Penk ChrisCHRIS PENK (National—Kaipara ki Mahurangi) (remote): Thank you very much Mr Chair. I have a question for the Minister of Justice regarding the jury selection. I do want to acknowledge his response to my previous question in that space which I thought was helpful and thoughtful. I would be interested to know his thoughts to the extent that that interacts with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act and fair trial rights in the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act.I also want to pick up a theme of my questioning that had commenced under clause 1 and it was in relation to the role if any that tribunals have in our court system. In his mind with regard to the COVID-19 response the Minister said that tribunals along with courts were treated in a certain way during level 4 and level 3 and I don't wish to relitigate whether those were appropriate. That's outside the scope of the bill. But is the Minister saying that there is nothing in this bill that relates to tribunals and if so how can he justify such a huge gap in our justice system treatment unless he's prepared to say that the dictates of public health safety efficiency and so on don't equally apply to our workers our litigants our parties in those systems?I do want to acknowledge that juries specifically of course don't operate within the tribunal system so I do acknowledge that one particular specific carve-out. But in respect of most of the rest of the provisions I want to hear from the Minister whether or not they apply equally to tribunals and if not why not and if not also when he will be introducing legislation that gives them some certainty about security and safety in procedural aspects in the COVID-19 environment because again the Minister can't have it both ways. He can't say these things are important for courts but not for tribunals. So again I do want to hear the Minister say something more about that.While I've got the call—noting it's probably never more than a couple of minutes away from another closure motion being sought—I do want to ask the Minister to justify clause 6 within the new Schedule to the Courts Security Act in clause 3 of Schedule 1 and that's the one in which court security officers are being asked to inform persons of the consequences of them being denied entry or being removed from court. Is the Minister through this legislation saying that court security officers are appropriate to provide legal advice to those who have been denied such a fundamental right as being denied access to a courtroom?Hon KRIS FAAFOI (Minister of Justice): Can I thank the member Chris Penk for his questions. I think I'll just remind the member that within the piece of legislation if there are instructions from a judge or a head of bench around any changes or protocols they have to be done to keep the health and safety of the courtroom and to also be in the interests of justice. I'd also note that this piece of legislation has been obviously through the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act vet process and has been found compliant.I do think the member asks a reasonable question in terms of who is covered by this. It is courts and it is tribunals that I understand roughly are held in court buildings. So there will be a very small number of tribunals that won't necessarily always hear issues in person that won't be covered by this but the vast majority of tribunals that operate—especially those that operate on the site of a court—are covered by this piece of legislation.