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.
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