Fenton Darien: Law Reform (Epidemic Preparedness) Bill — In Committee 
Fenton Darien: Law Reform (Epidemic Preparedness) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:636;Page:6987] 
DARIEN FENTON (Labour) 
: 
 I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak on Part 1 of the Law Reform (Epidemic Preparedness) Bill. I ask members to forgive me if I repeat some of the things my colleague Brian Connell has said in terms of what is in Part 1. I think it is important to do so because as my colleague has said this is an important bill that the Government Administration Committee has worked hard on and we need to understand what it is we have all agreed to. 
Several members talked at the second reading last night of how an epidemic caused by either avian flu or another infectious disease has the potential for enormous economic and social consequences. Labour’s whole-of-Government planning is well advanced and this bill provides for the legislative nuts and bolts needed should we be confronted with an awful emergency of this type. 
Some commentators have suggested that an H5N1 pandemic could be similar to the most serious influenza pandemic on our record the 1918 Spanish flu. Clearly that is on our minds because many people have spoken about it. It spread around the world in a year killing millions. It hit New Zealand in 1918 and killed 8600 people including 2160 Maori. The Government had to close schools theatres and hotels and many businesses were closed because of staff illness leading to shortages of basic supplies. Schools and halls were turned into makeshift hospitals as the virus spread very quickly. Sometimes people died within a day of their symptoms first appearing. Today we can only imagine what that might be like. 
An Epidemic Commission was set up in 1919 to investigate the cause and course of the epidemic. This led to major reforms of the health system including the passing of the Health Act 1920. As we know that Act was updated in 1956 and today we are considering modern relevant and vital legislation that will leave the country better prepared than it was in previous epidemics. It will also enable the Crown to provide a proper response should there be a human outbreak of avian disease or a similar disease capable of becoming an epidemic. 
Part 1 enables the use of emergency powers. The purpose of the legislation is to ensure that there is adequate statutory power for Government agencies firstly to try to prevent the outbreak of an epidemic in New Zealand; secondly to respond to an epidemic in New Zealand; and thirdly to respond to certain possible consequences of an epidemic whether here or overseas. The trigger mechanism includes the added protection of a requirement for the Prime Minister to have the agreement of the Minister of Health and the written recommendation of the Director-General of Health. That also ensures added accountability. As my colleague has mentioned the description “infectious” disease in clause 5 has been changed to “quarantinable” disease which includes those listed in Part 3 of schedule 1 of the Health Act. Those diseases are dreadful things like cholera plague and yellow fever as well as bird flu. 
The select committee recommends substantial amendments in clauses 7B to 9 to include modifications through Orders in Council in advance of any epidemic and modifications while an epidemic notice is in force. The making of prospective modification orders will ensure proper scrutiny through the Regulations Review Committee and the Regulations (Disallowance) Act 1989. It will also enable health authorities and others to learn in advance what they are expected to do before an epidemic comes. Prospective orders would come into force only once an epidemic notice had been declared and the epidemic was in progress. Under clauses 9A to 9H immediate modification orders will be subject to parliamentary scrutiny by way of any member of the House giving a notice of motion to disallow them. As the Minister of Health mentioned last night it is intended to amend the Standing Orders to make the disallowance motion debatable and to give it priority on the Order Paper. 
Clause 9I enables judges to modify the rules of court during an epidemic in the interests of justice so as to take into account the effects of the quarantinable disease but certain common law doctrines are not affected—that is mentioned in clause 9J. Finally clause 9K requires that where people’s rights remedies courses of action or legal situations under an enactment are affected by a modification order they must be told of their modified rights. 
The members of the select committee spent a considerable amount of time working on the amendments to Part 1 and we appreciated the advice of the Law Commission and the officials so as to get a reasonable balance between the emergency powers which can be quite draconian and ensuring accountability through parliamentary scrutiny.