Ministerial Statements — Earthquake, Christchurch—Extension of State of National Emergency

on behalf of the Minister of Civil Defence: I intend to make a ministerial statement under Standing Order 347 advising the House of the extension of the state of national emergency. Today the Minister has further extended the duration of the state of national emergency in Christchurch City under section 71 of the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002. As members know, section 66 of the Act states: “The Minister must advise the House of Representatives as soon as practicable” of an extension, hence the statement yesterday applied to the extension declared on 31 March. Today’s declaration by the Minister is the seventh extension of the state of national emergency that applies specifically to Christchurch City since it was first declared on 23 February. The extensions are necessary to enable the national controller to continue exercising his powers and functions under the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act.

Although the situation in Christchurch City has improved significantly in the 6 weeks since the earthquake of 22 February, the city has not been stabilised sufficiently to change the status of this state of national emergency, and therefore the Minister considers it necessary to keep the state of national emergency in place. The earthquake response is of such a magnitude that the civil defence emergency management required is beyond the capacity of the regional civil defence emergency management group. I am advised there is strong support in Christchurch for the state of emergency to be national rather than local or regional at this time. This provides the national controller with powers to access resources from around New Zealand, but only for the purpose of responding to the earthquake in Christchurch City. The state of national emergency will be lifted when the Minister is satisfied that the situation has stabilised sufficiently and the powers available through the state of national emergency are no longer required.

I would like to thank the Minister for the statement he has made on behalf of the Minister of Civil Defence. It is the first time that the question of the appropriateness of a national rather than a regional state of emergency has been addressed in a ministerial statement, and for that I do acknowledge the fact that the Minister has considered the matter and communicated his thoughts, or at least the thoughts of the Minister of Civil Defence, to the House. The issues that he has raised about the appropriateness of a national versus a regional state of emergency will be considered by the Opposition, and a response will be forthcoming in due course.

The Green Party supports the statement of the Minister, the Hon Simon Power. We would like more information, though. Repeatedly, when these renewals are made, we get just general words about the situation having not yet been stabilised. A little bit more elaboration, I think, would benefit the House—for example, the Minister could say, in the areas of getting rid of silt or getting the power back on, that there have been advances that do not require the national state of emergency, but that, in other areas, progress is still being made and the national state of emergency is still required. I think more elaboration would be useful for the House.