Spokesperson: 

Rev Mike Coleman   027 392 8278

Other WeCan! Contacts: 

Brent Cairns   027 222 4767

13 May 2013

Official Information Requests.

Submitted by WeCan, on behalf of the people of Christchurch, New Zealand.

1. •Under the Official Information’s Act: (Under section 12 sub-section 1 of the Official Information Act 1982 and also deemed to be made pursuant to sub-clause (1) (b) of Principle 6 of the Privacy Act), I request copies of all electronically stored records, hard copies , requested evidence, communications, invoices  & receipts of payment for Professional Services
   

2. •Under the Parliamentary Privileges’ Act 1688
   

3. •Under the Privacy Act 1993
   

4. •Under the Human Rights Act 1993
   

We request the following information to be supplied to us via registered courier within 20 working days of the request’s receipt.

1/. Please supply documentation explaining and proving:

1. •What due diligence was undertaken to appoint Fletchers as the main repair / service provider for the Earthquake Commission?
   

2. •Who authorised this action and appointed Fletchers to be the main service provider?
   

3. •Under the Fair Trading Act, please provide copies of information which confirms and proves that all steps were taken to allow other service providers the chance to apply for the position, and the reasons benefits / features identified leading to Fletcher Building receiving the appointment. 
   

4. •Please provide all evidence & documentation of Fletcher Building contract submission, and all submissions from other applicants.
   

2/. Please provide documentation & evidence of all procedures in place with EQC to ensure correct transparent billing processes for work provided?

1. •Please provide documentation & evidence ensuring all statements / spread sheets provided to EQC / Fletcher Building for payment are fully transparent, and that such documentation is submitted providing all details of work provided, by whom, labour hours listed, materials used & excess materials credited?
   

2. •From September 2010 to May 2013, please supply documentation of all credited building materials, credited back to building supply merchants & credited monies paid directly into the Fletcher’s bank account.
   

3. •Please supply documentation itemising all payments paid by EQC -/ -Fletchers to service providers, supported by correctly & fully detailed invoices provided to EQC -/- Fletchers from the service provider?
   

4. •In accordance with the Consumer Guarantees Act, please provide documentation outlining what procedures are in place to ensure work billed by service providers (both by Fletchers themselves & those assigned to carry out work by Fletchers) has been supplied & completed by professional service providers and completed to a professional & sustainable level?
   

5. •In accordance with the Consumer Guarantees Act, please provide proof that procedures are in place to ensure work billed by service providers (both by Fletchers themselves & those assigned to carry out work for EQC) has been supplied & completed to an acceptable level in accordance with the New Zealand Building Code, and that this work has been supervised & signed off as being completed to a professional sustainable standard.
   

3/. Please provide information which explains why the Earthquake Commission allowed the employment of assessors, who had not had any previous building knowledge / structural training, and allowed these inadequately trained personnel to assess initial structural damage / damage to peoples’ residences?

4/. Please supply information explaining: on what grounds was it decided that 3-5 days of basic building compliance / structural training, would deem the knowledge of such assessors- as sufficient, and that reports from such ill equipped assessors would be at all accurate?

5/. Please provide proof and information to confirm and justify:

1. •Who made the decision to employ Assessors with no previous building knowledge, to undertake basic damage / structural assessment of victims’ homes?
   

2. •How do EQC or Fletchers deem these initial assessments to be true or adequate.
   

3. •Please provide all written training materials provided to EQC and Fletchers assessors , written mandates & instructions which have been published for their use as instructions, guidelines -/-  all training materials provided outlining  structural & cosmetic assessment requirements.
   

6/. Under the Employment Contract’s Act, please provide the information which explains and the evidence to prove:

1. •What steps were taken to ensure no bias / discrimination was present when selection process for assessors was undertaken.
   

2. •What processes were undertaken to ensure fair & correct assessment of victims’ damage was reported.
   

7/. Please provide evidence and information explaining :

1. •Why were local tradespeople / professionals with previous known structural knowledge -/- experience, not employed as building assessors?
   

2. •Under the Employment Act, please explain what clause was used to allow such selection process, deeming this action to be legally acceptable?
   

3. •Please supply the evidence which confirms ‘who’ deemed this process to be acceptable.
   

8/. Please provide evidence and copies of:

1. •All processes and procedures which EQC had in place to ensure fast & effective identification of those most in need and the most vulnerable, ensuring them to be quickly  identified at the time of the September 2010 Earthquake in Christchurch New Zealand.
   

2. •All processes and procedures which EQC had  in place to adequately & effectively assist those most in need,  and how the most vulnerable were to be identified , allowing them to be effectively processed & prioritised  at the time of the September 2010 Earthquake in Christchurch New Zealand.
   

3. •All added processes and procedures which had been identified and instigated after Sept 2010 earthquake and before February 2011 earthquake, which EQC implemented to ensure fast & effective identification of those most in need and the most vulnerable, allowing them to be quickly identified t the time of the September 2010 Earthquake in Christchurch New Zealand.
   

4. •All added processes and procedures which had been identified and instigated after Sept 2010 earthquake and before February 2011 earthquake which EQC  implemented to adequately & effectively assist those most in need,  identifying  the  most vulnerable , allowing them to be effectively processed & prioritised  at the time of the September 2010 Earthquake in Christchurch, New Zealand.
   

5. •All added processes and procedures which had been identified and instigated post February 2011 Earthquake, which EQC have now implemented to ensure fast & effective identification of those most in need and the most vulnerable  to be,  ensuring  fast, effective relief intervention, should another state disaster ever occur.
   

9/. Please provide evidence, and all documentation of policy which explains:

1. •May 2013, what processes are now in place to ensure the most vulnerable victims (elderly, those with small children, those with medical conditions) are identified and their repair / rebuilds prioritised?
   

10/. Please supply documentation proving sufficient emergency housing has been erected and is readily available to the most vulnerable victims,  ensuring their health / lives are sustained to an acceptable living condition (under the Human Rights Act) until such time repair / rebuild on their homes to an acceptable NZ Building Code of Compliance level is complete?

11/. Please provide evidence and information which explains all processes which are in place to guarantee transparency & accountability of the Earthquake Minister & Earthquake hubb Staff, ensuring the priority of repair undertaken, is given to those identified as being most at risk?

12/. Please provide transparent geographic statistics, & evidence showing:

1. •The number of EQC Staff who were paid ‘Multiple Over Cap’ payments for their homes, and which hubbs they work for.
   

2. •The number of EQC staff, who are still, as of May 2013, still waiting for over cap payments for their damage to their homes, and under the Fletcher repair strategy?
   

3. •The number of EQC hubb supervisors who have been paid ‘Multiple Over Cap’ payments? And which hubbs these supervisors’ work for.
   

4. •The number of properties in the Ilam Electorate which have been assigned & subsequently paid ‘Multiple over Cap’ payments? Please provide dates confirming when these payments were made.
   

5. •The number of properties in the Ilam Electorate between Sept 2010 and July 2011 which have had repair completed?
   

6. •The number of properties in the Ilam Electorate between July 2011 and May 2013 have had repair completed?
   

As of May 2013, please supply statistics & information which confirms:

1. •The number of TC3 residential properties which have been completely repaired to a sustainable level compliant to The NZ Building Code Standard. Please state the areas in which these properties are situated.
   

2. •The number of TC3 residential properties which now have a definitive ‘acceptable’ rebuild / repair date, ensuring rebuild / repair will comply to the New Zealand Building Code and which would conform to the Human Rights Act, and the Consumer Guarantees Act, to be completed within a reasonable and acceptable time frame. Please state the areas in which these properties are situated.
   

3. •The number of residential properties with-in the Greater Canterbury region which are still not defined under a repair / rebuild classification. Please state the areas in which these properties are situated.
   

4. •The number of residential properties which are still deemed under cap. Please state the areas in which these properties are situated.
   

5. •The number of residential properties which are deemed under cap, but suffered medium to severe structural damage. Please state the areas in which these properties are situated.
   

6. •The number of TC2 residential properties in Christchurch, which have suffered structural damage and deemed by EQC / Fletchers to be repair &70,000.00 or more. Please state the areas in which these properties are situated.
   

7. •He number of TC3 residential properties in Christchurch, which have suffered structural damage and are deemed by EQC / Fletchers to be repair &70,000.00 or more. Please state the areas in which these properties are situated.
   

8. •The number of residential properties in Christchurch which are deemed ‘cosmetic damage / repair only’. Please state the areas in which these properties are situated.
   

9. •The number of residential TC2 properties in Christchurch which are deemed ‘cosmetic damage / repair only’ which have had repairs completed, work inspected & standard of work attained guaranteed to be of a professional sustainable level. Please state the areas in which these properties are situated.
   

10. •The number or residential properties in Christchurch which have suffered moderate structural damage & the number of these properties which have had their repairs / rebuilds completed to the NZ Building Code Standard. Please state the areas in which these properties are situated.
    

11. •The number of residential properties in Christchurch which have suffered severe structural damage & the number of these properties which have had their repairs / rebuilds completed to the NZ Building Code Standard. Please state the areas in which these properties are situated.
    

13/. Under the Parliamentary Privileges’ Act, and the Official Information’s Act, please provide information and evidence which confirms, at the time of September 2010 and February 2011 earthquakes:

1. •How many residential and rental properties did the Honourable Gerry Brownlee own?
   

2. •How many over-cap payments has he received for each of these properties?
   

3. •What dates were their rebuilds- / -repairs completed?
   

4. •As of May 2013, how many properties does the Honourable Gerry Brownlee now own (or have Invested Trust Share Interest) within the greater Canterbury Region?
   

5. •How many of these has the Honourable Gerry Brownlee purchased outright / or has a shared interest in, within the past 24 months?
   

6. •When were their repair / rebuild work assigned, and please provide dates of repair / rebuild work completed on each of these properties.
   

7. •Please provide evidence of what priority was given, for each property owned or partly owned by the Honourable Gerry Brownlee, and evidence of how priority was given for the repair / rebuild of these properties?
   

14/. Please provide evidence and explanation which confirms:

1. •What processes & procedures were / are now used to evaluate & determine the apportionment of Cap payments?
   

2. •How do EQC guarantee these apportionments to be accurate?
   

3. •Who / what authority decided upon these procedures, and under the Consumer Guarantees Act.
   

4. •What procedures were taken to ensure these apportionment payments are fair & correct?
   

15/. Please provide an explanation which confirms what authority was given to the Earthquake Minister allowing him to:

And please provide evidence substantiating his decision to:

1. •Downgrade the New Zealand Building Code, to a now less then sustainable level?
   

2. •Allow the now down-graded building code to supersede the NZ BC at the time of the Earthquakes?
   

3. •Under the Fair Trading Act & Consumer Guarantees Act, under what authority does the Earth Quake Minister have to apply the downgraded building code, when the contract with EQC & Insurance Companies at the time of the September 2010 & February 2011 was the then existing Building Code covering a higher standard of required New Zealand Building Code of Compliance?
   

16/. Please provide information which explains the  processes which have taken place (e.g.- BRANZ testing) to ensure the new Code of Compliance- (which now allows some lateral spread, cracking in concrete foundations, and foundation subsidence), is sustainable long term, and what makes these amendments to the New Zealand Building Code acceptable under the then already existing Consumer Guarantees Act, which covered -/ -protected our already existing EQC & insurance contracts ensuring repairs- /-rebuild s would comply to the ‘then already existing  New Zealand Building Compliance code at the time of the earthquakes?

17/. Please provide evidence of guarantees under the newly amended NZ building Code, that all work attained under contractual obligations from our insurance companies & EQC -/- Fletchers, will be , and is provided by registered professionals, and compliant to the NZ Building Code.

18/. Please provide an explanation which confirms why these now downgraded Building Codes, are given preference to the previous existing, sustainably proven ‘A Zone’ (high earthquake risk) New Zealand Building Code, and under the NZ EQC & Insurance contractual rights, please provide evidence and explanation which confirms who has the authority to change this code?

19/. Please provide substantive evidence proving the new acceptable foundation solutions & framing solutions within the NZ Building Code of Compliance is a more sustainable and a superior level of repair strategy than the previous, now amended 1998 New Zealand Building Code of Compliance?

20/. Please provide explanation & evidence confirming the processes and procedures which are in place to decipher the true and exact apportionment of land damage to victims’ properties?

21/. Please provide details of what qualifications -/- training the personnel assessing such damage are required and have, and have received?

22/. Please provide all instructed mandates & assessment guidelines these assessors have been provided with to enable them to carry out their assessments to EQC requirements?-  

23/. Please provide the information which explains and which will confirm that the land damage on each individual residential property is effectively & truthfully apportioned between three separate events, thus ensuring fair & proper reimbursement for repair under our contract with EQC?

24/. Please supply the documentation under the Human Rights Act, the Mental Health Act, and the New Zealand Health Act which will confirm and prove it is acceptable to, after 33 months of a major earthquake:

Allow victims to, for a period well in excess of 6 months:

1. •S till not be able to by-pass EQC and deal directly with their insurance companies, thus allowing them to progress with their insurance contractual requirements, and then allow the insurance companies to claw back required refunds for works from EQC?
   

2. •Live in houses that have leaked since the earthquakes, are unsanitary, growing mould and mildew and are unable to be sufficiently ventilated or heated?
   

3. •Live in houses unable to be secured?
   

4. •Live in houses now without safe access or egress?
   

5. •Not be amended to acceptable Building Compliance conditions (in place at the time of the events) as per their Insurers contractual obligations, allowing victims to start to repair -/- rebuild their futures and alleviating mental stress?
   

6. •Still not have any answers to land classifications or repair strategies or proposals in place allowing victims to go forward.
   

7. •Not have available to them, sufficient emergency housing built -/- supplied to ensure a quality of life for the most vulnerable.
   

8. •Be forced to accept constant changing rules and regulations which supersede the contracts in place at the time of the earthquakes, and now endlessly postpone -/- hinder victims’ abilities to move forward and rebuild / repair their homes.
   

9. •Accept having to wait for alternative -/- cheaper solutions for repair -/- rebuild, when already proven techniques have been accepted and applied to the New Zealand Building Code for ‘A Zone’ high earthquake risk zones.
   

10. •Still be waiting for emergency works to be completed, -enabling victims to endure living in their homes until effective remediation is complete.
    

11. •Through no fault of their own, be void of sufficient heating services, which were not replaced as a priority via Fletchers / EQC emergency works legal requirements.
    

12. •Victims having to now endure a third harsh winter. 
    

25/. Please provide us with the criteria and information which explains the definition between earthquake victims who are eligible for physical help and supplied paid ‘packing’ staff when they have to move out of their homes due to required repair -/- rebuild, and which people are not eligible to have this assistance. It appears to be common practice that Fletchers -/- EQC will allow some victims package & removal assistance, and others merely removal assistance. Please provide an information and policy which will explain this discrepancy.

26/. Please provide us with the criteria, instruction and evidence which confirms, it is acceptable to be advising elderly people and families with young vulnerable children, and persons with medical conditions, that their house repairs / rebuilds will not be attended to until 2014 – 2018?

27/. It has been brought to our attention that in 2009 a report called ‘EQC’s Catastrophic Response Capability’ was produced.

1. •Please provide us with a full copy of this report, & information confirming the implementation of any recommended changes to EQC policy & procedure which had been implemented as a direct outcome of this report prior to September 2010.
   

2. •Please provide us with all information confirming the implementation of any recommended changes to EQC policy & procedure which have been implemented as a direct outcome of this report post the September 2010 earthquake.
   

                                                   ************ Media Release ************

On behalf of the People of Christchurch New Zealand & the wider Canterbury Community,

Please find attached publicly presented Official Information's Requests which were presented LIVE to Campbell Live at noon this afternoon and are circulated to all the New Zealand News Media.

This document has been e-mailed to: Ian Simpson, EQC Complaints Dept, The Ombudsman

Track Mailed to The office of the Auditor General, The Ombudsman and EQC Head Office Attn Ian Simpson.

This document has been presented, demanding long awaited information & evidence of policy and procedures, which are presently ineffective in assisting the people of Canterbury to move forward after 33 months of extreme hardship, in their efforts to regain any form of control of their lives.

There was no & still is no efficient nor effective policy or procedure in place, ensuring identification & acceptable help for victims most vulnerable during & post natural disasters.

It is now of grave concern to the people of Canterbury, that Human Rights boundaries have now been excessively exceeded, as we witness our elderly dying in third world living conditions, with no means to heat their homes, secure their homes, and many now facing 'RED ZONE' expulsion of their homes as of July this year, with no guarantee of replacement accommodation. There is very little & insufficient emergency housing -/-accommodation been built since the September 2010 earthquakes.

This is now viewed from many as 'Government Orchestrated Genocide of our Elderly'

Thousands of family members are endlessly living in squallered, 3rd world conditions, where black mould grows within their homes, bedrooms pool with water, sewerage systems remain dysfunctional, doors & windows are unable to be opened -/- shut, vital heating systems remain unreplaced, and family violence, separations and chronic illness has now escalated in both parents and their children. .

The people of Canterbury have been 'HOGTIED' by burocracy, disabling them to deal directly with their insurers.

There has been no intervention by the Government to change this policy, allowing Insured persons to deal with their Insurance companies, and then allowing the Insurance Companies to then 'claw back' required monies from EQC.

As a direct result of this badly written & completely ineffective Government Policy, many families (Thousands of people) here in Canterbury, are still, after 33 months of extreme hardship, no further ahead in their quest to regain their lives. Still fighting burocracy on a daily basis, and having endured under qualified EQC driven initial assessments from assessors employed by EQC who had 5 days training & most had not had any previous building / structural training.

This policy, which disarms New Zealand Citizens, HOGTYING them to Fletcher Building contracts, must change urgently, before more elderly die, more children become gravely ill, more families break up, violence cause by stress escalates beyond control, and severe PTSD health issues develop in our children.. Our next generation!!

Please can you publicly print the above Information's Request document & tell our true story, demanding we receive answers, and demand policy & procedure changes, enabling access to and advancement in our now inhumanely overdue insurance settlements.

Sarah O'Brien