As parliament returns under the shadow of disaster, questions are being raised about resilience and preparedness \u2013 but not what went wrong on the Mount, writes Catherine McGregor in today\u2019s excerpt from The Bulletin.<\/p>\n
To receive The Bulletin in full each weekday,\u00a0sign up here<\/a>.<\/p>\n Walking the line<\/p>\n Following the deadly landslide at Mauao, MPs returned to parliament yesterday conscious that the country was watching not just what they said, but how they said it. In the House, there was broad agreement that debate over climate resilience and preparedness could not be put on ice, even as families were still waiting for loved ones to be recovered. But there was also clear discomfort about crossing into blame,\u00a0reports Jamie Ensor in the Herald<\/a>\u00a0(paywalled).<\/p>\n Winston Peters said it was \u201cappalling that with the bodies of victims still to be recovered, some have rushed to be adjudicators based not on fact, but on emotion and hot reckons\u201d. Act MP Cameron Luxton argued that even the climate conversation was too soon, accusing some of \u201chijacking [the disaster] for their own agenda\u201d, and calling for a focus on \u201caccountability, not ideology\u201d. But Opposition leaders said the recent floods were a wake-up call the country couldn\u2019t ignore. \u201cWe know that these are not one-off events,\u201d Davidson said. \u201cWe know that we are going to have to be honest with ourselves the more and more that we know this stuff is going to come.\u201d<\/p>\n Leadership in a crisis<\/p>\n How leaders perform in moments like this inevitably invites comparison,\u00a0and Adam Pearse\u2019s column in the Herald<\/a> on Monday set Christopher Luxon\u2019s approach against his Labour predecessors. While Hipkins \u201cappeared to struggle on the doorstep of a flood-ravaged home\u201d, few leaders could match Jacinda Ardern for her ability to empathise and emote authentically alongside members of the public. Luxon\u2019s strengths are more modest, Pearse writes, but they were evident at Sunday\u2019s candlelight vigil at the foot of Mount Maunganui, where he stayed until dark, sat on the grass in his suit, and spoke quietly with those who had gathered to remember the dead. Attending the vigil carried political risk, yet Pearse argued it worked. \u201cIt should serve as a lesson to the strategists planning their upcoming election campaigns that a little bravery and flexibility can pay off.\u201d<\/p>\n The case for an inquiry<\/p>\n Beyond tone and symbolism lies the harder question of accountability. Yesterday Luxon stopped short of committing to a government inquiry, but acknowledged there was a \u201cstrong case\u201d for one.\u00a0In the Sunday Star-Times<\/a>, Andrea Vance argued that only a government-level inquiry has the independence and reach to answer the questions now hanging over Mauao. Tauranga City Council has already ordered its own review, and there are specific issues it will need to explain, including how a FENZ call alerting it to potential earth movement was handled.<\/p>\n But, Vance cautioned, the council should not become a scapegoat: \u201cCouncils are already underfunded and overburdened, carrying climate risk on balance sheets never designed for it.\u201d Central government decisions, from hazard mapping to funding frameworks, also deserve scrutiny, Vance said. \u201cEither we interrogate this disaster fully. Or we accept that this will not be the last time we stand in the rain, counting the dead, and wondering why we were not ready.\u201d<\/p>\n Fact-checking the online sleuths<\/p>\n