Stuff reports:

But in a speech to the Employers Chamber of Commerce in Wellington this afternoon, Dalziel lashed out at both the Government and the council.

Everyone but Lianne is incompetent it seems.

“Without a layer of governance between the Minister and the recovery authority we have decisions being made by Cabinet, implemented by bureaucrats and undermining the last remaining democratic institution in Christchurch – our city council.”

So Labour’s policy is that there should be a Board for CERA? So the Minister appoints a Board that appoints a CEO, and all decisions go from staff to the CEO to the Board to the Minister. Yes, that will speed things up.

The council itself had not responded properly to the shock of the earthquake either, she said. …

However, the mistakes of the council had been compounded by the Government’s response of “imposing a growing bureaucracy” which “must not replace the core functions that belong to the council – the only body that can offer democratic participation in decision-making”.

It is a strange argument that local government is democratic, but central government is not.

“The solutions to all the problems we face in Christchurch can be found in strengthening the council so that it can perform its proper function in collaboration with the citizens of Christchurch, not to usurp its role with a government department without any practical knowledge and experience of urban planning and design.”

So now the policy is to “strengthen” the Council. Can anyone explain to me, what exactly is meant by that?

Just being angry about everything isn’t a substitute for rational policy and analysis.

The new unit is seconding experienced staff from the Council. Unless one is proposing that the City Council be given the powers of compulsory land acquisition, it has to be done by CERA.

Stuff reports:

A new Christchurch Central Development Unit has 100 days to prepare a ”Blueprint for Action”.

The unit will be headed by Warwick Isaacs, currently the general manager of operations for Cera, the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority.

The new unit was announced today by the Minister for Earthquake Recovery, Gerry Brownlee. He said it was time for action and the city needed a clear direction for the centre’s rebuild.

The unit has been created as part of Cera because of the authority’s wide-ranging powers, which include compulsory acquisition of land for major projects.

Brownlee said the Government had largely adopted the Christchurch City Council’s draft plan for the centre.

He said the unit would second staff from the city council and Environment Canterbury, but it would collaborate with the City Council and it was not a takeover.

The council will remain the consenting authority, but Brownlee made a commitment that building consents for the central city would be approved within 14 days.

Isaacs has an extensive record in local government. He was the chief executive officer of the Timaru District Council for 10 years before coming to Christchurch after the February 22 quake as part of Civil Defence’s emergency response team.

Christchurch Mayor Bob Parker welcomed the unit and said he was delighted that the Government had essentially accepted the community’s vision for its city.

He told a business leaders’ briefing this morning that the unit’s ability to develop and implement a plan showed that the Resource Management Act could not deliver the ”speed, direction and outcomes that we need”.

Seems pretty sensible to me. We await the condemnation from the Labour Party Mayoral candidate.

The Press reports:

Christchurch democracy is to be “discarded” with the Government poised to take control of the central city rebuild, Labour says. …

Parker said he had not been informed of any “dramatic announcements” about the council’s role in the central city rebuild. …

Cera chief executive Roger Sutton also said he was not aware of any proposal to take over planning responsibilities in the central city.

I think this is more about the 2013 Mayoral elections.

A guest post by John Stringer:

I’m no architect, but I know a bit about art and culture and was born and bred in Christchurch. I grafted my young children here from Kapiti so they too could be ‘Cantabs’ under this sprawling big sky. I adore Christchurch and have made considerable sacrifices to remain here, and  was a parliamentary candidate for Christchurch Central in the late nineties. The confused demolition of the classic Sydenham Heritage Church (1878) a southern gateway to inner Christchurch (on Colombo & Brougham Streets) has pained me on top of all the other complex emotions of 22/2.

Heritage takes perhaps 100 years to set. Simply bowling Christchurch over and starting again will dislocate us from cultural anchoring points intrinsic to our being and history. Retention and restoration are important to healing and recovery –seeing familiarity restored, like an amputee receiving an artificial limb. Who would not restore the toppled statues of Godley and Scott?  Why then, not iconic buildings? While there is an exciting opportunity to rebuild with fresh vision, we must retain the core of what Christchurch is, architecturally.

Cultural iconography has to be a selected snap shot of time (for us mid-nineteenth century neo-gothic Victorian) otherwise cities are an unfocussed mash of everything and nothing. 
Tourists come to take pictures of the Arts Centre and the Christ Church cathedral, not the Forsyth Barr building.  We have trams, Avon punts, Christ’s College –all icons of identity and heritage.  Restoration is vital.

Perhaps our best exemplar is Dresden’s Frauenkirche, the iconic “Church of Our Lady” at the center of their city obliterated in WWII.  This building was lovingly restored from almost nothing, as the architectural heart of Dresden. This was an obvious – and no doubt expensive – piece of cultural healing and identification; holding on to an element of the past to anchor the future.  Human beings do not do well in cultural vacuums. We need reference points.

Many of our old buildings survived: the Jubilee Clock Tower on Victoria Street, much of the Arts Centre, the Museum, many of our old churches (St Albans Union at Merivale; St Mary’s a few blocks down; the Catholic Basilica on Barbadoes St– perhaps out most attractive building) and many did not. Restoration is achievable, but so is fusion. As with Kirkaldie & Stains’ fascade in Lambton Quay, Wellington. Restoration along with faked facades behind which safe modern buildings are constructed, might be a symbiosis pleasing to most: Christ Church cathedral and the Chalice – traditional and contemporary side-by-side, like grandparent and grandchild supporting each other. Eradicate the one, and the other is lessoned, a lesson to us all.

It is not simply an issue of safety.  Older buildings can be strengthened and made safe. My alma mater the red brick Christchurch Boys’ High School was largely unaffected in the quake due to strengthening.

It need not be an argument between traditionalist and progressive. Fusion is the key.  We should restore, strengthen as much of our heritage as we can preserve, and in the grey areas, retain facades at street level with modern buildings behind.

Change, however, is inevitable, and perhaps it is time to review emphases in different parts of the city.  My own thoughts are: that the eastern suburbs (Parklands, Bexley) could be thinned by natural attrition (no one should be forced away) and perhaps this area of Christchurch refocused as recreational serving city-wide sports needs with centralized hockey, cricket, rugby and soccer fields and mountain biking (already an emphasis at Bottle Lake).  Large grassed fields slotted in amongst retained housing would be well served by the existing ring roads to these areas, such as QEII Drive. It would also lesson traffic congestion around Hagley Park and Harper & Deans Avenues. The obvious beach, and attractive wetlands, already lends itself as an enhanced recreational and leisure focus nestled naturally amongst less residential intensity.  This reduces risk to human life in the event of more earthquakes, floods or tsunami.

Rather than rebuild, I would thin the CBD out (especially Cathedral Square) with small parks to set tall buildings back astride grassed areas with fountains and people friendly contexts.  New York has done this very successfully. This creates more natural space and light, for cafes, tourism, open air events like the Buskers’ festival (why jam these into Cathedral Square and the Arts Centre?).

I would extend the CBD into Sydenham-Addington with central government-subsidized commercial rentals to help re-establish small businesses lost in the CBD, and to grow new enterprises.  This area is already bisected by the railway line and rail station. Shouldn’t this be a natural hub for the city?  The trams could easily extend into this part of town traversing the new parks named after significant Canterbury events or personages, enhancing our sense of heritage as done with Latimer & Cranmer Squares reflecting our Anglican heritage. These new parks might be named: “4 Sept,” “22 Feb,”  “Crusader,” or perhaps after historic battlefields where the 1^st and 20^th Canterbury Battalions played decisive roles: “Suvla Bay,” “Messines,” etc. (as the French have done in Paris with “Bir Hacheim” metro station).  Our CBD would then be defined between Rolleston Ave (which I would extend across the river by the hospital into Antigua Street, renamed Rolleston Ave South), Brougham St, Fitzgerald Ave and Bealey Ave.

I would push Deans Ave south to Hazeldean St and into Lincoln Rd to create a second ‘Moorhouse’ lateral into the expanded Addington-Sydenham CBD.  This area is already flanked by Hagley Park, and is zoned commercial with little residential. It has an existing major west-east arterial motorway creating a rapid egress from the city to the south as well as the railway.  These suburbs are also traditionally lower socio-economic. What better a commemoration of the earthquake than to re-create this part of Christchurch as a new economic boon sector reflective of Merivale and Fendalton their counterparts on the other side of the Park.

There are huge opportunities.  The challenge is not to become bogged down in reactionary arguments (the Moore sheep sculpture on the Port Hills; the Chalice; the Millennium Bridge; or inter-suburban parochialism). Rather, to have a wide creative response that fuses a breadth of aesthetic opinion and culture reflective of Christchurch’s diversity while retaining our intrinsic raison d’être – the architectural vision of our city’s Victorian founders. 

 

John Stringer is an ex-Anglican pastor of the Christchurch Dioceses under license to the Bishop. He is an international author who lost everything at Mt Pleasant on 22/2 (house, business, car and job) and now lives in rental accommodation in St Albans with his wife Laurie.

Demolished after 144 years. St Albans Methodist Sunday School (behind the late nineteenth-century church) at Merivale, corner Papanui Rd and Rugby St, 1902 rebuilt after the 1868 fire. Damaged 4 Sept 2010 and 22 Feb. 2011 and finally demolished Jan. 2012.  Photos: John Stringer.

Dresden’s Frauenkirche basilica before and after restoration (the black blocks in the left image are original). Photos: public domain.

The Herald reports:

A Christchurch City Councillor has called for a televised debate on whether the cathedral should be pulled down.

Councillor Aaron Keown, representing the Shirley-Papanui ward, has argued the Anglican Church is not being transparent about the reasons for not demolishing the cathedral.

“You’ve got a building in the centre of Christchurch that has more value to the city and the people of Christchurch than it does to the church.

Tough. It belongs to the Anglican Church. The public don’t get a vote on this.

Mr Keown said the costs and upkeep of the cathedral should be transferred to the city.

“It would still be the Anglican Cathedral, I would like to see them semi hand over the ownership. Kind of like how there have partnerships with iwi, we’ve got to do the same with the church. The church just don’t have the money they once had.”

You want to spend ratepayers money on buying a cathedral??? No. And the Church has an insurance policy.

He said he will bring up the possibility of council leading legal action against the church at the next meeting.

What part of private property rights is hard to understand? Also what part of unsafe is hard to fathom.

I’m not saying the Anglican Church has made the right decision. I’m saying it is their decision. If you don’t like it, then join the Church and roll the bishop or something – if that is possible.

Bishop Victoria Matthews has announced:

Dear Friends,

I am writing to inform you of last evenings meeting and the decision reached about the next step for our beloved Cathedral.

The Standing Committee and Church Property Trustees voted to bring the ChristChurch Cathedral down to a safe level. This is understood to be between two and three meters in height with some parts of the walls necessarily being lower for safety reasons. This means the footprint will be preserved but that there will be extensive controlled demolition and controlled deconstruction. For reasons of safety and the likelihood of ongoing seismic activity, we will not be preserving any of the walls intact. What this plan does allow is the safe retrieval of taonga and heritage items from the ruins. To give one example, we anticipate the safe retrieval of the remaining stained glass windows over the next couple of months. The process of bringing down the Cathedral to a safe level will take most of the balance of the year.

This is very different from the plan presented last October, due to the seismic events of 23 December. CERA has insisted that we present a new plan to ensure the building is safe and we agree with their requirement.

I am sad to have to relay this decision but I believe it is the way forward. There are of course other voices and alternative opinions but I have relayed to you the decision of the Cathedral Project Group, which is the group that has the delegated authority to make recommendations about the future of the Cathedral to the Cathedral Chapter, CPT and Standing Committee. The decision was made with much prayer and deliberation and has the support of each of the various groups. It is also the decision that has the highest support from CERA for safety reasons. The demolition and deconstruction will be carried our with care and great respect for a wonderful sacred space that has been damaged beyond repair.

My prayers and the prayers of many around the world are with you at this time. It is now up to all of us to show that we are the living Cathedral of Christchurch; and that we carry within us and live out the Gospel of Jesus Christ wherever we go and wherever we are. In the midst of this sad outcome let us not neglect to witness to the hope within us due to Gods love, grace and mercy.

In Christ,

A very sad decision, but arguably an inevitable one.

I quite like the suggestion one person made which is to turn the ruins into the central memorial for the earthquakes, and a tourist attraction – and build an entirely new cathedral next to it.

A year ago, at 12.51 pm Canterbury was hit by the second earthquake. The first one was on 4 September 2010.

By pure coincidence on both days I was flying to Australia on the redeye flight, so found about both in airport lounges.

I recall after the first earthquake thinking how it was a minor miracle that no one died, and partly putting it down to the timing at 4.35 am, when most were asleep in their beds.

The second earthquake was not so well timed. It was technically less powerful than the September quake, but it was centred closer to Christchurch and was centred at half the depth. The combination of the timing, the earlier damage and the location led to 185 human beings losing their life.

There is much one can say about what has happened since, with the $30 billion estimated price tag, the decisions on reconstruction etc. But I don’t think today is the day for that. Today I just want to say to those in Canterbury that a year on we have not forgotten, and we will not forget.

Marc Greenhill in The Press reports:

A Christchurch woman with a rare medical condition has been forced to sleep outdoors or suffer migraines and insomnia because of repairs in her earthquake-damaged street.

Anne Gastinger, of Dallington, has electromagnetic hypersensitivity, or an adverse reaction to electromagnetic waves and wi-fi, and severe chemical allergies, including to treated wood. …

Her symptoms, which include migraines and insomnia, worsened in April last year when overhead powerlines were installed because of damage to underground cables.

“I was managing really well here. When the high-voltage lines went up, I was no longer able to tolerate for any length of time being at home. My body seems to lack the tolerance.”

Since then, to avoid migraines and insomnia, she has spent most nights sleeping outside at a friend’s home in an abandoned red-zoned area with no electricity or wi-fi.

She rarely spoke about the condition because it was a not an acknowledged diagnosis in New Zealand, although a Christchurch GP had provided a medical certificate confirming her symptoms.

I have no doubt Ms Gastinger suffers migraines and insomnia, and is in considerable distress from what has happened.

However the reference to the condition of electromagnetic hypersensitivity not being acknowledged in New Zealand did make me curious.

As is often the case, the Wikipedia article provides a lot of useful info on this condition. The article states:

Although the thermal effects of electromagnetic fields on the body are established, self-described sufferers of electromagnetic hypersensitivity report responding to non-ionizing electromagnetic fields (or electromagnetic radiation) at intensities well below the limits permitted by international radiation safety standards. The majority of provocation trials to date have found that self-described sufferers of electromagnetic hypersensitivity are unable to distinguish between exposure to real and fake electromagnetic fields, and it is not recognized as a medical condition by the medical or scientific communities.

The WHO fact sheet also states:

A number of studies have been conducted where EHS individuals were exposed to EMF similar to those that they attributed to the cause of their symptoms. The aim was to elicit symptoms under controlled laboratory conditions.

The majority of studies indicate that EHS individuals cannot detect EMF exposure any more accurately than non-EHS individuals. Well controlled and conducted double-blind studies have shown that symptoms were not correlated with EMF exposure. …

There are also some indications that these symptoms may be due to pre-existing psychiatric conditions as well as stress reactions as a result of worrying about EMF health effects, rather than the EMF exposure itself.

With this in mind, I do wonder the wisdom of The Press giving this story considerable prominence, as it may in fact itself increase the stress reactions caused by people worrying about EMF.

Note that I repeat my earlier point that I am sure Ms Gastringer does suffer from the symptoms she describes, and she is convinced they are caused by EMFs. In no way am I suggesting she is not in distress by the situation the earthquake has caused.

Almost unbelievable that Christchurch has had four more significant quakes today – luckily no serious injuries, but the psychological impact must be wearying.

They were:

• 1.58 pm – magnitude 5.8 quake, 8km deep and centred 20km north east of Lyttelton
• 2.06 pm – magnitude 5.3 quake, 10km deep and centred 20km east of Christchurch
• 3.18 pm – magnitude 6.0 quake, 6km deep and centred 10km north of Lyttelton
• 4.50 pm – magnitude 5.0 quake, 10km deep and centred 20km north east of Lyttelton

There’s also been nine sub 5.0 quakes today also.

Let’s just hope this is the worse of it.

This was posted to Facebook today by the Labour Party candidate for Rodney – Christine Rose.

So John Key didn’t only arrange the H Fee, he also blew up the Pike River mine, arranged the earthquakes and was the pilot of the Rena.

Again, this is a Labour Party candidate, not just an activist, who approvingly Facebooked this photo. Is this who you want in Government?

The Press has an editorial on Labour’s earthquake recovery policy:

Labour’s proposals are, at this stage, not much more than a fine-sounding wishlist. As one red-zone resident noted, the plans were “about as useful as wallpaper”. This is largely driven by the party’s poor showing in opinion polls.

Wallpaper can be useful, to be fair.

Unless there is more substance that Labour has yet to announce, some of them would raise more problems than they would solve. It is also difficult to see how some of them could be made to work. The gaping hole in the proposals is the lack of any realistic assessment of their longer-term impact on the public finances. And while Labour’s leader, Phil Goff, was scornful of the capacity of a “market solution”, he appeared to be oblivious (or chose to ignore) the potentially huge, unintended consequences of ad-hoc interventionism.

A centrepiece of Labour’s plan is the proposal to spend $230 million on “affordable” sections that would be sold “at cost” to 1500 red-zone homeowners. This would, Labour says, control cost inflation among private developers. Quite how the government buying sections, instead of private interests, would control any inflation in the market is not explained. Also, “at cost” suggests that Labour would subsidise the price of the sections, which means a few fortunate buyers would get sections they could not otherwise afford at the expense of taxpayers.

The most notable flaw in this proposal, however, is that it does not explain how the lucky 1500 would be chosen out of 6000 or so who can no longer remain on their land. Whether they were chosen according to some stated criteria, by a lottery or selected by some other method, a host of inequities would be bound to arise.

Perhaps they would go to those who can prove they voted Labour?

Adam Bennett in the NZ Herald reports:

Labour would actively “intervene” to kick-start the Christchurch recovery, including entering the land development and insurance markets if it felt that was necessary, leader Phil Goff says.

Mr Goff this morning launched his party’s quake recovery policy package.

“The next Labour Government will intervene to give Cantabrians affordable choices to help rebuild their homes, businesses and lives after the devastating earthquakes”, he said at the launch in quake stricken Kaiapoi just north of Christchurch.

“These are extraordinary times for Canterbury and the Government must respond accordingly. Business as usual won’t cut it.”

Mr Goff said the government needed to take a more active role in the rebuild.

Goodness, you would think the Government had done nothing, rather than actually commit billions of dollars from taxpayers towards rebuilding Christchurch.

Ring-fence a maximum of $100 million from the Canterbury Earthquake Fund to ensure home improvements to houses in the Red Zone are reimbursed up to a maximum of $50,000

As someone said on Twitter, this is a repeat of their 1957 policy of “Do you want 100 pounds or not”? I’m surprised Labour haven’t made the same offer to everyone in New Zealand who has sold a house for less than they think it is worth.

I understand that for the first time ever, the Crown has filed a Treaty of Waitangi claim against an Iwi.

The Government is claiming that Ngai Tahu sold them dud land in Christchurch and they want Ngai Tahu to buy the land back

A song for Christchurch. Nice.

The Press reports:

Disenchanted Christchurch red-zone residents are gearing up to fight for their land.

Some, not all, I presume.

Kairaki resident Tim Stephenson said he and a group of neighbours planned to challenge their red-zoning after he unsuccessfully sought geotechnical data through the Official Information Act.

I’m not sure why it was refused, and whether the Ombudsman has ruled. On the face of it I would have thought all data would be made available.

Kaiapoi resident Brent Cairns did not believe accepting the government offer was compulsory.

“All of the documentation clearly shows that there are only two options available to the families in the red zone. Both included, without exception, that you had to move. You have a third option, and that is to stay,” he said.

If those residents feel the taxpayer has not been generous enough by buying their houses at the 2007 valuation rating (most houses are currently selling for below GV), then I’d say let them be martyrs and stay.

Brownlee said on Friday that he did not believe anyone would choose to remain in the red zone beyond April 2013.

Remaining residents would be left with unreliable or non-existent services on land that was uninsurable and worth almost nothing, he said.

It would be a stupid decision to stay on, but I’d let them rather than compulsorily acquire their land. Wait a couple of years and you’ll be able to acquire it for a few dollars.

The NZ Herald reports:

The taxpayer’s share of the $29.5 billion bill for rebuilding Christchurch is set to rise yet again – by as much as $1 billion according to Prime Minister John Key – after a High Court decision late last week.

Late on Friday the court issued a declaratory judgment confirming the Earthquake Commission’s maximum cover of $100,000 for properties and $20,000 for contents applied to claims resulting from both the September and February major quakes and associated aftershocks, rather than just the first one.

The decision effectively shifts hundreds of millions of dollars in liability for quake damage from private insurers to the EQC which only last week raised its estimated liability from $3.05 billion to $7.1 billion.

Mr Key said the additional liability for the EQC could be as much as $1 billion.

Again no choice over this one, and the court decision is the right one that they should be treated as two different earthquakes. The ruling may encourage the global reinsurers to remain in the market also.

Whispers have reached me that in a desperate attempt to turn the polls around, Labour on Sunday will announce their biggest election bribe ever.

Sunday is the one year anniversary of the first Christchurch earthquake. I understand they will use the emotion around the anniversary to announce an alternate recovery package, possibly involving huge land swaps.

As they have already spent the revenue from the CGT many times over, one can only assume that they will have to announce a new tax on all New Zealanders (or maybe just on the rich pricks) to pay for it.

UPDATE: Labour have denied (according to Katie Bradford on Twitter) that they will release a quake policy in Christchurch this weekend. It is unclear if they are just denying the timing, or the policy.

As an election gets closer, a party normally gets more disciplined. MPs are usually well versed in not offering views on issues that are not party policy, as a party won’t get elected if it has different MPs saying different things on what they want their party to do in Government.

Labour seems to be going the other way. Whale has audio of Trevor Mallard saying that you shouldn’t have an earthquake levy, and within 24 hours also Shane Jones saying you should have an earthquake levy.

Some interesting facts from the latest cost update on the Earthquake

• Number of houses estimated to have more than $100,000 of damage increased from 12,000 to 30,000
• Damage to land increased from $300m – $600m to $1.8b
• Total cost of earthquake now estimated to be $15b, or 8% of GDP
• This makes it the largest natural disaster to hit a developed country (in terms of cost proportional to the economy) in recent memory
• Government share of earthquake costs estimated to be $12.9b, including EQC
• The number of claims has been 388,000. The previous highest total was 6,224 for Gisborne in 2007
• Regardless of the size of the economy, the earthquakes are the 4th most costly event for insurers since 1970 – beaten only by the Northridge earthquake in California in 1994 and earthquakes in Japan in 1995 and 2011

Andrea Vance at Stuff reports:

The cost of the Canterbury earthquakes to the Government has more than doubled to $7.1 billion.

Finance Minister Bill English this morning said the Earthquake Commission has increased its liability by about $4 billion to $7.1 billion.

He said the announcement would not affect homeowners claims.

The cost blowout includes an increase of $2.17 billion from the 22 February earthquake and $1.42 billion from the 13 June earthquakes and other aftershocks, which were not previously included.

At a press conference, English said the new estimate follows a risk assessment, based on analysis of damage claims.

He said the extra costs can be met through the Natural Disaster Fund which held about $6 billion before the first earthquake. The government will meet the shortfall. EQC also has reinsurance in place to help meet the cost of any future events.

“Today’s announcement will not affect homeowners’ claims, which EQC will continue to pay in full. And it will not delay rebuilding in Christchurch,“ English said.

Basically this means an extra $3b to $4b of borrowing. There is no choice about this – it is just what the costs are.

But it is worth reflecting that even by their own calculations, Labour’s tax plans require greater Government borrowing for at least the next seven years. And that is before we even get to their spending plans. Will these extra costs make Labour reconsider their policy of tax cuts and boosting benefits?

Derek Cheng at NZ Herald reports:

 The Israelis at the centre of spying suspicions say the allegations are ridiculous and insulting – and they are demanding an apology. …

Mr Jordan said last night he and his friends were backpackers, not spies.

“It’s a big lie, and it’s rubbish,” he told 3 News.

“When I was in New Zealand, I was just a backpacker and was travelling New Zealand.” …

Israeli search and rescue team head Hilik Magnus said he helped facilitate their quick departure.

It was “ridiculous, impolite and even rude” to think that their swift departure was suspicious, he said.

“What should three youngsters do when one of their friends has died? Stay in the park without their belongings? Should they sit in the park and wait? Or should they go home, hug their families and share their sorrow with the family of their friend [who died]?” …

Mr Magnus, who led a seven-person team to Christchurch, said it was “total bullshit” to think that any spy activity was going on.

He denied reports that his team was caught in the Red Zone and had to be escorted out by police.

He said the team was allowed in the restricted area only once – under police supervision – to retrieve to belongings of dead Israelis Mr Levy and Mr Ingel.

“We are going to demand an apology [from the Southland Times, which broke the story] and if they don’t do it, we are going to sue. It is a stupid story. Nothing connected to reality.”

I have great sympathy for the three young backpackers who not only lost a mate, but had these allegations to deal with. Likewise it has been tough on the families of other Israelis killed.

And if there were factual errors in the Southland Times story, they should of course be corrected.

But in terms of the issue of the initial suspicions of the security agencies, the reality is once bitten twice shy. The attempt to get false NZ passports a few years ago by Israeli intelligence agencies was incredibly stupid and damaging. If that attempt had never occurred, then I doubt this whole issue would have occurred. But it is natural for our security agencies to be more vigilant or suspicious when there is a track record like Israel has.

I am a defender of much of what Israel does, as they do get treated unfairly and discriminated against in many ways. But I am not an uncritical defender. Actions have consequences, and if you abuse a friendly country’s hospitality once, then it is no surprise that security agencies will be more vigilant in future.

The young Israelis and their families (and the USAR team led by Mr Magnus) are innocent victims in all this, and will be justifiably angry at having to defend their names and reputations. They have my sympathy. But some of their anger should be directed at the former Israeli Government which authorised the attempted passport identity theft in the 2000s. If they had not done that, this whole episode might not have ever happened.

Fred Tulett in the Southland Times reports:

Prime Minister John Key has confirmed one of three Israelis killed in the Christchurch earthquake was carrying multiple passports but is refusing to go into further detail because it is not in the national interest.

The police national computer has been under scrutiny in the aftermath of the Christchurch earthquake in February because of fears Israeli agents loaded software into the system that would allow backdoor access to highly sensitive intelligence files. …

The Security Intelligence Service ordered the checks as part of an urgent investigation of what one SIS officer described as the suspicious activities of several groups of Israelis during and immediately after the earthquake.

Three Israelis were among the 181 people who died when the earthquake destroyed most of Christchurch’s central business district on February 22. One was found to be carrying at least five passports.

On Sunday, February 26, Mizrahi’s body was recovered from the van and taken to the morgue where, during routine identity checks, he was found to be carrying at least five passports.

Meanwhile, the search and rescue squad dispatched from Israel had arrived in Christchurch but the offer of help was rejected by New Zealand authorities because the squad did not have accreditation from the United Nations.

According to Israeli newspaper reports, the squad was being funded by the parents of two other Israelis killed in the earthquake, Ofer Levy and Gabi Ingel, both 22, who were said to be in New Zealand on a backpacking holiday. The parents made repeated public appeals for the Israeli team to join the rescue, appeals that were dismissed by the New Zealand authorities until squad members were discovered in the sealed off “red zone” of the central city.

Readers may recall I had some minor involvement at the time. I blogged on 4 March:

As a disclosure, one of the dead Israelis is a close friend of one of my good Israeli friends – in fact the person who hosted me in Israel in November 2009. He approached me for assistance in getting a favourable decision made on getting the Israeli team admitted, and I put them in touch with the appropriate MFAT officials. I have no criticism of the MFAT officials who were very responsive and helpful, my criticism is of the ultimate decision maker, which I presume is someone in Civil Defence.

The family I was trying to help is the Ingel family. Their son, who was killed, is not under any suspicion at all of Mossad involvement. I have absolutely no doubt that the parents just genuinely wanted to maximise the chances of finding their son alive.

In terms of the other dead Israeli, with the alleged five passports, I have no first hand knowledge or involvement. The number of passports he had is not confirmed, and many Israelis do have multiple passports due to travel restrictions. I’m not aware of a suggestion that any of the passports were under a fake name, which would suggest something different.

I did become aware some months ago that there were suspicions over the Israeli who was killed in the van. But the evidence is very circumstantial – multiple passports, only a few tributes on a Facebook page etc. At the end of the day, I don’t know anything beyond what is in the paper, and that isn’t enough to make a conclusion on.

The PM is saying it is not in the national interest for him to comment. That to me suggests that the Government does think there may have been improper behaviour, but can’t prove it. And you don’t generally have Governments speculate on these issues unless they have proof.

Gerry Brownlee says:

residents will be able to visit the www.landcheck.org.nz website and enter their address to find out what zone their property has been mapped into, and download a fact sheet on what it means for them. Residents can also contact the government helpline on 0800 779 997 if they are unable to access the website or they want more information.

There are four zones for the city:

• Red – Fucked – Govt to offer to buy property within 8 weeks. Resident has nine months to sell full property or land only. 5,000 homes
• Green – Fine – can start rebuilding, 100,000 homes
• Orange – Fluctuant – further engineering investigation needed, 10,000 homes
• White – Forthcoming- not yet mapped, mainly CBD and Port Hills non-residential areas.

It’s good to have certainty for the 105,000 in the red and green zones, who can now make decisions. Hopefully the remaining 10,000 will be in the same situation before too long.

My Herald column is on the political impact of the third earthquake on Monday. An extract:

So it is no surprise that the Government is wanting to take the time to get it right, and be able to do the above. But there is a wonderful quote by François-Marie Arouet, better known as Voltaire. He is credited as saying in 1772 “The perfect is the enemy of the good”.

Voltaire was warning that if you keep delaying to get a perfect solution, you may end up not achieving anything at all. That sometimes it is better to go forward with what you have, rather than “improving” it further.

Comments and feedback can be left at the Herald.

Poor bastards in Christchurch. Three more after-shocks today, and some further damage from the shallow one.

Sounds like no serious injuries, and property damage minimal. But I know the psychological damage is a lot larger.

UPDATE: The latest aftershock was at around 2.25 pm and I could feel it in Wellington. Sounds like this one may have done some significant damage, and power out in some areas.

GNS say it was over a six.