That’s because it is always “somebody else” or “the government” ie anybody else except them.

Sure lots of heritage buildings have been lost forever but there are many more than could have been and continue to be saveable. In 50 years time any buildings built in 2012 will have minimal architectural value just like those built in the 1960s-70s dont. The turn of the century buildings are in a different class.

Noone is saying we have to save all of them but those of sufficient merit should have every effort taken to save them (and in some cases even build exact replicas where there is sufficient merit such as the cathedral). To date that hasnt happened.

These views have nothing to do with my political leanings. I just feel our early european culture is far too easily forgotten.

And elsewhere around New Zealand, there are innumerable old brick & stone masonry “heritage” buildings whose owners cannot find the money to strengthen them to even 67% of current seismic design code levels, let alone 100% that we are striving to encourage them to do. And these are buildings that have paying tenants in place, and are NOT damaged, and NOT unsafe to enter or even approach to work on.

While the owners of these buildings are struggling to fund restoration and strengthening projects, it does not surprise me that the owners of damaged, empty, unsafe and semi-derelict old buildings in Chch cannot afford to do so.

It is great to have pieces of our bricks & mortar heritage preserved. But all that costs money,which has to come from somewhere. And there doesn’t even appear to be money enough to save NZ’s greatest historic building (Chch Cathedral) so it doesn’t surprise me that preservation of many much lesser historic buildings hasn’t been pursued.

On the other hand, if private building owners DID get their funding together and DID apply to CCC for building consent to carry out repair and strengthening schemes for their buildings, would CCC decline them?

In other words – who, exactly, are this “they” who “should be doing more” here?

NZ Govt should lock them out and not pay them. Teachers are the biggest drain on the NZ economy – losers.

It wasn’t about backing up the government but the fact is sometimes decisions just have to be made. These decisions are the backbone of any decent leader. I’m not saying the government is this, I’m provoking thought on the wider issue – why aren’t they?

And the NZEI event is another exercise in democracy our host finds upsetting. Maybe we should put Herr Gerry in charge of education?

[DPF:Luc time and time again you show you do not even read the posts you comment on. I explicitly said I oppose the Govt's decision on not holding ECan elections.

And 30 demerits for Herr Gerry]

She was so emphatic about it I didn’t feel like pointing out that the cuts would merely take the ratios down to what they were everywhere else.

As for the teachers who are part of the political bitching they will not accept that they have lost 9000 children from Christchurch. New ones will emerge into a system of over $1 billion of new and refurbished schools.
Stupid as Stupid is – and they are called Teachers – poor pupils.

When the 1930′s quake hit Napier, what’s the bet the people of the time accepted their fate, thankful for their survival, and just got on with rebuilding their lives without being political drama queens and wanting things to be wrapped up in cotton wool.

I would really like the lazy MSM to get off their arses and dig back into their OWN archives to review the people’s attitudes of the time and contrast it to now. I’ve been waiting since 2011 for this and have yet to see one single article. Why is that?

Left-leaning consulting structural engineer here… Your comments on demolition of heritage buildings and CBD land acquisition are spot on IMHO.

Schools issue I don’t know enough about to comment on. I see all the teachers in the whole district took a personal risk in going to an illegal strike yesterday, there must be something they are pretty upset about.

Residential red zone… why doesn’t the council just stop issuing rates invoices to those properties, and disconnect their services? People will eventually get the hint that they are pushing sh!t uphill demanding everyone else uneconomically fix their broken and deserted former neighbourhood… and that the Govt’s offer is worth considering after all. They have survived what is – touch wood – probably the great natural disaster of our times, but their houses and sections didn’t. That’s sad, but they are being offered significant help.

Brownlee has made mistakes but has also achieved a great deal. This is new territory for the govt and mistakes are the inevitable result of doing stuff. He deserves plaudits for getting on with it.

Then we wouldn’t have to risk people’s lives for the pleasure of heritage aesthetes.

“the Government wants to use Christchurch to test its new ideology”

Ooooo. Did they also make the claim that the government was punishing people for not voting National? That’s a good one too.

The buildings performed well, but there is a difference between their performance and people’s expectations that is the main issue.

Yes. I also think many people don’t realise just how much more expensive it is to deliver the difference – literally a couple of orders of magnitude in cost in some areas.