Tuesday 11 March 2014

One Voice Te Reo Kotahi Sector Forum: "Questions regarding CERA transitioning out in 2016"


One Voice Te Reo Kotahi

Sector Forum:
“Questions regarding CERA transitioning out in 2016”

7.30pm, 10 March 2014
Netball Centre, Christchurch

Feedback from this event

 

Introduction


Approximately 120 people attended to hear speakers from the six statutory partners in the recovery talk about arrangements for recovery post-2016.

The meeting opened with a karakia given by Whare Tamanui, before Rex Gibson welcomed the official guests and the audience.

The context of the event and outline of the programme was given by Katherine Peet, who chaired the forum.  She referred to the previous OVTRK forum at which CERA representative Benesia Smith had described the relationship between CERA and greater Christchurch as like an arranged marriage – the cost-sharing agreement should have been a pre-nuptial agreement yet it was decided afterwards.  Katherine noted that five of the six questions that tonight’s speakers were addressing had been raised by Benesia at that forum. 

Katherine also gave an overview of the NGO sector – there are approximately 10,000 NGO’s in Canterbury, and only 10% have any paid staff.  The volunteer and paid workers in the sector are 10% of the workforce and bring together a wealth of experience and collective expertise.  Treaty-based development is widely practiced.  The sector contributes 5.3% of GDP, and receives 24% of its income from philanthropic giving, 9% from government and generates the remaining 67% itself.

NGO speakers
The meeting was addressed by four NGO speakers, who were chosen to cover the four aspects of recovery (environmental, social, economic and cultural) that CERA must address and to give a flavour of the diversity of the sector.  
There are around 10,000 NGOs in Canterbury, of which approx 10% have paid staff.  Volunteer and paid workers in the non-profit sector are 10.6% of NZ's workforce, that’s about 54,000 paid and volunteer workers in Canterbury.  The non-profit sector contributes 5.3% of NZ's GDP.  67% of the sector's income comes from fees, 9% from government and 24% from philanthropic giving.


Jane Quigley (The Viva Project):  In the first year or so after the earthquakes we all believed that we had a great opportunity to create a better city and make a difference.  We don’t hear people saying that so much now. 

Viva has a focus on sustainable urban villages.  It ran workshops for people who wanted to create sustainable living spaces in Christchurch.  An initial design was submitted to the ‘Breathe’ competition held by Future Christchurch, and made the finals but didn’t submit a final plan.  The land was too expensive, and conditions that were imposed by regulatory authorities too hard.  No one group can create the vision alone, we need to work together. 


Surinder Tandon (Chch Multicultural Council):  The Multicultural Council was formed 25 years ago (as Chch Ethnic Council) with the support of Christchurch City Council.  Its purposes are to promote harmonious relations, support cultural diversity, and support migrants’ health and wellbeing.  It is run purely by volunteers, and doesn’t get much support in way of funding.  Currently it is campaigning for government’s Office of Ethnic Affairs to get Ministry status.  Christchurch is attractive to migrants and becoming increasingly ethnically diverse.  Migrants are still coming to the city post quake.  The city needs better resources for existing and future migrants so they can contribute fully to the city.


Tim Weir (Delta Community Support Trust):  Delta is based in Richmond, which was one of the harder hit suburbs with liquefaction and the recent floods.  Tim noted that ‘economic’ was at the top of the graphic of aspects of recovery in the CERA Recovery document.  The NGO sector priority is not economic, it is common good.  We need to be sure that an economic focus doesn’t drive our vision.  Money should be invested behind our vision.  The community sector can make money go a long way.  For instance Delta collaborates with other groups in the area to put on community events to maintain and enhance community connections.  The loss of community venues is an issue.  Tim would love to see investment in the community sector as an anchor project. 


Dallas Hibbs (He Waka Tapu):  He Waka Tapu is 20 years old and based on the east side of town.  Before the quakes people were talking about what they wanted to do, this hasn’t stopped.  How do we make families stronger?  Lots on east side want to celebrate their Maoriness, others including Pacifika and Pakeha also want to see their heritage recognised.  We need to look after people first, bricks and mortar can follow. 


Speakers from the Panel of CERA statutory partners

An earlier forum with CERA had given rise to a number of questions that had been sent to the panel speakers.  They were all asked to respond to those that were relevant to their organisation.  The questions were:

     How will CCC and the government continue to relate beyond 2016, given that there is an agreement about cost sharing between them?

     How will the five statutory partners, named in the CER Act, continue to relate to one another, ECAN and the TLAs beyond 2016?

     Who will undertake the monitoring of the recovery beyond 2016?

     What will be the future use of the residential red zone lands?

     What challenges do you anticipate for the transition, with 2014 being a parliamentary election year?

     How will recognition of Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu's statutory role in the recovery under the CER Act be continued into the future beyond 2016? 


Roger Sutton (CEO, CERA):  The forum Chair read out the apology emailed this evening from Roger Sutton, and his keenness to progress these discussions.  No replacement speaker was provided. 

Arihia Bennett (CEO, Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu):  Arihia bases the role on her passion for family and communities.  Ngai Tahu number around 56,000, about 10,000 are based in the rohe (area of responsibility) which stretches from Kaikoura to Murihiku. 

At the time of the quakes the Kaiwhakahaere Mark Solomon said the role of Ngai Tahu is manaakitanga and kaitaikitanga in relation to all of the people of Christchurch.  What is the role for Ngai Tahu post-2016?  Ten years ago Ngai Tahu may not have been sitting on this panel, there have been big changes in 10 years.  Ngai Tahu has increasing roles with other governing bodies e.g. co-governing Waihora (Lake Ellesmere) in partnership with ECan.  It is also engaged in many activities from commercial to social.  We have started to pave the way, it is now expected that we will have a lot more to do with each other. 


Dame Margaret Bazley (Chair, ECan):  Dame Margaret noted that ECan has a Canterbury-wide responsibility. 

We need to be realistic as to when we can expect all the issues for people and land to be completed and when we can expect CCC to be able to take over addressing these.  This can’t be achieved in 2 years, so it’s too early to be talking about transition.  We need to be planning beyond 2016.  Dame Margaret supports returning responsibilities to the territorial authorities as soon as possible, but we are dealing with things that are too big and hard and have never been dealt with before.  We need Brownlee and CERA for some time yet, they make sure our voice is heard in Wellington.  If we had a smaller presence there we wouldn’t be heard. 

The partners didn’t relate well to each other prior to quakes, it was very difficult until CERA was created.  Now the parties get on fine.  ECan is most closely involved in rebuilding the public transport system, which is a huge job. 

Monitoring of the recovery should be done by the community with overview by government because of the money they have invested.

Dame Margaret is looking forward to working with the other partners in the future use of the red zoned land. 

She did not feel it was possible to comment what impact the forthcoming election could have on the development of a transition process.  A change in government may bring about changes to how things are done.

ECan works closely with Ngai Tahu, who have a person nominated as an ECan commissioner.  This model should be looked at going forward.  Advisory units, liaison groups and similar models don’t work as well as having somebody as part of governance.


Kelvin Coe (Selwyn District Council) represented by Councillor Malcolm Lyall:  Selwyn was not affected as severely by the earthquakes as the other authorities. 

The statutory partners have been working together since 2006, developing the Urban Development Strategy (UDS) – the overarching strategic document for Canterbury.  This has set the ground for learning to work with each other, and developed relationships that are standing us in good stead.  Malcolm has faith that all can work together, it needs communication, cooperation and consideration.  Selwyn has become a feeder region for Christchurch city, its residents want Christchurch to go ahead as they it as their city – many were educated there, they go to the theatre and events, and take part in the life of the city. 

Monitoring of the recovery should continue to be informed by the CERA advisory committee.  The UDS has stood as a framework for the recovery plans, Malcolm would like to see Health Board sitting on the UDS board as well.  Aspirations need to be heard and supported by our partners.  Selwyn is more than willing to be there and help facilitate the conversations between partners.  It looks forward to continuing to work with Ngai Tahu at the table. 


David Ayers (Mayor, Waimakariri District Council):  David noted that the recovery is not about Christchurch, it is about Canterbury.  Waimakariri was badly affected by quakes.  Towns like Kaiapoi are as old as Christchurch, with similar buildings.  WDC are talking about not only greater Christchurch recovery and revival but its own.  There are two cost-sharing agreements, WDC has one as well as Christchurch city.  The agreement is not with CERA but directly with the Crown.  They are largely satisfied with the results of the agreement.  Beyond 2016, it is expected that most of the money will be spent. 

There is a history of cooperation that goes back beyond the quakes.  There have been some tensions especially with ECan prior to 2010, but all the local governments have worked well togetherat both governance and staff level, including on LURP and the UDS. 

WDC is monitoring its own recovery now and will continue to do so. 

The red zone is a major issue for area – probably a higher proportion of houses in Kaiapoi (20%) have been red-zoned than in Christchurch.  There is some evidence that there is progress towards an answer of what will happen to the land, this is something they have been pressing for.  Infrastructure repair is now getting to the fringes of the red zones, and WDC needs clarity of what can or cannot be placed there.  Signals suggest some kind of reserve for recreational use, but surety is needed.  It is written into cost-sharing agreement that community must be involved in the decision.

WDC has a good relationship with the local hapu of Ngai Tahu, Ngai Tuahuriri.  Their day to day relationship is with them. 


Lianne Dalziel (Mayor, Christchurch City Council):  As an example of how she approaches recovery, Lianne explained how she gave a draft of her recent commemoration speech to the bereaved families and also to the All Right campaign because wanted to be sure that it addressed psychosocial issues.  This is important because it matters how we engage with communities, we need to be working together to find solutions, not to find ourselves in conflict.  People respond and recover in different ways, we need to be respectful of reality that not everyone is able or ready to ‘move on’. 

According to the advice offered to government in 2011 by the Prime Minister’s Chief Science Officer, Professor Sir Peter Gluckman, the most important ameliorating factors in psychosocial recovery from a major disaster included: being explicit how governance arrangements will facilitate local engagement and empowerment; recognition by the community of the conflict inherent between the desire for rapid physical recovery and the difficulties in planning - the key is to ask community openly how to resolve it; and providing clarity of reconstruction and rehabilitation plans – it is better for those in decision-making roles to say “we don’t know” than obfuscate.  This confirmed that the statutory partners can’t do it on their own without each other and the community.  We have to combine all our resources and work in a collaborative way. 

The CERA Recovery Strategy approved by government specifically requires the statutory partners to write a transition plan and this must be completed by April 2015.  It’s only the legislation and statutory CERA powers that disappears in 2016, not the need to work together.  The spirit of CERA will continue.  We need to reinforce all of the relationships in order to carry on beyond then. 


Questions from the floor:  People involved with NGOs were invited to ask questions of any of the panellists.

Q to Lianne Dalziel – what is that working together that you spoke of going to look like? 

A:  The process for developing the transition plan isn’t clear at present.  It has become clearer to Christchurch City Council that we need to be thinking more carefully what this means for the long term.  Eventually council will be re-established in its role in the city, this is an amazing opportunity to find ways for more community engagement including collaborative decision-making that would not have been possible without the post-disaster response that was driven by the community.  In any environment that has taken advantage of this energy and resolve you can get transformation on a scale that you wouldn’t believe.  I’m seeing building community and restoring ability to make decisions for themselves.  That is the magic of what can happen next. 


Q to Lianne Dalziel:  The disability sector is puzzled because we are told that everything must be rebuilt as it was pre-quake but people talk about how this is an opportunity to make things better than they were.  For example, the centre islands in roads are not suitable for some disabilities.  This is an opportunity to make things that were useless before useful now.  Why must they be only restored to what they were? 

A:  When SCIRT was established CCC established a separate betterment fund for this purpose.  The applications for this fund come from SCIRT, if they can get extra funds they can increase capacity.  But SCIRT looks underground and at the road, and not around it.  They are not applying for things like you describe because it’s off their radar.  We need to find a way for them to look at the neighbourhood and see what the betterment objectives could be. 

David Ayers:  In the Waimakariri we have no SCIRT, and yes we are doing betterment work. 


Q to entire panel:  What’s the role of young people in the transitional period, how would you ensure that the youth voice is heard?

A:  Arihia:  Ngai Tahu have young people involved in arts and crafts and design of natural environment through educational institutions or papatipu runanga.  We have resurrected through polytechs the trade training programme. 

David:  Waimakariri Youth Council is being set up at the moment.  Youth have been involved in the recovery particularly in Kaiapoi but also other towns. 

Malcolm:  Selwyn does not have the same rebuild needs as further north.  We just recently established the Selwyn Youth Council and are actively involving them in decision-making.  Issues are more to do with rapid community growth. 

Dame Margaret: There are a number of youth programmes in ECan’s restoration programmes. 

Lianne:  Young people have led all the edgy and different regeneration programmes such as Gapfiller.  We need to keep in mind that we are rebuilding our city for future generations.


Q:  Public transport will be an issue, the railway line could be used for commuter transport.  Has this been discussed, if not why not? 

David:  This has always been on the agenda.  The first priority has been trying to make the bus system work because of its flexibility.  We need to get it working in the central city first. 

Malcolm:  Selwyn would like to see it work.  It was looked at pre-quake in work on the UDS, the passenger numbers needed to make it efficient were quite high.  The line to Rolleston is heavily used by freight, it would be difficult to schedule passenger transport. 

Dame Margaret:  We have to get the basics of bus transport sorted first. 

Comment from the floor:  there is some rolling stock available in Auckland, could we get it for a discount rate for the future? 

David:  WDC has been doing research on people who live in the Waimakariri and work in Christchurch.  It was found that they work all over the city.  If a train ran from Rangiora to Christchurch it would have to integrate with the bus services.

Comment from the floor:  The arteries of the city are what will allow us to develop new subdivisions.  We need to protect the rail corridors now so we can integrate heavy rail and light rail. 


Q to all:  I am encouraged by Lianne’s comment about CERA continuing on in spirit.  For me this was significant.  Could others also commit to that spirit? 

Arihia:  Ngai Tahu is very interested in progressing this, and is looking forward to further participation. 

David:  The relationships there now and will continue after 2016.  We are happy to see government there in a non-regulatory way. 

Malcolm:  Yes. 

Dame Margaret:  the concept of CERA continuing in spirit (ie without statutory powers) appeals to me. 

Lianne:  Building partnerships is what is important, not the existence or otherwise of legislation.  The community at present doesn’t feel that it’s engaged, this must change.


Q to Dame Margaret and Lianne:  How will the plan for transition be developed?  How will the goals be decided, how will the community be involved to secure our confidence that a democratic future is assured?

Lianne: It is CERA’s responsibility to lead the development process, we will need to refer to Roger. 

Response:  What does each partner present think should be in the agreement? 

Dame Margaret: It has to be seamless. 

Lianne:  It has to have an overarching framework for investment, procurement and delivery.  At present investors present ideas to CERA then to CCC, there is no sense of what’s being joined up between what CCC is leading and what government is leading, e.g. new schools to be built could have community facilities.  I would really like a model of joining up. 

David:  CERA has treated WDC with a fairly light hand, and usually come to council. 


From the floor:  All of this re build must keep people in the centre.  Many people who are marginalised anyway have become more marginalised.  Please keep holding people in front. 


Q:  The elephant in the room is the 30,000 workers that we need to bring in, how are they to be housed?  We need 21st century tools to allow people to take back building their own communities.

Lianne:  This needs to be addressed by CERA.  WDC have been honoured for their community engagement, has been exemplary and should acknowledge that.  Community engagement doesn’t slow things down, it speeds them up.  People will accept the inevitable delays if they understand that everyone is doing their best. 

Malcolm:  perhaps it’s time to look at what we’re building – maybe temporary structures for 10 years that can be moved later on. 


Summary of questions and responses for action:  The night’s discussions were summed up by Organising Group member Evan Smith: 

Holding up a rugby ball Evan noted that it has been difficult with a key player missing, like the ball has been taken to the far end of the paddock and nobody is able to play with it. 

Before the earthquakes there were already well-established relationships, although not without tensions.  This may explain why ECan thinks 2016 is too soon to say goodbye to CERA and others think it is not soon enough. 

Concepts that we have noted: Selwyn’s three ‘c’s - communication, cooperation and consideration; it is better to give timelines; recovery is about people, not just buildings. 

It is good to recognise WDCs good progress, and the magnitude of what it is dealing with. 

There is a variety of agencies involved in monitoring.  From the NGOs perspective, recovery is only as successful as the most vulnerable person’s recovery.  This is about community empowerment. 

The upcoming election brings uncertainty.  There is a real danger that government might take its foot off the pedal, but we take Lianne’s point that not everyone is ready to move on. 

Recognition of Ngai Tahu and having it given a statutory role in the recovery is a great highlight of the CER Act and an example to the rest of the country.  The cultural and spiritual memory of the land has risen up with the shaking of the quakes.  It has not just been recognising tangata whenua in law but in the hearts of the people, which is the only way it will endure. 

We have been using the analogy of an arranged marriage when talking about the relationship between CERA and its statutory partners, when this arranged marriage formally comes to an end, who is left holding the baby?  The baby is a product of more than its parents, it is the product of its social, environmental, economic, and cultural environment.  It takes a village to raise a child, and the NGO sector knows every nook and cranny of the village extremely well.  We have between us a wealth of expertise to help raise the child. 


Final thanks and concluding remarks:  Katherine invited all the panellists to keep the dialogue going with the NGO sector.  Democracy exists when the people involved feel they are setting the agenda.  The agenda for transition must belong to all of us.  Rex reiterated that NGOs know what we’re doing.  All the people putting questions to the speakers tonight came from NGOs – this means that there are many other people standing behind the questioners.  Tonight has been participatory democracy in action. 



Karakia whakamutunga:  Dallas Hibbs closed the meeting with a karakia.