A plan which outlines the function, roles and responsibilities of SCIRT during an emergency event affecting SCIRT construction works. The first version of this plan was produced on 30 April 2012. Note that personal details of key personnel have been removed from this document.
The number of emergency psychiatric assessments in Christchurch has more than doubled since the earthquakes struck.
In this dissertation it is argued that the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Act 2011 and the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority were both necessary and inevitable given the trends and traditions of civil defence emergency management (CDEM) in New Zealand. The trends and traditions of civil defence are such that principles come before practice, form before function, and change is primarily brought about through crisis and criticism. The guiding question of the research was why were a new governance system and law made after the Canterbury earthquakes in 2010 and 2011? Why did this outcome occur despite the establishment of a modern emergency management system in 2002 which included a recovery framework that had been praised by international scholars as leading edge and a model for other countries? The official reason was the unprecedented scale and demands of the recovery – but a disaster of such scale is the principle reason for having a national emergency management system. Another explanation is the lack of cooperation among local authorities – but that raises the question of whether the CDEM recovery framework would have been successful in another locality. Consequentially, the focus of this dissertation is on the CDEM recovery framework and how New Zealand came to find itself making disaster law during a disaster. Recommendations include a review of emergency powers for recovery, a review of the capabilities needed to fulfil the mandate of Recovery Managers, and the establishment of a National Recovery Office with a cadre of Recovery Managers that attend every recovery to observe, advise, or assume control as needed. CDEM Group Recovery Managers would be seconded to the National Recovery Office which would allow for experience in recovery management to be developed and institutionalised through regular practice.
A video of a presentation by Bridget Tehan and Sharon Tortonson during the Community and Social Recovery Stream of the 2016 People in Disasters Conference. The presentation is titled, "Community and Social Service Organisations in Emergencies and Disasters in Australia and New Zealand".The abstract for this presentation reads as follows: What happens when support services for issues such as mental health, foster care or homelessness are impacted by a disaster? What happens to their staff? What happens to their clients? The community sector is a unique, valuable and diverse component of Australasian economy and society. Through its significant numbers of employees and volunteers, its diversity, the range of service and advocacy programs it delivers, and the wide range of people it supports, it delivers value to communities and strengthens society. The community and social services sector builds resilience daily through services to aged care, child welfare and disability, domestic violence, housing and homelessness, and mental health care. The sector's role is particularly vital in assisting disadvantaged people and communities. For many, community sector organisations are their primary connection to the broader community and form the basis of their resilience to everyday adversity, as well as in times of crisis. However, community sector organisations are particularly vulnerable in a major emergency or disaster. Australian research shows that the most community sector organisations are highly vulnerable and unprepared for emergencies. This lack of preparedness can have impacts on service delivery, business continuity, and the wellbeing of clients. The consequences of major disruptions to the provision of social services to vulnerable people are serious and could be life-threatening in a disaster. This presentation will review the Victorian Council of Social Service (Australia) and Social Equity and Wellbeing Network (formerly the Christchurch Council of Social Services) records on the impacts of emergencies on community sector organisations, staff, and clients. From the discussion of records, recommendations will be presented that could improve the resilience of this crucial sector.
A video of a presentation by Margaret Moreton during the Community and Social Recovery Stream of the 2016 People in Disasters Conference. The presentation is titled, "Community and Social Service Organisations in Emergencies and Disasters in Australia and New Zealand".
Interagency Emergency Response Teams (IERTs) play acrucial role in times of disasters. Therefore it is crucial to understand more thoroughly the communication roles and responsibilities of interagency team members and to examine how individual members communicate within a complex, evolving, and unstable environment. It is also important to understand how different organisational identities and their spatial geographies contribute to the interactional dynamics. Earthquakes hit the Canterbury region on September, 2010 and then on February 2011 a more devastating shallow earthquake struck resulting in severe damage to the Aged Residential Care (ARC) sector. Over 600 ARC beds were lost and 500 elderly and disabled people were displaced. Canterbury District Health Board (CDHB) set up an interagency emergency response team to address the issues of vulnerable people with significant health and disability needs who were unable to access their normal supports due to the effects of the earthquake. The purpose of this qualitative interpretive study is to focus on the case study of the response and evacuation of vulnerable people by interagencies responding to the event. Staff within these agencies were interviewed with a focus on the critical incidents that either stabilised or negatively influenced the outcome of the response. The findings included the complexity of navigating multiple agencies communication channels; understanding the different hierarchies and communication methods within each agency; data communication challenges when infrastructures were severely damaged; the importance of having the right skills, personal attributes and understanding of the organisations in the response; and the significance of having a liaison in situ representing and communicating through to agencies geographically dispersed from Canterbury. It is hoped that this research will assist in determining a future framework for interagency communication best practice and policy.
A video of a presentation by Associate Professor John Vargo during the fifth plenary of the 2016 People in Disasters Conference. Vargo is a senior researcher and co-leader of the Resilient Organisations Research Programme at the University of Canterbury. The presentation is titled, "Organisational Resilience is more than just Business Continuity".The abstract for this presentation reads as follows: Business Continuity Management is well-established process in many larger organisations and a key element in their emergency planning. Research carried out by resilient organisations follow the 2010 and 2011 Canterbury Earthquakes show that most small organisations did not have a business continuity plan (BCP), yet many of these organisations did survive the massive disruptions following the earthquakes. They were resilient to these catastrophic events, but in the absence of a BCP. This research also found that many of the organisations with BCP's, struggled to use them effectively when facing real events that did not align with the BCP. Although the BCPs did a good job of preparing organisations to deal with technology and operational disruptions, there was virtually no coverage for the continuity of people. Issues surrounding staff welfare and engagement were amongst the most crucial issues faced by Canterbury organisations, yet impacts of societal and personal disruption did not feature in BCPs. Resilience is a systematic way of looking at how an organization can survive a crisis and thrive in an uncertain world. Business continuity is an important aspect for surviving the crisis, but it is only part of the bigger picture addressed by organisational resilience. This presentation will show how organizational experiences in the Canterbury earthquakes support the need to move to a 'Business Continuity' for the '21st Century', one that incorporates more aspects of resilience, especially the 'people' areas of leadership, culture, staff welfare, and engagement.
A video of a presentation by Richard Conlin during the Community Resilience Stream of the 2016 People in Disasters Conference. The presentation is titled, "Resilience, Poverty, and Seismic Culture".The abstract for this presentation reads as follows: A strategy of resilience is built around the recognition that effective emergency response requires community involvement and mobilization. It further recognizes that many of the characteristics that equip communities to respond most effectively to short term emergencies are also characteristics that build strong communities over the long term. Building resilient communities means integrating our approaches to poverty, community engagement, economic development, and housing into a coherent strategy that empowers community members to engage with each other and with other communities. In this way, resilience becomes a complementary concept to sustainability. This requires an asset-based change strategy where external agencies meet communities where they are, in their own space, and use collective impact approaches to work in partnership. This also requires understanding and assessing poverty, including physical, financial, and social capital in their myriad manifestations. Poverty is not exclusively a matter of class. It is a complex subject, and different communities manifest multiple versions of poverty, which must be respected and understood through the asset-based lens. Resilience is a quality of a community and a system, and develops over time as a result of careful analysis of strengths and vulnerabilities and taking actions to increase competencies and reduce risk situations. Resilience requires maintenance and must be developed in a way that includes practicing continuous improvement and adaptation. The characteristics of a resilient community include both physical qualities and 'soft infrastructure', such as community knowledge, resourcefulness, and overall health. This presentation reviews the experience of some earlier disasters, outlines a working model of how emergency response, resilience, and poverty interact and can be addressed in concert, and concludes with a summary of what the 2010 Chilean earthquake tells us about how a 'seismic culture' can function effectively in communities even when government suffers from unexpected shortcomings.
The operation of telecommunication networks is critical during business as usual times, and becomes most vital in post-disaster scenarios, when the services are most needed for restoring other critical lifelines, due to inherent interdependencies, and for supporting emergency and relief management tasks. In spite of the recognized critical importance, the assessment of the seismic performance for the telecommunication infrastructure appears to be underrepresented in the literature. The FP6 QuakeCoRE project “Performance of the Telecommunication Network during the Canterbury Earthquake Sequence” will provide a critical contribution to bridge this gap. Thanks to an unprecedented collaboration between national and international researchers and highly experienced asset managers from Chorus, data and evidences on the physical and functional performance of the telecommunication network after the Canterbury Earthquakes 2010-2011 have been collected and collated. The data will be processed and interpreted aiming to reveal fragilities and resilience of the telecommunication networks to seismic events
A video of a presentation by Thomas Petschner during the Resilience and Response Stream of the 2016 People in Disasters Conference. The presentation is titled, "Medical Clowning in Disaster Zones".The abstract for this presentation reads as follows: To be in a crisis caused by different kinds of natural disasters (as well as a man made incidents), dealing with ongoing increase of problems and frequent confrontation with very bad news isn't something that many people can easily cope with. This applies obviously to affected people but also to the members of SAR teams, doctors in the field and the experienced humanitarians too. The appropriate use of humour in crisis situations and dis-functional environments is a great tool to make those difficult moments more bearable for everyone. It helps injured and traumatised people cope with what they're facing, and can help them to recover more quickly too. At the same time humorous thinking can help to solve some of the complex problems emergency responders face. This is in addition to emergency and medical only reactions - allowing for a more holistic human perspective, which can provide a positive lasting effect. The ability to laugh is hardwired into our systems bringing a huge variety of physical, mental and social benefits. Even a simple smile can cultivate optimism and hope, while laughter can boost a hormone cocktail - which helps to cope with pain, enhance the immune system, reduce stress, re-focus, connect and unite people during difficult times. Humour as an element of psychological response in crisis situations is increasingly understood in a much wider sense: as the human capacity to plan and achieve desired outcomes with less stress, thus resulting in more 'predictable' work in unpredictable situations. So, if we approach certain problems in the same way Medical Clowns do, we may find a more positive solution. Everyone knows that laughter is an essential component of a healthy, happy life. The delivery of 'permission to laugh' into disaster zones makes a big difference to the quality of life for everyone, even if it's for a very short, but important period of time. And it's crucial to get it right as there is no second chance for the first response.
A video of the keynote presentation by Sir John Holmes, during the first plenary of the 2016 People in Disasters Conference. Holmes is the former United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator, the current Director of Ditchley Foundation, and the chair of the Board of the International Rescue Committee in the UK. The presentation is titled, "The Politics of Humanity: Reflections on international aid in disasters".The abstract for this presentation reads as follows: As United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinate from 2007-2010, Sir John Holmes was heavily involved in the coordination of air provision to countries struck by natural and man-made disasters, raising the necessary funds, and the elaboration of humanitarian policy. The international humanitarian system is fragmented and struggling to cope with rising demands from both conflicts such as that in Syria, and the growing effects of climate change. Sir John will talk about what humanitarian aid can and cannot achieve, the frustrations of getting aid through when access may be difficult or denied, and the need to ensure that assistance encompasses protection of civilians and efforts to get them back on their feet, as well as the delivery of essential short term items such as food, water, medical care and shelter. He will discuss the challenges involved in trying to make the different agencies - UN United Nations, non-government organisations and the International Red Cross/Crescent movement - work together effectively. He will reveal some of the problems in dealing with donor and recipient governments who often have their own political and security agendas, and may be little interested in the necessary neutrality and independence of humanitarian aid. He will illustrate these points by practical examples of political and other dilemmas from aid provision in natural disasters such as Cyclone Nargis in Myanmar in 2009, and the Haiti earthquake of 2010, and in conflict situations such as Darfur, Afghanistan and Sri Lanka in the past, and Syria today. He will also draw conclusions and make recommendations about how humanitarian aid might work better, and why politicians and others need to understand more clearly the impartial space required by humanitarian agencies to operate properly.
The 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquake sequence, and the resulting extensive data sets on damaged buildings that have been collected, provide a unique opportunity to exercise and evaluate previously published seismic performance assessment procedures. This poster provides an overview of the authors’ methodology to perform evaluations with two such assessment procedures, namely the P-58 guidelines and the REDi Rating System. P-58, produced by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in the United States, aims to facilitate risk assessment and decision-making by quantifying earthquake ground shaking, structural demands, component damage and resulting consequences in a logical framework. The REDi framework, developed by the engineering firm ARUP, aids stakeholders in implementing resilience-based earthquake design. Preliminary results from the evaluations are presented. These have the potential to provide insights on the ability of the assessment procedures to predict impacts using “real-world” data. However, further work remains to critically analyse these results and to broaden the scope of buildings studied and of impacts predicted.
Sewerage systems convey sewage, or wastewater, from residential or commercial buildings through complex reticulation networks to treatment plants. During seismic events both transient ground motion and permanent ground deformation can induce physical damage to sewerage system components, limiting or impeding the operability of the whole system. The malfunction of municipal sewerage systems can result in the pollution of nearby waterways through discharge of untreated sewage, pose a public health threat by preventing the use of appropriate sanitation facilities, and cause serious inconvenience for rescuers and residents. Christchurch, the second largest city in New Zealand, was seriously affected by the Canterbury Earthquake Sequence (CES) in 2010-2011. The CES imposed widespread damage to the Christchurch sewerage system (CSS), causing a significant loss of functionality and serviceability to the system. The Christchurch City Council (CCC) relied heavily on temporary sewerage services for several months following the CES. The temporary services were supported by use of chemical and portable toilets to supplement the damaged wastewater system. The rebuild delivery agency -Stronger Christchurch Infrastructure Rebuild Team (SCIRT) was created to be responsible for repair of 85 % of the damaged horizontal infrastructure (i.e., water, wastewater, stormwater systems, and roads) in Christchurch. Numerous initiatives to create platforms/tools aiming to, on the one hand, support the understanding, management and mitigation of seismic risk for infrastructure prior to disasters, and on the other hand, to support the decision-making for post-disaster reconstruction and recovery, have been promoted worldwide. Despite this, the CES in New Zealand highlighted that none of the existing platforms/tools are either accessible and/or readable or usable by emergency managers and decision makers for restoring the CSS. Furthermore, the majority of existing tools have a sole focus on the engineering perspective, while the holistic process of formulating recovery decisions is based on system-wide approach, where a variety of factors in addition to technical considerations are involved. Lastly, there is a paucity of studies focused on the tools and frameworks for supporting decision-making specifically on sewerage system restoration after earthquakes. This thesis develops a decision support framework for sewerage pipe and system restoration after earthquakes, building on the experience and learning of the organisations involved in recovering the CSS following the CES in 2010-2011. The proposed decision support framework includes three modules: 1) Physical Damage Module (PDM); 2) Functional Impact Module (FIM); 3) Pipeline Restoration Module (PRM). The PDM provides seismic fragility matrices and functions for sewer gravity and pressure pipelines for predicting earthquake-induced physical damage, categorised by pipe materials and liquefaction zones. The FIM demonstrates a set of performance indicators that are categorised in five domains: structural, hydraulic, environmental, social and economic domains. These performance indicators are used to assess loss of wastewater system service and the induced functional impacts in three different phases: emergency response, short-term recovery and long-term restoration. Based on the knowledge of the physical and functional status-quo of the sewerage systems post-earthquake captured through the PDM and FIM, the PRM estimates restoration time of sewer networks by use of restoration models developed using a Random Forest technique and graphically represented in terms of restoration curves. The development of a decision support framework for sewer recovery after earthquakes enables decision makers to assess physical damage, evaluate functional impacts relating to hydraulic, environmental, structural, economic and social contexts, and to predict restoration time of sewerage systems. Furthermore, the decision support framework can be potentially employed to underpin system maintenance and upgrade by guiding system rehabilitation and to monitor system behaviours during business-as-usual time. In conjunction with expert judgement and best practices, this framework can be moreover applied to assist asset managers in targeting the inclusion of system resilience as part of asset maintenance programmes.
A video of a presentation by Dr Erin Smith during the Community Resilience Stream of the 2016 People in Disasters Conference. The presentation is titled, "A Qualitative Study of Paramedic Duty to Treat During Disaster Response".The abstract for this presentation reads as follows: Disasters place unprecedented demands on emergency medical services and test paramedic personal commitment to the health care profession. Despite this challenge, legal guidelines, professional codes of ethics and ambulance service management guidelines are largely silent on the issue of professional obligations during disasters. They provide little to no guidance on what is expected of paramedics or how they ought to approach their duty to treat in the face of risk. This research explores how paramedics view their duty to treat during disasters. Reasons that may limit or override such a duty are examined. Understanding these issues is important in enabling paramedics to make informed and defensible decisions during disasters. The authors employed qualitative methods to gather Australian paramedic perspectives. Participants' views were analysed and organised according to three emerging themes: the scope of individual paramedic obligations, the role and obligations of ambulance services, and the broader ethical context. Our findings suggest that paramedic decisions around duty to treat will largely depend on their individual perception of risk and competing obligations. A reciprocal obligation is expected of paramedic employers. Ambulance services need to provide their employees with the best current information about risks in order to assist paramedics in making defensible decisions in difficult circumstances. Education plays a key role in providing paramedics with an understanding and appreciation of fundamental professional obligations by focusing attention on both the medical and ethical challenges involved with disaster response. Finally, codes of ethics might be useful, but ultimately paramedic decisions around professional obligations will largely depend on their individual risk assessment, perception of risk, and personal value systems.
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?
A video of the keynote presentation by Alexander C. McFarlane during the third plenary of the 2016 People in Disasters Conference. McFarlane is a Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Adelaide and the Heady of the Centre for Traumatic Stress Studies. The presentation is titled, "Holding onto the Lessons Disasters Teach".The abstract for this presentation reads as follows: Disasters are sentinel points in the life of the communities affected. They bring an unusual focus to community mental health. In so doing, they provide unique opportunities for better understanding and caring for communities. However, one of the difficulties in the disaster field is that many of the lessons from previous disasters are frequently lost. If anything, Norris (in 2006) identified that the quality of disaster research had declined over the previous 25 years. What is critical is that a longitudinal perspective is taken of representative cohorts. Equally, the impact of a disaster should always be judged against the background mental health of the communities affected, including emergency service personnel. Understandably, many of those who are particularly distressed in the aftermath of a disaster are people who have previously experienced a psychiatric disorder. It is important that disaster services are framed against knowledge of this background morbidity and have a broad range of expertise to deal with the emerging symptoms. Equally, it is critical that a long-term perspective is considered rather than short-term support that attempts to ameliorate distress. Future improvement of disaster management depends upon sustaining a body of expertise dealing with the consequences of other forms of traumatic stress such as accidents. This expertise can be redirected to co-ordinate and manage the impact of larger scale events when disasters strike communities. This presentation will highlight the relevance of these issues to the disaster planning in a country such as New Zealand that is prone to earthquakes.
Tsunami have the potential to cause significant disruptions to society, including damage to infrastructure, critical to the every-day operation of society. Effective risk management is required to reduce the potential tsunami impacts to them. Christchurch city, situated on the eastern coast of New Zealand’s South Island, is exposed to a number of far-field tsunami hazards. Although the tsunami hazard has been well identified for Christchurch city infrastructure, the likely impacts have not been well constrained. To support effective risk management a credible and realistic infrastructure impact model is required to inform risk management planning. The objectives of this thesis are to assess the impacts on Christchurch city infrastructure from a credible, hypothetical far-field tsunami scenario. To achieve this an impact assessment process is adopted, using tsunami hazard and exposure measures to determine asset vulnerability and subsequent impacts. However, the thesis identified a number of knowledge gaps in infrastructure vulnerability to tsunami. The thesis addresses this by using two approaches: a tsunami damage matrix; and the development of tsunami fragility functions. The tsunami damage matrix pools together tsunami impacts on infrastructure literature, and post-event field observations. It represents the most comprehensive ‘look-up’ resource for tsunami impacts to infrastructure to date. This damage matrix can inform the assessment of tsunami impacts on Christchurch city infrastructure by providing a measure of damage likelihood at various hazard intensities. A more robust approach to tsunami vulnerability of infrastructure are fragility functions, which are also developed in this thesis. These were based on post-event tsunami surveys of the 2011 ‘Tohoku’ earthquake tsunami in Japan. The fragility functions are limited to road and bridge infrastructure, but represent the highest resolution measure of vulnerability for the given assets. As well as providing a measure of damage likelihood for a given tsunami hazard intensity, these also indicate a level of asset damage. The impact assessment process, and synthesized vulnerability measures, are used to run tsunami impact models for Christchurch infrastructure to determine the probability of asset damage occurring and to determine if impact will reach or exceed a given damage state. The models suggest that infrastructure damage is likely to occur in areas exposed to tsunami inundation in this scenario, with significant damage identified for low elevation roads and bridges. The results are presented and discussed in the context of the risk management framework, with emphasis on using risk assessment to inform risk treatment, monitoring and review. In summary, this thesis A) advances tsunami vulnerability and impact assessment methodologies for infrastructure and B) provides a tsunami impact assessment framework for Christchurch city infrastructure which will inform infrastructure tsunami risk management for planners, emergency managers and lifelines groups.
RON MARK to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by all his statements; if so, how? ANDREW LITTLE to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his statement that “if you see house prices rising, you might say the Government needs to do more” and “we take responsibility, we need to do a better job of it”? SARAH DOWIE to the Minister of Finance: What international reports has he received showing New Zealand’s economic growth remains robust? Hon ANNETTE KING to the Minister of Health: On what date was the Ministry of Health first made aware of data manipulation of the six-hour Emergency Department target by district health boards? CHRIS BISHOP to the Minister for Economic Development: What recent announcements has the Government made regarding support for earthquake-affected businesses? METIRIA TUREI to the Minister for Building and Housing: Ka tū a ia i runga i te mana o tana kōrero, “The proportion of New Zealanders living in rental homes is not changing dramatically and owner-occupiers will remain the dominant living arrangement for most Kiwi families into the future” i te mea, ā, e ai ki ngā tatauranga hou, nō mai anō i te tau Kotahi mano, iwa rau, rima tekau mā tahi, i taka ai te hunga whiwhi i tōna ake whare, ki raro rā nō? Translation: Does he stand by his statement that “The proportion of New Zealanders living in rental homes is not changing dramatically and owner-occupiers will remain the dominant living arrangement for most Kiwi families into the future” given that home ownership is at its lowest level since 1951, according to the latest census? STUART SMITH to the Minister for Primary Industries: What recent announcements has he made regarding support for earthquake-affected primary sectors? GRANT ROBERTSON to the Minister of Finance: Does he agree with the Prime Minister’s statement that Treasury forecasts are “a load of nonsense, because they can’t get predications in 44 days right, let alone 44 years”? ALFRED NGARO to the Minister for Building and Housing: What additional Auckland housing projects did he announce during last week’s recess, and what are the latest reports on the growth in construction across Auckland showing? Dr MEGAN WOODS to the Minister responsible for the Earthquake Commission: Is he confident EQC will be employing the necessary resource to process and settle claims, from both the Canterbury earthquake sequence and the earthquake sequence of a fortnight ago, after 16 December; if so, why? DAVID SEYMOUR to the Minister of Police: What reassurance can she give to Epsom residents concerned that their Community Policing Centre will cease to operate after 24 years? IAN McKELVIE to the Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs: What announcements has he made recently that support the continued growth of the New Zealand wine export market?
In September 2010 and February 2011 the Canterbury region of New Zealand was struck by two powerful earthquakes, registering magnitude 7.1 and 6.3 respectively on the Richter scale. The second earthquake was centred 10 kilometres south-east of the centre of Christchurch (the region’s capital and New Zealand’s third most populous urban area, with approximately 360,000 residents) at a depth of five kilometres. 185 people were killed, making it the second deadliest natural disaster in New Zealand’s history. (66 people were killed in the collapse of one building alone, the six-storey Canterbury Television building.) The earthquake occurred during the lunch hour, increasing the number of people killed on footpaths and in buses and cars by falling debris. In addition to the loss of life, the earthquake caused catastrophic damage to both land and buildings in Christchurch, particularly in the central business district. Many commercial and residential buildings collapsed in the tremors; others were damaged through soil liquefaction and surface flooding. Over 1,000 buildings in the central business district were eventually demolished because of safety concerns, and an estimated 70,000 people had to leave the city after the earthquakes because their homes were uninhabitable. The New Zealand Government declared a state of national emergency, which stayed in force for ten weeks. In 2014 the Government estimated that the rebuild process would cost NZ$40 billion (approximately US$27.3 billion, a cost equivalent to 17% of New Zealand’s annual GDP). Economists now estimate it could take the New Zealand economy between 50 and 100 years to recover. The earthquakes generated tens of thousands of insurance claims, both against private home insurance companies and against the New Zealand Earthquake Commission, a government-owned statutory body which provides primary natural disaster insurance to residential property owners in New Zealand. These ranged from claims for hundreds of millions of dollars concerning the local port and university to much smaller claims in respect of the thousands of residential homes damaged. Many of these insurance claims resulted in civil proceedings, caused by disputes about policy cover, the extent of the damage and the cost and/or methodology of repairs, as well as failures in communication and delays caused by the overwhelming number of claims. Disputes were complicated by the fact that the Earthquake Commission provides primary insurance cover up to a monetary cap, with any additional costs to be met by the property owner’s private insurer. Litigation funders and non-lawyer claims advocates who took a percentage of any insurance proceeds also soon became involved. These two factors increased the number of parties involved in any given claim and introduced further obstacles to resolution. Resolving these disputes both efficiently and fairly was (and remains) central to the rebuild process. This created an unprecedented challenge for the justice system in Christchurch (and New Zealand), exacerbated by the fact that the Christchurch High Court building was itself damaged in the earthquakes, with the Court having to relocate to temporary premises. (The High Court hears civil claims exceeding NZ$200,000 in value (approximately US$140,000) or those involving particularly complex issues. Most of the claims fell into this category.) This paper will examine the response of the Christchurch High Court to this extraordinary situation as a case study in innovative judging practices and from a jurisprudential perspective. In 2011, following the earthquakes, the High Court made a commitment that earthquake-related civil claims would be dealt with as swiftly as the Court's resources permitted. In May 2012, it commenced a special “Earthquake List” to manage these cases. The list (which is ongoing) seeks to streamline the trial process, resolve quickly claims with precedent value or involving acute personal hardship or large numbers of people, facilitate settlement and generally work proactively and innovatively with local lawyers, technical experts and other stakeholders. For example, the Court maintains a public list (in spreadsheet format, available online) with details of all active cases before the Court, listing the parties and their lawyers, summarising the facts and identifying the legal issues raised. It identifies cases in which issues of general importance have been or will be decided, with the expressed purpose being to assist earthquake litigants and those contemplating litigation and to facilitate communication among parties and lawyers. This paper will posit the Earthquake List as an attempt to implement innovative judging techniques to provide efficient yet just legal processes, and which can be examined from a variety of jurisprudential perspectives. One of these is as a case study in the well-established debate about the dialogic relationship between public decisions and private settlement in the rule of law. Drawing on the work of scholars such as Hazel Genn, Owen Fiss, David Luban, Carrie Menkel-Meadow and Judith Resnik, it will explore the tension between the need to develop the law through the doctrine of precedent and the need to resolve civil disputes fairly, affordably and expeditiously. It will also be informed by the presenter’s personal experience of the interplay between reported decisions and private settlement in post-earthquake Christchurch through her work mediating insurance disputes. From a methodological perspective, this research project itself gives rise to issues suitable for discussion at the Law and Society Annual Meeting. These include the challenges in empirical study of judges, working with data collected by the courts and statistical analysis of the legal process in reference to settlement. September 2015 marked the five-year anniversary of the first Christchurch earthquake. There remains widespread dissatisfaction amongst Christchurch residents with the ongoing delays in resolving claims, particularly insurers, and the rebuild process. There will continue to be challenges in Christchurch for years to come, both from as-yet unresolved claims but also because of the possibility of a new wave of claims arising from poor quality repairs. Thus, a final purpose of presenting this paper at the 2016 Meeting is to gain the benefit of other scholarly perspectives and experiences of innovative judging best practice, with a view to strengthening and improving the judicial processes in Christchurch. This Annual Meeting of the Law and Society Association in New Orleans is a particularly appropriate forum for this paper, given the recent ten year anniversary of Hurricane Katrina and the plenary session theme of “Natural and Unnatural Disasters – human crises and law’s response.” The presenter has a personal connection with this theme, as she was a Fulbright scholar from New Zealand at New York University in 2005/2006 and participated in the student volunteer cleanup effort in New Orleans following Katrina. http://www.lawandsociety.org/NewOrleans2016/docs/2016_Program.pdf