Clark DavidHon Dr DAVID CLARK (Minister of Health): Thank you Mr Speaker. It's a pleasure to rise and speak in the second reading of this bill. I will address some of the questions raised by the previous member Chris Penk. He raised at one point the question about whether there had been a New Zealand Bill of Rights Act vet. I can let him know that there has so that piece of process has been done. It is accessible so I encourage the member to look at that. He also questions whether the existing legal framework was adequate or whether in fact the current regime has a sound legal basis. It does. And he questions whether the purpose of this bill is to design one. Because it doesn't. It explicitly says—and I do encourage him to read the bill—in the explanatory note paragraph 1 That single broad policy is to establish a fit-for-purpose legal framework for managing the unprecedented circumstances of the COVID-19 epidemic in a co-ordinated and orderly way even if there is no longer a national state of emergency. To this end this Bill establishes standalone legislation that provides a different legal framework for corresponding to COVID-19 over the next 2 years or until COVID-19 is sooner brought under control."To put that another way: essentially it's saying that we have the powers we need for responding to an emergency in the area of health to respond in a situation where a crisis emerges. Those powers exist—an undescribed crisis—and so those responses have happened. Now that we have the opportunity over time to have a more specific piece of legislation for this particular disease and for our response to it it seems fitting and appropriate firstly that the whole Parliament can debate it so that we can have the Parliament's agreement to the framework that underpins the decision making around our country's response to this virus. And it also makes sense to have legislation that was not designed for the immediate crisis but that is designed for an ongoing management situation and therefore can be more fit-for-purpose. That indeed is explained in the explanatory note in paragraph 1 of the bill.But for those who have just tuned in to the debate as well it's also true that there has been much said about funerals that I have heard in the context of this debate. And I have to say as a Cabinet certainly my experience—and I've heard the Prime Minister also talk about this and other Cabinet Ministers—limiting the number of people attending a tangi or a funeral is one of the most difficult decisions we've had to make in the context of COVID-19. Grieving for the loss of a loved one is an incredibly intense and difficult human experience and people in those situations do tend to want to physically comfort one another. That is the reality of the grieving process. As a funeral celebrant myself I've been involved in many funerals and of course have observed the way in which we do comfort each other in these situations. Overseas sadly we have seen situations where people who've come together for the purpose of grieving—in funerals where they have gathered there has been spread of COVID-19 and then there has been further subsequent tragic loss. And so that is not something we ever want to see in this country.We have made an in-principle decision that we should not have gatherings of more than 10 people unless of course there is more than 10 people in an existing bubble—but that restaurants won't take bookings of more than 10 people for example; that funerals and tangihanga will be restricted in physical presence to 10 people. Of course there are other practices in place which are more common these days where also these services can be broadcast via social media and other means video-recorded and watched as well. That will be some comfort to people though it has to be said it will still be incredibly difficult for those people in that situation. That is why we do want to examine that and lift those restrictions as soon as we have confidence. In another cycle of the virus we will re-examine it. We do want to loosen those restrictions as soon as we safely can.I think the important thing here is that as a country many people have made sacrifices through the existing time of level 4 and we want to lock those gains in. We do not want to see people go through unnecessary suffering. We want to lock in the gains and move forward together."