Stanford EricaERICA STANFORD (National—East Coast Bays): Ah—shambolic" and "disorganised" says the member of the Government who is passing legislation in the dying days of their Government knowing that this has been coming for months and months and months. The only reason we're here is because the National Party put out a really solid good argument for a number of weeks—possibly months now even—saying that actually it's fair and reasonable to expect people to pay some of the costs of their managed isolation. It pushed this Government—well firstly into a chaotic shambles. We had one side of the Government saying "Oh we need to charge everybody the full amount."—Winston Peters—and we had the Greens over here saying "Oh no we can't charge anyone; it has to be completely free." So don't lecture us about "shambolic" and "disorganised" when the three parties across the House can't even get their stuff together to sit down sort themselves out and come to a position on this that they can all agree on. This bill is an acknowledgment of the fact that they can't do that because all it does as has been mentioned by a few people is just set out a framework; it doesn't go into any detail. They can't go into any detail because they know if they do that they're going to have a huge tiff on their hands between the guys over here and the guys over here who couldn't by the way even sit together let alone come to an agreement on this bill. That's "shambolic" and "disorganised" I would put to you.Now I'd also put to you the fact that Michael Wood can't get his head around the fact that all that Gerry Brownlee was saying was that in fact the proposals that this Government have put forward—not in this bill but in their press releases and what the Prime Minister has said about who gets charged and who doesn't get charged—are in fact shambolic and disorganised because it's unfair to say to some people "You have to pay." and other people "You don't have to pay." If we're going to put in a regime it has to be well-thought-through not shambolic and disorganised like the bits and pieces we've heard from this Government in their bits and pieces of press releases. I want just to go back to the previous speaker Megan Woods. You have come to expect from this Minister of Energy and Resources a general misunderstanding of the issues and today—a complete fabrication and misrepresentation of what I in fact said. I was very clear in my first reading speech that we cannot continue to cover the cost of what will if you extrapolate it out be a billion dollars a year in bringing people home. I never at any stage said that we shouldn't be quarantining people—as much as she'd like to believe that and go and have a press release about it; I was saying we cannot continue to meet that cost. It is huge. It is ballooning. As Gerry Brownlee said we don't know how long this is going to go on for. It is reasonable to expect like the rest of us how we've all had some kind of cost that we've had to bear in this whether it's people who've lost their businesses lost their jobs lost their livelihoods had to take out huge loans or had to spend their retirement savings to prop up their business—everybody in this country has paid. Is it fair? No it's not fair. Grant Robertson made that very clear—this is not about fairness—when he said very early on in COVID it's not about fairness unfortunately. This whole thing is very unfair. But the practical reality is we cannot continue to spend a billion dollars a year. We have to put in place something that is as fair as we can get it to recover some of those costs and that's what this bill does and which is why we'll be supporting it. I would also like to point out that the Minister in her first and second reading speeches glossed very quickly over the section 11 changes to the COVID-19 Public Health Response Act which will be interesting. I'm looking forward to having her in the chair when we delve into these a bit. She said in her second reading speech that—clause 7(2) says "Replace section 11(1)(a)(viii) with:". In fact that is already in the bill. There's only one new word—well there's two new words: people must report for "and undergo" because I guess there was a problem with people reporting for but not wanting to undergo a test. It also includes "of any kind". So previously I guess there was one type of test; now they've included any kind of test. So we're going to delve into that a bit more. What does that mean? She didn't mention any of that in her speech; she just glossed over the top of it. And then the other part of section 11 which will just be interesting to go into—again there was no detail given to us by this Minister about people having to register potentially for a quarantine place before they come into New Zealand. But new section 11(1)(a)(x) set out in clause 7(3) says here "satisfy any specified criteria before entering New Zealand from a place outside New Zealand which may include [having to preregister]." But what else could that mean? Could that mean having a test before you come in? Does it mean being vaccinated before you come in? It's very broad: "satisfy any specified criteria before entering New Zealand". It'll be interesting to hear what the Minister has to say about those. There was no detail given in her speech. I'd be keen to know what those things mean as I'm sure many New Zealanders would. In the final couple of minutes—I won't go on too long—I want to just remind the House that if you extrapolate this out it's a billion dollars all of the cost of bringing people home. All this Government have told us that they would like to do is cost recovery of around about somewhere in the realm of $8 million. It is—I think that someone said—2 percent. It's a drop in the bucket. The cost of administering the scheme alone—who's exempt who's not how much do you charge when do you charge cost recovery and all those bits and pieces—would suck up most of that. We have to have a regime in place that is seriously recuperating the costs of managed isolation and quarantine in New Zealand. It's the right thing to do it's a practical thing to do and I commend the bill to the House."