Bishop ChrisCHRIS BISHOP (National): Thank you very much Madam Speaker and I want to thank the Minister for COVID-19 Response for his illumination of these quite technical but very important orders. Can I just start where he finished by congratulating and saying thank you to the Regulations Review Committee. Perhaps when the COVID-19 Public Health Response Act was passed it was not envisaged that the Regulations Review Committee would be quite so busy but they have been very diligent and very busy over the last few months now actually in considering the various orders.I actually think genuinely that we have got to a very good situation where the Act gives the Minister quite deep powers—quite broad powers you would say—to take action around mandatory vaccination for example around mandatory testing and all of the things that I think everyone in the House agrees is necessary. But it's really important that those powers are exercised responsibly and pursuant to the Act. We've got the Regulations Review Committee which National has members on led by our shadow Attorney-General Mr Penk who's doing a really good job and I actually think we've got to a situation where things are referred to the committee and the committee does a really good job considering it and it's really good to hear the Minister indicate that he's actually consulting proactively in advance with the committee. So we will support the motion to approve these orders.I do note that as the Minister indicated the succession of quarantine-free travel orders and amendment orders is regrettable but necessary. As the Minister was outlining you know we had the order that started the travel and then we had the one that stopped it. It's restarted again and now we've got one before the committee which will in due course make its way back to the House around stopping it again. I was pondering whether or not there was a simpler way of doing that and it doesn't off the top of my head occur to me that there is—and the Minister's shaking his head saying no. I suspect he is right because I suspect he has also asked his officials whether or not there is a simpler way of doing it.Hon Chris Hipkins: A button. I want a button!CHRIS BISHOP: Ha ha! Right you want a button? Yeah yeah. Well it's almost like a metaphorical button I suppose. You know you sign the ministerial order and off it goes. It's sort of like a button. It's like the parliamentary equivalent of a button I suppose. Anyway I suppose there isn't a simpler way of doing it and so we are where we are. But having said that it is really important that we consider these things properly. So we will be supporting the orders.I do have one point to make around the COVID-19 Public Health Response (Isolation and Quarantine) Amendment Order 2021 which is in relation to aircrew and that is the one order that the Regulations Review Committee did have some concerns with to quote them. In particular it was not clear according to the committee that that order was made in accordance with the objects and intentions of the enactment under which it's made. It's not clear to us how this power to shorten the period of isolation and quarantine is justified for New Zealand - based aircrew given the public health objectives to prevent or limit the outbreak of COVID-19. So this is the order that allows the chief executive of the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment (MBIE) to bring to an end the normal 14-day period for aircrew. I accept that there are some practical complications around aircrew but it's not totally clear to me in the response from the Minister that is recorded in the report to the House that that is a justified one.I've actually had quite a few members of the public write to me saying Well hang on a minute. If it's good enough for aircrew from Air New Zealand to have their time in isolation and quarantine shortened—I've been doubly vaccinated. I've had a pre-departure test. I'm happy to have a day-zero test when I arrive. If it's good enough for aircrew to have their time shortened by fiat of the chief executive of MBIE why isn't it good enough for me?" I'm confused by the response from the Minister that's recorded where it says "Requiring the full 14 days of managed isolation when that is not necessary for these aircrew would raise issues under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990." Well if requiring 14 days of isolation when it's not necessary for aircrew raises issues under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 surely it therefore raises issues for everybody who is subject to a mandatory 14 days of isolation under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act when it is not necessary. So I don't really understand that point. Perhaps that's something we can get into later on.If I could close my contribution by just throwing forward a little bit to what we're going to hear on—well I think that there's some indication that the information will be provided tomorrow but Thursday is the public forum with the Prime Minister and Professor Sir David Skegg in relation to the future. I suspect coming down the line hopefully sooner rather than later we are going to get to a point where the House is going to be asked to consider quite a few of these orders. Hopefully we can get into a situation where there is at least an indication on the horizon or a prospect on the horizon of at least a gradual loosening at the border to allow more New Zealanders to come home and also people who need to come to New Zealand to fill skill shortages for example to come to New Zealand.We will take a very careful and judicious approach to that from the Opposition but I think there is a momentum building in the public and certainly from New Zealanders overseas to see at least what the landscape will look like at some point into the future around our border particularly when it comes to vaccinations overseas. There's a large number of New Zealanders living overseas now who've had the double dose of AstraZeneca or the double dose of Pfizer who do want to come home to New Zealand at some point in 2022 and beyond once we have a very good level of vaccination coverage in New Zealand. So hopefully on Thursday the Minister said last week we're going to get the direction of travel and hopefully on Thursday we do get a reasonably—well things are never certain with COVID-19 and I wouldn't want to say that the Minister should outline a path that he should never deviate from. I think COVID has taught us over the last year or so that actually deviation from the path is sometimes really necessary. You have to be guided by the science and guided by the public health but a direction of travel that at least New Zealanders can see and get behind a little bit.One of the things that I've been saying over the last couple of weeks or so is that I think it would be really good to see a target. I don't just mean a numerical one-off target; I mean a range of targets and it could even be a range of ranges. What I mean by that is it could be 80 to 85 percent or 85 to 90 percent. Then of course you've got the geographic targets as well because the Minister has previously talked about how it may not be enough for New Zealand to open the border at say 85 percent vaccination coverage if there's one part of the country—say South Auckland—which is only at 50 to 60 percent and I do really take that point. I am really worried about vaccination coverage in our Māori and Pasifika communities for example. I am really worried about it and I think the Minister should be as well because I see vaccine hesitancy out there all the time particularly amongst our Māori and Pasifika communities and they are of course more vulnerable and we do need to increase that uptake.So what I would like to see from the Government as we head into Thursday is an indication of what sort of number we need in the community of vaccination coverage before we can start to loosen our restrictions at the border. The reason I say that is twofold. The first is that I think New Zealanders don't just need the negative message around COVID vaccines protecting you. That is really important obviously and it's true but actually there's a group of people out there who need the positive message as well. They need to know what vaccine coverage will give them in terms of freedoms into the future. So it's really important I think that we don't just send a negative message but we also send a positive message.The other thing that I think is worth mentioning is actually we're pretty good when we get behind a national goal and a national target. I know it's an imperfect analogy but you think about the red socks campaign in the America's Cup in the past even telethons and frankly last year with the team of 5 million—that moniker and that effort. When we all pull together as a community and as a collective we can actually achieve really good things. I think it would be worth the Government outlining a number or at least a range of numbers and then the Prime Minister using her mana and leadership and saying "You know what New Zealand? Let's go for it." Let's get to whatever the number is. Say it's 80 or 85. Let's get there. And when we get to 85 percent coverage around the country that will mean that in time New Zealanders with a double dose of Pfizer or double dose of AstraZeneca can come home and maybe spend less time in managed isolation.But that's what the future holds for us and I actually think that would encourage a lot more people to go down and get vaccinated. I actually think it would highlight the benefits of the vaccination programme and send a positive message rather than just the negative one which is necessary but is just a very one-note message at the moment. So I think that is what we would like to see from the opposition as we head into Thursday and the outline of the science. We always have to be guided by the science and guided by the evidence. That's something that's served us well on the COVID-19 response so far and it will continue to serve us well into the future but I think there's a bit of a gathering momentum. We want a number. We want some targets. We want to know what the future holds. We've been told we'll get a direction of travel and I think everyone in the House is looking forward to hearing exactly what that is on Thursday. Thank you Madam Speaker."