-
Source: ONE News -
View Photos
-
Related
I hate the term "coming to terms".
I guess it differentiates a stage of human reaction and emotion. For someone to understand and accept a disaster has occurred, for them to "come to terms", first they need a basic appreciation of the overall situation as it affects them.
Nobody in Christchurch has that appreciation yet.
The police don't. The search and rescue guys don't. The average family sitting in the dark in suburban Christchurch most certainly don't.
People here can accept a disaster has occurred, but they can't accept the enormity of it.
For now, quite rightly, the emergency services are focused on rescuing. Time passes and desperation builds, but instead of collating statistics, their priority is rescue.
For the next 24 hours at least, it's unlikely that will change.
From what I've seen inside the CBD, they're brave, they're calm and they've very professional.
But what about for those who aren't involved with rescues or recovery or the direct wider aftermath? What about those who are just sitting at home, waiting?
Already in the last few days New Zealand has seen some of the most horrific, distressing images in our history.
We've seen pictures of iconic buildings destroyed. We've seen pictures of people with terrible injuries, in states of bewildered despair. We've seen pictures of people who've died.
But 48 hours on, still so many people here aren't in a position to see anything.
Forty percent of Christchurch is without power, told via battery-powered radio to stay in their homes.
They haven't seen the TV or the pictures online. They haven't seen their city as it stands. They haven't seen it as it falls.
In the coming days, as power and movement are slowly restored to Christchurch, people will begin to appreciate the enormity of what has happened. But who knows if they'll ever come to terms with it.
Add a Comment:
Post new commentroyalcourtier said on 2011-03-14 @ 21:33 NZDT: Report abusive post
The whole focus of this debate is wrong. There is no reason for any of these buildings to be demolished. It is not a case of which should be saved, but which should be demolished. There are few which cannot be saved. What people are missing is that if a building is demolished unnecessarily, and illegally, there won't be any insurance. Only the city can approve demolition - civil defence cannot do so.
Adam Chc said on 2011-03-09 @ 14:44 NZDT: Report abusive post
As a small business based near the epicentre in Christchurch we are strugeling to survive and simply can not afford a day off. I also do not think I or my staff are reasdy for a day of mourning yet. I am surprised the govenment would even consider this, it shows how out of touch they are to the impact this is having on business and staff.
annej said on 2011-03-08 @ 15:09 NZDT: Report abusive post
I must congratulate Bob Parker for his leadership and his caring nature to all people in Christchurch and his unfaultering continual contact with his people, a fine leader and the restoration of Christchurch should go through him and the council and not left to those who do not care about the uniqueness of Christchurch, sack Brownlee, send him back where he come from.
annej said on 2011-03-08 @ 15:04 NZDT: Report abusive post
At a time when the suffering is entering an unacceptable time frame of two weeks, John Key throws the baby out with the bath water and states that the government will buy the land off people who have suffered so much,this is akin to pulling the rug from underneath those who are stressed,do not know their fate and have lost loved ones, more thought and empathy is needed from central govt and to deal with the bulk of the people and not just the business sector.Thoughts and prayers to all.
Huatoki said on 2011-03-08 @ 13:37 NZDT: Report abusive post
As with every issue he's dealt with, Brownlee crashes in with an ill-advised and inflammatory attitude, then scuttles behind his officials and is unavailable for comment. Christchurch needs unifying, reassuring and competent leadership and Brownlee consistently fails on all three counts. We need resources, not divisiveness. If the minister cannot deliver them quickly and efficiently, he needs to go. We deserve better.