatment of epistemic uncertainty in seismic hazard to allow this uncertainty to be used in risk-based decision making. The framework is demonstrated by showing how the current New Zealand loading standards could be revised to achieve uniform life-safety risk across the country and how the introduction of a new loading factor can reduce risk aggregation in cities. Not on Alma, moved and emailed. 1/02/2023 ce
Lincoln University was commissioned by the Avon-Otakaro Network (AvON) to estimate the value of the benefits of a ‘recreation reserve’ or ‘river park’ in the Avon River Residential Red Zone (ARRRZ). This research has demonstrated significant public desire and support for the development of a recreation reserve in the Avon River Residential Red Zone. Support is strongest for a unique natural environment with native fauna and flora, healthy wetlands and rivers, and recreational opportunities that align with this vision, such as walking, cycling and water-based sporting and leisure activities. The research also showed support for a reserve that promotes and enables community interaction and wellbeing, and is evident in respondents’ desires for community gardens, regular festivals and markets, and the physical linking of the CBD with eastern suburbs through a green corridor. There is less support for children’s playgrounds, sports fields or open grassed areas, all of which could be considered as more typical of an urban park development. Benefits (willing to pay) to Christchurch residents (excluding tourists) of a recreation reserve could be as high as $35 million each year. Savings to public health costs could be as high as $50.3 million each year. The incorporation or restoration of various ecosystems services, including water quality improvements, flood mitigation and storm water management could yield a further $8.8 million ($19, 600) per hectare/year at 450 ha). Combined annual benefits of a recreational reserve in the ARRRZ are approximately $94.1 million per annum but this figure does not include potentially significant benefits from, for example, tourism, property equity gains in areas adjacent to the reserve, or the effects of economic rejuvenation in the East. Although we were not able to provide costing estimates for park attributes, this study does make available the value of benefits, which can be used as a guide to the scope of expenditure on development of each park attribute.
On 4 September 2010 the Magnitude 7.1 'Darfield' Earthquake marked the beginning of the Canterbury earthquake sequence. The Darfield earthquake produced strong ground shaking throughout the centralCanterbury Plains, affecting rural areas, small towns and the city of Christchurch. The event produced a 29km long surface rupture through intensive farmland, causing localised flooding and liquefaction. The central Canterbury plains were subjected to a sustained period of thousands of aftershocks in the months after the Darfield earthquake. The primary sector is a major component of the in New Zealand economy. Business units are predominantly small family-run farm organisations, though there are increasing levels of corporate farming. The agribusiness sector contributes 20 per cent of real GDP and 47 per cent of total exports for New Zealand. Of the approximately 2,000 farms that are located in the Canterbury Plains, the most common farming sectors in the region are Mixed farming (mostly comprised of sheep and/or beef farming), Dairy farming, and Arable farming (cropping). Many farms on the Canterbury Plains require some form of irrigation and are increasingly capital intensive, reliant on built infrastructure, technology and critical services. Farms are of great significance to their local rural economies, with many rural non-farming organisations dependent on the health of local farming organisations. Despite the economic significance of the sector, there have been few, if any studies analysing how modern intensive farms are affected by earthquakes. The aim of this report is to (1) summarise the impacts the Darfield earthquake had on farming organisations and outline in general terms how farms are vulnerable to the effects of an earthquake; (2) identify what factors helped mitigate earthquake-related impacts. Data for this paper was collected through two surveys of farming and rural non-farming organisations following the earthquake and contextual interviews with affected organisations. In total, 78 organisations participated in the study (Figure 1). Farming organisations represented 72% (N=56) of the sample.
1. AMY ADAMS to the Minister of Finance: What progress has the Government made this year in laying the foundations for a more ambitious and faster growing economy? 2. Hon PHIL GOFF to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement that by early 2010 New Zealand will be coming out of the recession "reasonably aggressively"? 3. ALLAN PEACHEY to the Minister of Education: What feedback has she received about the quality of school reports to parents this year? 4. Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Is he satisfied that the Canterbury earthquake business support measures undertaken by the Government have worked as intended? 5. Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM to the Minister for Climate Change Issues (International Negotiations): Will the Cancun Agreements achieve the agreed goal of confining global warming to 2 degrees Celsius by 2020; if so, how? 6. Dr PAUL HUTCHISON to the Minister of Health: What reports has he received on improved access to medicines? 7. Hon DAMIEN O'CONNOR to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement that "It's clearly been a large sum of money. But at the end of the day I gave a commitment to the families at Pike River I'd do everything I could to get their men out, I stand by that. I think the Government has done everything it can do so far"? 8. Dr CAM CALDER to the Minister of Corrections: Has she received any progress reports on the Government's Prisoner Skills and Employment Strategy? 9. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister for Economic Development: How many additional Cabinet papers has he submitted to Cabinet since he told the House in July "In my capacity as Minster for Economic Development I have submitted 14 papers to Cabinet in the last 6 months"? 10. HONE HARAWIRA to the Minister of Foreign Affairs: What steps has the New Zealand Government taken to denounce the shooting by Chilean forces of indigenous Rapa Nui, during an operation to evict them from stolen ancestral lands that they were seeking to reclaim? 11. Hon JIM ANDERTON to the Minister for ACC: Does he have any concerns about the way ACC in general and claims general manager Denise Cosgrove in particular, is interpreting ACC legislation regarding personal injury claims which are being declined on the basis of degeneration or pre-existing conditions? 12. COLIN KING to the Minister of Fisheries: How will fisheries officers be helping to better protect New Zealand's fisheries this summer?
Questions to Ministers 1. PESETA SAM LOTU-IIGA to the Minister of Finance: What are some of the issues the Government will consider to meet the expected fiscal cost of the Christchurch earthquake? 2. Hon PHIL GOFF to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement that, in Christchurch, "up to 10,000 houses will need to be demolished and over 100,000 more could be damaged? 3. Hon JOHN BOSCAWEN to the Attorney-General: What changes, if any, is he proposing to the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill, and why? 4. Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE to the Minister of Finance: How much of the cumulative $15 billion drop in GDP over the next 4 years, as identified in the Treasury's February Monthly Economic Indicators report, is a result of the "weaker [economic] outlook we were seeing prior to the February earthquake" in Christchurch? 5. Dr KENNEDY GRAHAM to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Is he satisfied that there is enough coordination between central government agencies, local council, and non-government organisations in the response to the earthquake? 6. Hon DAVID PARKER to the Attorney-General: Is it his intention to further progress the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill this week? 7. NICKY WAGNER to the Minister for the Environment: What changes has the Government made under the Canterbury Earthquake Response and Recovery Act to facilitate recovery and the processing of resource consents to enable Christchurch to rebuild as quickly as possible? 8. Hon JIM ANDERTON to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Does he stand by his comment in the House yesterday that "there is a period in which insurance companies will not provide cover", and if so, what will the Government do to assist people who have already signed purchase contracts and are seeking insurance cover? 9. JACQUI DEAN to the Minister of Police: What has been the response of the New Zealand Police and their counterparts in other countries to the Christchurch earthquake? 10. GRANT ROBERTSON to the Minister of Health: Is he satisfied with the cost of after-hours medical treatment? 11. TIM MACINDOE to the Minister of Housing: What assistance is available for people who require emergency housing following the earthquake on 22 February? 12. Hon TREVOR MALLARD to the Minister for Communications and Information Technology: Who made the decision to defer MediaWorks' payment of $43 million to the Crown?
DAVID SHEARER to the Prime Minister: Does he believe that Hon John Banks has behaved in a manner that “upholds, and is seen to uphold the highest ethical standards” as required by the Cabinet Manual? BARBARA STEWART to the Prime Minister: Did Mr Banks explain to the Prime Minister’s Chief of Staff that he would use “obfuscation” in his dealings with the media over the “anonymous” donations from Kim Dotcom? MAGGIE BARRY to the Minister of Finance: How does the Government intend to strengthen the Public Finance Act 1989 in the Budget this month? Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Finance: In the most recent World Economic Outlook published by the IMF in April 2012, which of the 34 advanced economies listed is forecast to have a worse current account deficit (as a percentage of GDP) than New Zealand in 2013? METIRIA TUREI to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all the answers he gave to Oral Question No 4 yesterday? KANWALJIT SINGH BAKSHI to the Minister for Economic Development: What action is the Government taking to improve co-ordination of the business growth agenda? Hon PHIL GOFF to the Minister of Foreign Affairs: What damage, if any, has been done to staff confidence and retention by the change proposals for his Ministry announced on 23 February 2012, and does he intend to announce on 10 May 2012 a reversal of many of the proposals? SIMON O'CONNOR to the Minister of Labour: What steps is the Government taking to improve workplace health and safety? GARETH HUGHES to the Minister of Conservation: Does her proposed extension of the Marine Mammal Sanctuary for Maui’s dolphins allow the use of set nets, drift nets, and trawl nets within the sanctuary? IAN McKELVIE to the Minister of Corrections: What reports has she received about trade training within prisons? Hon LIANNE DALZIEL to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: Has he required that all his Ministers involved in the Canterbury earthquake recovery read the briefing paper dated 10 May 2011 prepared by Chief Science Advisor, Professor Sir Peter Gluckman, into the psychosocial consequences of the Canterbury earthquakes; if not, why not? NIKKI KAYE to the Minister of Education: What evidence has she seen of excellent achievement in scholarship exams?
DAVID SHEARER to the Prime Minister: Is it still a fundamental purpose of his Government to narrow the wage gap between New Zealand and Australia, and to grow local wages in New Zealand? TODD McCLAY to the Minister of Finance: What recent reports has he received on the economy? Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Finance: In dollar terms, what is the shortfall in the tax-take for the nine months to March revealed in yesterday’s Financial Statements compared to October’s pre-election update? Dr RUSSEL NORMAN to the Minister of Finance: How much has been raised to date by the Earthquake Kiwi Bonds and, at this rate, how many years will it take to cover the Government’s estimated $5.5 billion liability resulting from the Canterbury earthquakes? Hon TAU HENARE to the Minister for Social Development: How will Budget 2012 provide greater support for young people most at risk of long-term welfare dependency? Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE to the Minister for State Owned Enterprises: Does he stand by the Prime Minister’s statement regarding asset sales that “We are not going to do anything tricky there”? Dr JIAN YANG to the Associate Minister of Health: How is the Government expanding its programme to reduce rheumatic fever in vulnerable communities? Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister of Housing: Does he stand by all his comments regarding housing? JULIE ANNE GENTER to the Minister of Transport: What is the plan to pay for the Government’s transport expenditure given that the Ministry of Transport’s Briefing to the Incoming Minister warns of a funding shortfall of $4.9 billion if high oil prices and low GDP growth continue? MARK MITCHELL to the Minister for Economic Development: How is the Government improving value for money in its procurement of services for the public sector? DARIEN FENTON to the Minister of Labour: Does she stand by her statement that “I do not want to see unnecessary change for change’s sake. Rather I am looking to put in place pragmatic solutions as we implement our manifesto commitments and let employers, employees and business focus on what they do best.”? Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS to the Prime Minister: Does he still have confidence in the Minister for Social Development and the Associate Ministers for Social Development; if so, why?
After a disaster, cities experience profound social and environmental upheaval. Current research on disasters describes this social disruption along with collective community action to provide support. Pre-existing social capital is recognised as fundamental to this observed support. This research examines the relationship between sense of place for neighbourhood, social connectedness and resilience. Canterbury residents experienced considerable and continued disruption following a large and protracted sequence of earthquakes starting in September 2010. A major aftershock on 22 February 2011 caused significant loss of life, destruction of buildings and infrastructure. Following this earthquake some suburbs of Christchurch showed strong collective action. This research examines the features of the built environment that helped to form this cooperative support. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 20 key informants followed by 38 participants from four case study suburbs. The objectives were to describe the community response of suburbs, to identify the key features of the built environment and the role of social infrastructure in fostering social connectedness. The last objective was to contribute to future planning for community resilience. The findings from this research indicated that social capital and community competence are significant resources to be called upon after a disaster. Features of the local environment facilitated the formation of neighbourhood connections that enabled participants to cope, manage and to collectively solve problems. These features also strengthened a sense of belonging and attachment to the home territory. Propinquity was important; the bumping and gathering places such as schools, small local shops and parks provided the common ground for meaningful pre-existing local interaction. Well-defined geography, intimate street typology, access to quality natural space and social infrastructure helped to build the local social connections and develop a sense of place. Resourceful individuals and groups were also a factor, and many are drawn to live near the inner city or more natural places. The features are the same well understood attributes that contribute to health and wellbeing. The policy and planning framework needs to consider broader social outcomes, including resilience in new and existing urban developments. The socio-political structures that provide access to secure and stable housing and local education should also be recognised and incorporated into local planning for resilience and the everyday.
JAMI-LEE ROSS to the Minister of Finance: What reports has he received on the competitiveness of New Zealand's business sector? ANDREW WILLIAMS to the Minister of Trade: Does he stand by his statement on the Trans-Pacific Partnership that "It's going to be big. It's going to be significant and it's going to help New Zealanders find well-paid jobs"; if so, on what evidence does he base this claim? DAVID SHEARER to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement "…You can trust us. If we say we're going to do something we do it. If we don't, we don't … that's why I've stuck to my guns and I haven't campaigned on one thing and done something different."? METIRIA TUREI to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement regarding investor state disputes procedures proposed in the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement that "An exclusion solely for Australia and not for everybody else is unlikely to be something we would support"; if so, why? SIMON O'CONNOR to the Minister for Tertiary Education, Skills and Employment: What progress has the Government made to improve the viability of the Student Loan Scheme? JACINDA ARDERN to the Minister for Social Development: How many times, if any, has the Transition to Work Grant, or similar funds, been used by Work and Income New Zealand to purchase tickets to Australia for job seekers who have found work there? SHANE ARDERN to the Minister for Primary Industries: What announcements has he recently made on boosting innovation in the New Zealand primary sector? Hon DAVID PARKER to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by his statement regarding migration to Australia "What's the point of standing in the airport crying about it?"; if so, how many people have left permanently for Australia since he took office in November 2008? TIM MACINDOE to the Minister for Social Development: What announcements has she made on the Expert Advisory Group on Information Security, who will oversee the development of the initiatives in the Government's White Paper for Vulnerable Children? CHRIS HIPKINS to the Minister of Education: Does she agree with all of the statements the Prime Minister has made regarding food in schools? MOJO MATHERS to the Associate Minister of Health: Other than the LD50 test, will he rule out other animal tests for the pending psychoactive substances testing regime? NICKY WAGNER to the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery: What progress is the Government making with rebuilding and repairing residential homes in Christchurch?
1. Hon PHIL GOFF to the Prime Minister: Does he have confidence in his Minister of Finance? 2. CRAIG FOSS to the Minister of Finance: How much does the Government expect to spend over the next few years to help rebuild Christchurch in the aftermath of the two earthquakes? 3. Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister for Social Development and Employment: Does she stand by her statement in regard to hardship assistance that "…I think it proves that the help is there when people need it,"; if so, why? 4. RAHUI KATENE to the Minister of Health: What action, if any, has been taken in light of the study Ethnicity and Management of Colon Cancer in New Zealand: Do Indigenous Patients Get a Worse Deal?, which concluded that Māori New Zealanders with colon cancer were less likely to receive adjuvant chemotherapy and experienced a lower quality of care compared with non-Māori patients? 5. CHRIS AUCHINVOLE to the Minister for the Environment: What steps is the Government taking to increase renewable electricity generation in light of reports that greenhouse gas emissions from this sector have increased by 120 percent, which is more than any other sector since 1990? 6. Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE to the Minister of Finance: Excluding the banks and non-bank financial institutions covered by the deposit guarantee scheme, are there any other companies that might be provided with a government guarantee while the Rt Hon John Key is Prime Minister? 7. JONATHAN YOUNG to the Acting Minister of Energy and Resources: What is Petrobras able to do under the permit granted to it in the Raukumara Basin? 8. DAVID CLENDON to the Acting Minister of Energy and Resources: What environmental protection provisions, if any, did the Government include in the permit granted to Petrobras to explore for oil and drill off the East Cape? 9. Hon TREVOR MALLARD to the Prime Minister: Does he have confidence in all Ministers involved in the Mediaworks frequency payment arrangement? 10. AARON GILMORE to the Minister of Revenue: What has Inland Revenue done to assist the people in Christchurch after the February earthquake? 11. GRANT ROBERTSON to the Minister responsible for Ministerial Services: Does he stand by his statements in relation to the purchase of 34 BMWs by Ministerial Services, including one with heated seats, that "Yeah I don't know what's in Dunedin" and "It's beyond me, it's not my car anyway"? 12. SHANE ARDERN to the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture: What has been the result of enforcement action taken by the Ministry of Fisheries under Operation Paid and Taskforce Webb?