Tuesday, 10 December 2013

Kua tae mai rā ngā hararei...

...almost, anyway!

We have appreciated being able to share in dialogue with you and to discuss so many of the important issues facing our sector this year.  If you have found this valuable, we would appreciate you helping to spread word about One Voice Te Reo Kotahi-- others can find out more about OVTRK by visiting our blog or reading our up-to-date description of our kaupapa and what we have accomplished.  

As your 2013 wraps up and we begin to plan for 2014, please mark in your calendar the date for the next OVTRK forum: Monday 10-March 2014.  We look forward to continuing our work with you in the new year.

Kind regards,
The OVTRK Team

PS: Remember you can find the update from the panNGO delegates here and upcoming events on the left-hand panel.  Let us know if there anything else we should add!

Friday, 1 November 2013

follow-up from forum

Thanks to the nearly seventy people who made it to the forum a few weeks ago with Benesia Smith, CERA Deputy Chief Executive for Strategy and Governance.  We've sent a copy of the PpowerPoint that Benesia presented to NGOs on the register.  The notes from the forum are below. 

One Voice Te Reo Kotahi
Sector Forum 
10 October 2013
Guest speaker: Benesia Smith, Deputy Chief Executive for Strategy and Governance, CERA.

Welcome:  Rex Gibson welcomed everyone on behalf of the Organising Group and gave a blessing to the 70 people present

Setting the scene:  Katherine explained One Voice Te Reo Kotahi.  Much of it involves putting groups in touch with each other.  It also organises forums or hui for the NGO sector.  Katherine also outlined the Pan NGO sector’s representation in CERA by Sara Epperson and Wendy Dalls Katoa, which is in the Community Wellbeing Planning Group.  It would be good to get NGO representation in other parts of CERA’s work, as the sector is extremely diverse and touches every part of society.  She reminded those present of the Johns Hopkins Study of the sector in NZ which documents 97,000 organisations not formed by government (whether national, regional or local) or commercial interests.  The study also showed that only 10% of those have any paid staff.  Christchurch is assumed to have about 10% of such organisations.  In addition it was noted that the conclusion, from the March 2013 report Building Community resilience: Learning from the Canterbury earthquakes, that “communities [of interest, identity and of place] need to be sufficiently resourced and enabled to carry out their vital role.” was an impetus for the questions that were posed to CERA in the OVTRK invitation.

“There is an interest of the state that must not be controlled by the state.  Therein lies the realm of voluntary activity”.  Lord Beveridge UK 1950s.

Address:  Benesia Smith

Benesia spoke to a paper which was distributed (attached) and explained that she has been in her role for eight weeks, but part of CERA since 2011. 
She explained the history, vision and values of CERA, as shown in her Powerpoint handout.  She then explained the four priorities that government has – rebuilding Christchurch is one of these priorities.  This gives CERA influence with other government departments.  The five organisational priorities for CERA in 2013 were developed after extensive conversations with different sectors and signed off by Cabinet.  Each priority has a number of actions under them.  The priorities will be reviewed for 2014, drawing on monitoring programme data and consultation.  Benesia then explained each priority and gave a number of examples of activities undertaken in each.

In relation to insurance, Benesia explained that all insurance companies have in their contracts the right to void them in the event of any action by government to legislate over them. 
The priorities are delivered through six portfolios that together have 25 work programmes.  CERA may deliver, enable, or support each programme.

CERA is currently considering what programmes can be transitioned before 2016. 

NGOs are influencing the programmes through being involved in different forums, issues that come up go back to the staff.

Doesn’t see CERA as having a role in accommodation for NGOs, it is the role of the strategic partners such as CCC and TRONT.  CERA wasn’t set up to deliver services, it is leading and coordinating.  After the June quake they did have to take an implementation role is some things.  They do not have the funding to resource NGOs.

Discussion:  Benesia was joined by Michelle Mitchell, Deputy Chief Executive, Social and Cultural Recovery

Q:  We’re happy for CERA not to resource accommodation for NGOs, but how can we find out the whole picture of NGO accommodation needs and where can we look to for leadership to bring us all together to develop a collaborative strategy? 
Claire Phillips from CCC responded that Council was compiling information on who was in premises with temporary resource consent.
Q:   how can the ‘arranged marriage’ between CERA and CCC be widened to bring in the NGO sector? 
A:  The sector was already in the relationship – “in the house but not in the bed”
Q: why are people on TC3 land getting cash settlements forced on them when they know nothing about the land? 
Benesia: LURP was produced by strategic partners and through a consultation process.  Public comments are now being analysed to see what amendments might be made.  She noted that this is a technical question, and she didn’t have the information to be able to respond but was willing to talk with questioner after the Forum to workout to whom to refer.
Q temporary workers accommodation built on reserves will change into permanent accommodation and the land can be changed from crown owned to privately owned. 
A: at present government has resource consent to build on reserves.  A:  We need to get more info, will send out information when it is found.
Q:  I have been working on the Viva project for sustainable central city living.  Cantabrians want to rebuild new houses on a swamp.  We have engineers that have a very basic attitude to building safe foundations.  I see no movement towards innovation to create a viable system of housing in a swamp.  Viva has been withdrawn because could not create a viable model for building because of cost of remediating the land to required standard is prohibitive.  How are you creating a housing scenario for Christchurch when innovation is not being encouraged. 
A:  Swampy ground has been an issue since long before CERA.  MBIE are working on issue, they need to respond – there is an Engineering Advisory Grp, suggest you speak to them.
Q:  Govt departments work in silos – a critical role for CERA has to make sure they talk to each other and get an integrated recovery.  What happens after 2016? 
A:  transition team is working on this.  Hope the lessons of last 2 & half years have taught agencies to work together but there is more work to be done.  Locally government agencies have worked together at the operational level.  It is at the strategic and policy level that it gets harder.  With strategy being developed locally in CERA it has been easier.  The challenge is to build capacity for this to happen before 2016 and work is underway on this. 
Q:  was there not a plan to build a government precinct in Christchurch that would help government departments to work together? 
A  That would be at the operational level.  Almost all policy work (with the exception of CERA) happens in Wgtn, we need to set up something to change this.
Q:  CERA is there to support the rebuild of social infrastructure, what about the creation of new infrastructure for changing demographics?  With new migrants, money from MSD for Settling In has been moved to family violence.  There is no service currently being funded to resolve migrant issues at the lowest level. 
A:  This should be brought up at the provider forums and by Pan NGO delegates on the CERA Wellbeing Planing Group (CWPG).  Response:  it has been raised in a number of forums, but getting traction is a challenge.  A:  Statistics are starting to show this problem too.  We are trying to work with the social service govt agencies, how can we work on this and what service provision is needed?
Michelle acknowledged the courage and strong voice that Sara and Wendy bring to the CWPG table. 
Q:  It will take a long time to return the city to a prosperous and thriving place.  What is your level of confidence that the strategic priorities will be continued after 2016?  What are the barriers that you are seeing that might prevent a good transition from happening.  E.g. relationship with CCC, what do you need to see them doing that will give you confidence in the transition?
 A:  I’m sitting on the fence for many areas and identifying potential areas that will probably need further work at present.  I have been talking to CCC about the relationship and there are many areas where we have been working closely together, especially at the staff level.  Using the metaphor of the marriage required of CERA and CCC that had had to happen without any courtship period she suggested there was a need  for the renewal of vows.
Q:  You say “we talk to a lot of people”.  How do we find out who you talk to, about what, and what decisions it results in?  Are you happy with the level of information that the public can access on your website to find this out? 
A: Re information on website, it would depend on the issue.  There will be data and statistics, possibly more full information will be on the websites of other government departments.
Q:  Do you have a discretionary budget that you have control over locally that you can address issues. 
A:  We get money appropriated in the Budget for specific purposes, can only refer issues to the government dept that does get an appropriation vote for that – in this case our role is to enable.  We have no extra discretionary funding.
Q:  The Share an Idea exercise made it very clear that the citizens of Chch wanted a clean and green city.  This means integrating social, environmental, economic and cultural wellbeings  and other systems.  I’ve heard nothing about this happening.  For example, does CERA have any expertise or ability to mandate or encourage the provision of a CBD-wide sustainable central heating scheme?  Where is sustainability in the modus operandi of CERA? 
A: CBD is not my area, but it is outlined as something that is important in the Recovery Plan.  I will take the question to the head of CCDU. 
Q: People want clean green safe smart city.   The opportunity was there to do a recovery based on that.  What has happened to the people’s wishes in CERA?  Share an Idea was a one-off community consultation, it should have been an ongoing dialogue. 
A:  Elements of that have been picked up on. 
Benesia said there were  a number of issues that were currently unsolved in terms of transitioning from the current time to when CERA ceases in 2016.  These include how CCC and the government continue to relate given that there is an agreement about cost sharing  between them – not only about the central city rebuild but also about ongoing work on horizontal infrastructure; who will undertake the monitoring of the recovery; what will be the future use of the residential red zone and there will be the challenge of 2014 being a government election year.
Summary by Katherine : there is lots of interest and passion and expertise amongst NGOs, also willingness to contribute.  The modelling that you are doing here between policy (Benesia) and practice (Michelle) is something that we hope you can hold on to.  Your openness has been impressive, I hope that we can keep this dialogue going.  Another transition factor that you did not mention is that associated with recognition in the CER Act of Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu's statutory role.  We believe understanding amongst citizens needs to be addressed about how this will continue into the future beyond 2016.  OVTRK has embraced Te Tiriti o Waitangi / Treaty Relationships Framework as reflected by our two caucuses of Tangata Whenua and Tangata Tiriti and would value being briefed about this aspect of transition.

Closure:  Rex. 

Blessing:  Wendy

We hope that this is useful to you.  Our next forum is likely to be in the new year.  We'll let you know what we are planning!  In the meantime, if you haven't already seen the update from the panNGO delegates it has been sent to NGOs on the register, so have a look at one of our last emails.

Kind regards,
The OVTRK Team

Friday, 20 September 2013

We just sent out an email to NGOs on our register.

Upcoming forum
The next  OVTRK Forum is 7.30pm Thursday 10 October 2013 at the WEA Centre (59 Gloucester St).
Bernisia Smith from CERA will assist us to understand
  • how CERA’s strategy and policy is developed in the context of its finite life
  • who is involved in developing strategy and policy
  • how communities and NGOs can influence this development
For example, what strategy / policy is being developed to ensure ongoing resourcing (including accommodation) for NGOs within the rebuilt Greater Christchurch?
OVTRK has been involved in receiving feedback from the CERA Wellbeing Planning Team and its Psychosocial subcommittee. This engagement has, however, proved to be incomplete in addressing many of the matters inherent in our OVTRK kaupapa (attached), which have been highlighted by several NGOs on our OVTRK Register.
Do join us to help us clarify how NGOs with CERA can more fully participate in the current stage of the rebuild of Greater Christchurch.

Notes from the most recent forum
Notes from our last forum, How can housing developments in Greater Christchurch be future-proofed? are now on the OVTRK blog.

Watch this space
Some time before the next forum, the panNGO delegates to the CERA Community Wellbeing Planners Group and Psychosocial subcommittee will send out an update about their involvement with these groups and the work they have been doing.

That's all for now, everyone.
Noho ora mai koe (take care),
The OVTRK team

Thursday, 18 July 2013

One Voice Te Reo Kotahi Sector forum
17 July 2013 - YMCA, 10 Hereford St, Christchurch

How can housing developments in Greater Christchurch be future-proofed?Kia whakakotahi te hoe (Let's paddle in unison)  
Attendance:  Around 50 people attended.

Welcome:  Tangata Whenua Co-Chair Dora Langsbury welcomed everyone, introduced the OVTRK team and blessed the meeting.
A number of NGOs were invited to give short presentations on aspects of housing and residential developments. 

Comcare is a provider of social housing in Christchurch for people with mental health issues.  For them a future-proofed city is one where people who are vulnerable can be housed. 

There are 450 people at any one time who are homeless and experience mental health and addiction issues.  Often they are on invalid or sickness benefits.  Comcare supports clients to maintain their tenancies, which used to be mainly in private sector rentals.  They are now mainly in Housing NZ or Chch City Council properties.  There are over 100 people on Comcare’s waiting list. 

A positive development in the area of social housing was the stimulus that has come from the report of the Housing Shareholders Advisory Group established by government.  The report, ‘Home and Housed: A Vision for Social Housing in New Zealand’ has led to a reform process that has freed up opportunities and resources for NGOs to contribute more to social housing provision.  As a result Comcare is currently building 32 flats and hoping to build another 32 in new year. 

The Social Housing Reform Bill going through Parliament now has some positives and negatives.  One positive is that the government subsidy that is given to Housing New Zealand to be able to provide low-rental housing will also be made available to NGOs providing social housing.   

WikiHouse is a system that creates buildings that can be deconstructed and reconstructed.  It is trying to achieve affordable, high-performance buildings for everyone, especially residential housing.  The NZ initiative is being developed by Space Craft Systems and is part of a global network of people working on this issue.  Warm, dry, and sustainable is the goal. 


·         adaptable design: build only what you need, when you need it, and change it when you want.  

·         empowering people:  enables communities to better help themselves and each other,

·         protective environment: safeguards people, their interests and the environment.

The concept involves neighbourhoods designed and delivered by those who live in them.  There is a global library of designs that can be downloaded and then cheaply ‘printed’ and assembled without formal construction skills or tools.  They can be assembled by non-skilled people under supervision of project leader. 

WikiHouse NZ is looking for more people to become involved, along with funding and partners who can help.

The Viva project
The vision of Viva is “to create a vibrant urban village, an innovative and inspiring example of sustainable design and connected community”. 

With the involvement of architecture and design practice Jasmax, Viva held an integrated design workshop with over 100 people, who designed the kind of village they would like to see in Christchurch.  The design was entered the ‘Breathe’ Urban Village competition and was selected as one of four finalists.  The winning design will be built on the corner of Madras and Gloucester St. 

Their plan provides medium density housing but still maintains quite a lot of open space, allowing for food growing and an orchard. The focus is on wellbeing and happiness.  It’s important that the central city can’t be just for the rich and overseas visitors.

‘Breathe’ competition:  http://www.futurechristchurch.co.nz/breathe

NZ Planning Institute
The NZ Planning Institute gave an overview of Housing Accords Bill, which came out of the 2012 report of the Productivity Commission’s inquiry into housing affordability.  The inquiry identified the lack of housing supply as an influence on housing affordability. 

The purpose of the Accords Bill is to stimulate supply.  Under the Bill, the Government is able to identify regions and districts with significant housing supply and affordability issues and designate them as Special Housing Areas.  A Housing Accord is then developed between the relevant council and government to work collaboratively to address housing supply and affordability issues. 

While the intention is that councils and the Government will work in good faith, if an agreement cannot be reached the Bill gives the Government the ability to establish Special Housing Areas and to issue consents for developments in areas of severe housing unaffordability.. 

Within the Special Housing Areas, resource consent and plan change processes will be made more permissive.  Developments must be predominantly residential, and will be subject to height restrictions and a maximum number of houses.  However these can be overridden by Order in Council.  The legislation will be time-limited to 2017.

The Social Services Select Committee is due to report back on the Bill at the end of July. 

NZ Planning Institute:  http://www.planning.org.nz/MainMenu

Tenants Protection Assn 
TPA recently undertook a survey of tenants, which confirmed what they have been saying for a long time, that people are suffering in the rental arena. 

Of the 365 respondents, 70% have had one or more rent increases since the quakes.  The average increase is $43 per week.  Many tenants reported that rentals met only the most basic needs and nearly 50% reported mould issues.

The report puts forward a number of recommendations: 

·         The implementation of a rent stabilisation programme.  TPA would like to see a public disscussion around this.  It works in many countries around the world and they are working on a model to take to government.

·         Abolish letting fees.  These are charged by property manager or other letting agent and are the equivalent of one week’s rent + GST.  Tenants can’t get this from W&I.  As the property manager has agreement with the owner rather than the tenant, they shouldn’t be able to charge this to the tenant. 

·         An end to 90 day notices.  This would provide tenants with security of tenure.  Currently landlords can give 90 days’ notice without reason.  TPA recommends that all terminations must have a valid reason.  A strong theme that came through from tenants in survey was that they don’t complain about anything because they fear being given 90 days’ notice and there is nowhere for them to go to.  Property managers are re-renting properties more often than they used to over the same period of time.  They get another letting fee, but there is no security of tenure for tenants.  The average tenancy is 10 mths – 2 years. 

·         Warrant of Fitness for all rental properties:  The Government has announced that they will introduce this for Housing NZ properties.  TPA recommends that it also be brought into private sector, where most tenants live.

TPA is looking for support on these initiatives.  Homelessness is on the rise, particularly in Christchurch.  We need to future-proof the future of our citizens, and we must say that what people are living in is unacceptable. 

TPA also encouraged people to look at the Housing Accords Bill very carefully.

TPA (Chch) Rental Survey 2013:  A Study of Increasing Rents and Housing Conditions in the Greater Christchurch Area.  http://tpa.org.nz/sites/tpa.org.nz/files/TPA%20Rental%20Survey%20Report%202013_0.pdf

Tenants Protection Assn:  http://tpa.org.nz/

Lifemark advocates design standards to improve the state of NZ housing, providing design solutions for our ageing population.  They promote a set of common sense design standards based on 5 key principles: accessibility, adaptability, usability, safety, and lifetime value.

The speaker from Lifemark was unable to attend.  Tangata Tiriti Co-Chair Katherine Peet passed on some information that she had received prior to the meeting about the availability of a new Lifelong Design Advisory Service.  This is now free for people in Canterbury where their home is to be rebuilt or significantly repaired due to the earthquakes.  An advisor can meet with homeowners and recommend how homes can be adapted for lifespan use.

Lifemark:  www.lifemark.org.nz 

Lifelong Design Advisory Service:  http://www.enable.co.nz/news/news-items/lifelong-design

From the Ground Up
A group of people looked at what it costs for standard suburban development (infill) and development of a whole area to a similar density to that of infill by consolidation of use and removing cars.  Homes can be built more cheaply with this latter course of action.  Norway has very high building standards, and can build a home for parent and child for $67,000.  This can only be done with economies of scale and cooperation.

Cooperative Sections: 
This project is trying to make land affordable.  When buying a home in a standard property development, 1/3 of the cost is the land, 1/3 of the cost is materials and building, 1/3 is the developer’s margin.  The initiative has found some land and developed community sections that are selling for up to $140,000.  Few people have inquired, and and this may be because people are risk averse.  We need to start taking more risks, that’s why developers make their profits - they take the risks that we’re not prepared to. 

Cooperative Sections:  http://www.cooperativesections.co.nz/

Land Use Renewal Plan update
In response to a question how urban villages can be connected with each other and the central city when there are two separate plans – LURP and Central City, Stephen Timms from ECan was invited to give the meeting an update on the progress of the LURP. 

The new version of the plan is more about people and about how it integrates with the central city plan.  It sets targets for intensification to 2028, aiming initially for 35% of all development within the existing urban area and includes some mechanisms for doing this. 

The Plan is open for further comment until 2 August, and the Minister is keen to implement it as quickly as possible.  It is available from libraries or on the CERA website. 

Questions and comments from the attendees:

  • As the key issue is resource availability (we are running out of cheap oil) and other world issues such as collapsing economy; how do we move from this plan to future-proof our city?  Risk analysis in the plan seems to be absent.  Stephen responded that the issues have been addressed to the extent that we could. 
  • Missing from the plan is realistic thinking about people.  Prior to the quakes we were losing living spaces to urban development and gentrification.  Poor people are being forced out to the greenfields, where they are further from employment and community resources.  Central city living will be the domain of the well-to-do.  Stephen replied that the planners have been taking this into consideration, trying to plan so that people can remain in the city. 
  • Housing needs to be configured not just for nuclear families but for extended families – this is particularly important for CALD communities.  The urban village concept is useful, needs to be maximum 20 houses. 
  • LURP has proposals for affordable housing on p32.

General discussion / items from the floor: 

  • There is concern at the reported price that government is paying for commercial land – twice the current GV.  This is discouraging innovation. 
  • In the LURP is reference to the Canterbury Sustainable Homes Working Party.  Set up by Ecan, this is now being shared with MBIE and Beacon pathways.  It could be a vehicle for people to influence what gets to council.  The working party is developing Build Back Smarter guidelines with the involvement of Lifemark. 
  • PHA and Healthy Chch are planning a housing forum for later in the year. 

Closure:  In closing, people were encouraged to stay in touch with each other and engage with the vision and keep weaving the web. 

Thursday, 4 July 2013

July Forum

How can housing developments in Greater Christchurch be future-proofed?

Kia whakakotahi te hoe (Let's paddle in unison)
Nga mihi nui ki a koutou me nga ahuatanga o te wa. (Lots of greetings to everyone and all that is happening) 
The next One Voice Te Reo Kotahi (OVTRK) Open Forum is to consider the question: How can housing developments in Greater Christchurch be future-proofed? 
Again this Forum is intended to provide an opportunity for NGOs to inform each other and encourage us all to plan any next steps for OVTRK <onevoicetereokotahi.blogspot.co.nz>. 
The Forum is coming up at 7:30pm on Wednesday 17 July at the YMCA at 12 Hereford St - there are good bike racks, it is accessible by bus and has off-street parking accessed off Cashel St - for which you need to sign in at reception with your number plate.

Six NGOs have agreed to give a 5 minute input to start the conversation:
  • Lifemark – lifetime design for residential housing and their new Lifelong Design Advisory Service for the people in Canterbury
  • Wikihouse – housing that can be deconstructed and reconstructed elsewhere at relatively minimal cost
  • Viva - the vision of this Project is community focused sustainable urban villages in the re-build of Christchurch
  • Comcare – update on community housing in Christchurch and the social housing reform process. 
  • NZ Planning Institute – including the Housing Accords and Special Areas Bill currently being considered by Parliament. 
  • Tenant's Protection Association - will highlight the recent recommendations form the TPA Rental Survey Report
We also expect the final draft of the Land Use Recovery Plan (LURP) to have been released and to have people able to inform us about that - including for those NGOs who have not been able to do much work on the LURP!
See you there!
Noho ora mai koe (take care)
The OVTRK team

Monday, 17 June 2013

Thanks for your feedback + news on upcoming forum

Updates on our latest activities, and activities you may wish to be involved in.

Next forum: 
Our next forum is Wednesday 17 July, 7.30pm at the YMCA.  Topic: How can housing developments in Greater Christchurch be future-proofed?
Would anyone from your NGO like to help OVTRK organise this next Open Forum?  Please let us know ASAP.

We've had excellent feedback from our LURP forum and the submission that followed.  We hope to hear from you soon.

Information from the CERA Community Wellbeing Planners Group
Huge thanks to the NGOs who responded with information around the Canterbury Wellbeing Index and who provided input intour submission to the Psychosocial Plan [copy available to NGOs on our register].  The panNGO support panel (including representatives from OVTRK) will be attending a Community Wellbeing Index workshop later in the month to learn more about the findings in the index and discuss solutions around emerging issues.  The submissions to the Psychosocial plan are now sitting with the Psychosocial Subcommittee.  We will let you know if we find out about relevant developments in this area.

At the most recent meeting with the CERA CWPG, our delegates heard about plans for the advancement of the Avon Otakaro Project, and heard an update from the Residential Advisory Service, which has reported positive outcomes so far.

The panNGO delegates also had a slot on the agenda to speak, and chose to discuss "NGO Accommodation."  In the presentation, the delegates explained why NGO accommodation was in the interest of CERA and the Christchurch community, provided a few case studies or anecdotes from NGOs facing challenges related to accommodation, and offered a few of the following as possible ways forward:
  • Initiate a process (--> Identify best programme/plan/senior staff to champion this issue and work out solutions)
  • Commit to supporting specific/concrete things by planning for transitional options (Ex: Dallington Scout Hall (red zone but not demolished and safe))
  • Commit to scheduling time in existing facilities (Ex: Travis Education Centre)
  • Commit to projects that would move sound houses to vacant land (Ex: Old farm site, edge of Travis wetlands, could be environmental NGO hub for east, possibly under umbrella with other organisations (share support, project facilitation, publicity, etc.))
  • Plan: Council or CERA land with government-funded buildings?
  • Plan for affordable spaces close to bus exchange
  • Plan for fair rent and collaboratively shared resources
These issues seemed to be brand-new to the CWPG and will require significant follow-up.  There are several different "next steps" that the delegates are exploring with CERA staff.  At this point, the issue is at least on the table and we will keep you posted as we find out more and if we need feedback.

We will be in touch with you again soon.  Please remember that if you know of any agencies not on our registry but who would benefit from signing on, the link is easy: http://bit.ly/1voicetereokotahi-reg

The OVTRK Team

Wednesday, 22 May 2013

Settle in with some reading (and help us communicate your priorities)

Kia ora!  We just shared several bits of information with NGOs on our registry, including a few that involve feedback.  We've shared some of that information below.  If you'd like to know more but aren't on the registry, first join the registry and then get in touch with us.

Key issues highlighted by OVTRK registrants

OVTRK NGOs have been actively expressing their views to CERA, the media, and each other.  We thought we'd highlight a few particular issues of interest to the wider registry.  One has to do with the process that has surroundeCanCERN's work in the red zone.  Another is commentary from Sustainable Otautahi Christchurch on the feasibility of the Christchurch Central Recovery Plan.  We've also heard from many on our registry about the challenges related to accommodation-- and these viewpoints were recently featured in a Press article.  We are doing our best to keep abreast of these issues (and others!) so that the panNGO delegates can better communicate the challenges being faced by the sector at future Community Wellbeing Planning Group forums.  (Note: links to the CanCERN and SOC items were sent to NGOs on our registry).

Information from the CERA Community Wellbeing Planners Group
At recent meetings with the CERA CWPG, the panNGO delegates have been receiving updates about the residential advisory service, the winter resilience projects, and the community wellbeing programmes of works.  Representatives from each of these areas briefly report back at the meetings on new developments or trends.

What we think may be of the greatest interest to the sector as this point in time is the Canterbury Wellbeing Index that is being finalised.  The document isn't ready for circulation yet, but the delegates have been given the option of sharing feedback from the sector.  With the help of the support panel, we will be able to make some comment.  Additional information has been circulated to NGOs on our registry.

New: Information about the Psychosocial Wellbeing Committee and Plan
The panNGO delegate support panel received a request from CERA for the delegates to also participate in the Psychosocial Subcommittee.  Our team believes these meetings could be useful, but there has been some concern around the capacity of our delegates to attend both.  In response to invitation, the panNGO support panel answered with the following:
On behalf of the panNGO Support Panel I would like to thank you for offering our CWP delegation representation on the Psychosocial committee. 
The panNGO Support Panel would like to accept the offer to provide delegates to the Psychosocial Committee.  Due to the voluntary workload expectations on delegates from the NGO sector we, as a Support Panel for our NGO delegation, wish to reserve the right to determine who the delegates will be.
 We will endeavour to ensure that we provide representative coverage at both the CWP and Psychosocial committee hui.

We did make the decision to send our delegates to at least the first meeting after they received the invitation.  During this meeting, it was announced that the final copy of the Greater Christchurch Strategic Psychosocial Plan needed to go through consultation until 7-June.  We've made the draft document available to NGOs on our registry, and would ask that you reply using the consultation form provided by CERA.  If you have any further questions on this, please let us know. 

LURP submission
Many thanks to the people who attended our LURP workshop.  We've had excellent feedback from the facilitators and attendees alike.  

That's all for now, everyone.  We will be in touch with you again soon!