18.04.2015 Views

Editor: I. Mallikarjuna Sharma Volume 11: 15-31 March 2015 No. 5-6

Martyrs memorial special issue of 15-31 March 2015 paying tributes to Bhagat Singh and other comrades.

Martyrs memorial special issue of 15-31 March 2015 paying tributes to Bhagat Singh and other comrades.

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

F-<strong>15</strong>4 Quake Outcasts v. Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery [NZ-SC: Court Opinion] (20<strong>15</strong>) 1 LAW<br />

required would not be possible under the current<br />

legislation, whereas the processes set out in the<br />

Bill are “efficient while providing appropriate<br />

safeguards”. 44 Concluding his introductory<br />

speech, the Minister highlighted the purpose of<br />

the legislation and reassured the House that the<br />

powers would not go unchecked. The Minister<br />

said: 45<br />

“Overall, this bill enables the Government to<br />

move swiftly to restore the social and economic<br />

wellbeing of the greater Christchurch area and its<br />

affected communities. The checks and balances<br />

ensure that the necessary powers for recovery are<br />

used judiciously, are open to appropriate levels<br />

of public scrutiny, and provide for appeal.”<br />

[32] In essence, the purpose of the Bill was to put<br />

in place mechanisms for the effective recovery of<br />

the Christchurch region. As the Minister said: 46<br />

“In order to achieve the policy intent of effective<br />

and efficient rebuild and recovery in<br />

Christchurch, the legislation needs to ensure that<br />

the desired outcomes identified in the recovery<br />

strategy by the Christchurch Earthquake<br />

Recovery Agency [sic] and the Minister, which<br />

provides for the recovery plans, are able to be<br />

efficiently and effectively delivered on the<br />

ground.”<br />

[33] Much of the concern surrounding the Bill<br />

was due to the extensive powers to be vested in<br />

the Crown. In response to criticism that the<br />

powers granted under the Bill “go too far”, the<br />

Hon Kate Wilkinson, the then Minister for<br />

Conservation, said that that those fears had not<br />

been realised with the predecessor legislation (the<br />

Canterbury Earthquake Response and Recovery<br />

Act 2010) and that “[t]here are significant checks<br />

and balances to ensure that the powers are used<br />

properly, and are necessary for the Canterbury<br />

44 (12 April 20<strong>11</strong>) 671 NZPD 17899. See also the Minister’s<br />

comments at 18130 where he said “[t]his bill is an<br />

enabling framework setting out a range of powers that<br />

may need to be exercised during the recovery process. It<br />

does have significant checks and balances on the use of<br />

those powers.”<br />

45 At 17901.<br />

46 At 17899.<br />

recovery and rebuild”. 47 Mr Brownlee, during the<br />

Bill’s second reading, stated that the “most clear<br />

check and balance is the requirement that all of<br />

those powers must be exercised in the recovery<br />

process and cannot step outside of that”. 48<br />

[34] During the Bill’s second reading, Mr<br />

Brownlee also made the following comments<br />

about Recovery Plans. He said that: 49<br />

“The decisions that need to be made here are<br />

very, very dependent upon research about the<br />

condition of the land in Christchurch, and upon<br />

getting enough information to deal with<br />

individuals who have those broken properties so<br />

that they can be given some choices about what<br />

their future is.<br />

... All of those things will require a series of<br />

recovery plans, and, quite patently obviously,<br />

there will need to be discussion about how those<br />

plans are delivered with those local communities<br />

and those affected individuals.”<br />

[35] The need for community participation and<br />

consultation in the decision making processes, to<br />

the extent compatible with expedited recovery<br />

measures, was stressed. Ms Wilkinson, in<br />

recognising the need for efficiency and<br />

community input, said: 50 It is important that the<br />

need for community participation is balanced<br />

against the need for timely and effective decisionmaking.<br />

Cantabrians want a say in how their<br />

region is rebuilt. It is, after all, their region. This<br />

bill provides for the establishment of a<br />

community forum, made up of local<br />

representatives who will provide advice to the<br />

Minister. There will also be a public consultation<br />

process in place. Cantabrians want to be heard,<br />

but they want to see action. It is a matter of<br />

striking the balance between effective<br />

coordination and consultation and the need for<br />

progress.<br />

[36] A similar comment was made by Mr<br />

Brownlee when, during the second reading, he<br />

47 At 17904.<br />

48 At 18130.<br />

49 At 18130.<br />

50 At 17904.<br />

Law Animated World, <strong>15</strong>-<strong>31</strong> <strong>March</strong> 20<strong>15</strong> 96

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!