Seymour David; Hipkins ChrisDAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): Well thank you Mr Speaker. I speak on behalf of ACT in response to the ministerial statement. I think it is worth acknowledging some of the pain that has been caused to people by this lockdown. That is not to say that the lockdown is necessarily wrong—they might be prepared to accept those costs as the price of maintaining elimination—but it's worth putting on record the businesses who have gone under this time because the effects of our restrictions are cumulative.It's worth putting on record a message I got from the principal of a local school: Pretty dispiriting for kids with camps sports etc. cancelled. Lots of schools pulling out of Polyfest. It's not worth the risk. I don't think the rest of the country realise or cares about the effect this is having on our youth. Anyway keep fighting the good fight." That's a principal from the Epsom electorate.I think it's worth putting those on record and acknowledging that people who may have lost their businesses missed healthcare been dispirited by the restrictions actually probably think it's acceptable if the Government is truly doing a good job of managing COVID-19. But the Minister told us that we should be grateful because we've had low levels of restriction and according to the Oxford stringency index low levels of restrictions on our freedoms within New Zealand. And the Minister is right about that but I put it back to the Minister that this country has few peers that can compare to the natural advantages we have when it comes to fighting COVID. There's a few countries that are more isolated than New Zealand—one or two. There's a few that have a more spread out and younger population than New Zealand—one or two. And there's a few countries that are richer than us and have a richer civil society and more cooperative people. But I'd challenge the Minister to name one country that could match the suite of advantages that New Zealand had going into the COVID-19 pandemic. If he could answer that I'm sure we'd all love to know.Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister for COVID-19 Response): I think the member to some extent in his comments around freedoms highlighted how fortunate New Zealanders have been. When it comes to things like school camps festivals and events and so on we're one of the only countries in the world that's doing those things at the moment. We're one of the only countries in the world that actually has an events industry thriving at the moment. While I'm not saying that it's not challenging for them—it absolutely is—they are certainly doing a lot better than their counterparts in just about every other country around the world.In terms of the comparisons that the member makes to other countries I would simply point out to him that he is wrong that it is an insult to the people working at our border that he's putting it all down to the fact that we're an island country. In fact we've had probably up to about 120000 people now come back into New Zealand across the border. We're dealing with a handful of potential cases from that. I think about Air New Zealand—5500 flights they've operated since May last year and they've dealt with three COVID-19 cases out of that. There are people working exceptionally hard to keep COVID-19 out of New Zealand.DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): It was a very simple question: can he name one country that could match New Zealand's suite of advantages—its isolation its young and spread-out population its wealth the prosperity of New Zealand and our civil society? All he had to do was get up and say "Here's a bunch of countries." but he couldn't because there isn't one. When the Minister says we should all be grateful and lucky he's taking the credit for the Government without acknowledging the simple reality that this Government had a less challenging job than any country on earth going into this pandemic. That's the truth.Then he enters into the fallacy that to criticise the response of the Government is to attack the hard-working people at the border and at managed isolation and quarantine facilities. Well actually that's interesting because I'm not aware of anyone in the ACT Party or anyone on this side of the House who has had anything but praise for those hard-working people. Actually the problem that the Minister has and this Government has is that they are unable to accept any kind of criticism of the approach that they have taken. I would say to the Government that that is a huge vulnerability for New Zealand because actually in order to get better we have to be prepared to accept criticism and accept the need to get better.Here's a simple question for the Minister. It's astonishing we haven't heard anything about the NZ COVID Tracer app during the Valentine's Day outbreak. Could the Minister tell the House: was anybody traced two people that scanned in at the same location or were traced person-to-person by Bluetooth? How many people were traced using that technology in this outbreak?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister for COVID-19 Response): In terms of the Bluetooth technology we don't have that information because we don't collect that information. One of the basic things about the COVID Tracer app is that people collect their own data. They get notifications about whether they may have been exposed and they respond based on that. We don't collect all that information. Some of the countries the member likes to laud do collect that information and they use it for a lot more than just tracing COVID-19 contacts which is not something that the New Zealand Government has been willing to do.DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): Which countries and what else do they use it for?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister for COVID-19 Response): I haven't got a list of all of that in front of me. I'm happy to provide the member with that. We do not—Hon Member: Making it up.Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: —collect all of that information.SPEAKER: Order! Who interjected that? Who made that interjection? Nick Smith will leave the House.Hon Dr Nick Smith withdrew from the Chamber. DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): Thank you Mr Speaker. There we have it again. The Minister tries to deflect and say other countries are somehow using or misusing citizens' data because they have better contact tracing. He can't say if the NZ COVID Tracer app that good law-abiding New Zealanders are scanning in with each day was actually useful for this outbreak but he can cast aspersions on other countries that they are doing scurrilous things with their citizens' data and we ask him to name a country and he can't do it. But can I ask the Minister: does the Government have any plans to change the rules or improve the use of the NZ COVID Tracer app after this outbreak given the answer he just gave—that they don't know if it was actually useful for tracing anyone in this outbreak?SPEAKER: The Minister can handle that as part of his reply now.Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister for COVID-19 Response): Of course I am well known for my skills in—David Seymour: Point of order Mr Speaker. I recognise that this is new to the House. My reading of the Standing Orders is that the allocation in Appendix A is five minutes so I still have 25 seconds on the clock. You're cutting it short for what reason?SPEAKER: Yes I'm not cutting it short at all. What the Standing Orders say is that the Speaker may extend the member's time to allow for the answers. I have substantially extended the member's time.Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I am well known for my skills in diplomacy but it is not for me to provide a commentary on what other countries are doing with their COVID tracer apps or name and shame them. The member can read the newspaper himself if he wishes to find out what other countries are doing around that. In terms of encouraging uptake of the COVID Tracer app yes that is something that we are looking at. One of the things the member might like to know when it comes to his sudden desire for the Government to be putting in place more compulsory measures which somewhat highlights the identity crisis of the ACT Party at the moment is that the Apple/Google exposure notification framework is provided to us to use on the basis that it cannot be made compulsory.DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): Point of order. I don't wish to take up the House's time unnecessarily but I'm just reflecting on this as this new convention of questions to ministerial statements evolves: if the Minister can take up the time of the member with the call the incentive to ask questions and yield the floor becomes very weak and I worry that the whole concept which we're developing—and which I think you strongly support Mr Speaker—might collapse. I just ask you to reflect on whether in fact the interpretation shouldn't be that the member with the floor has five minutes.SPEAKER: Well if the member had come to the Standing Orders Committee he would have heard the discussion which made it very clear as the report does that it is discretionary.DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): Point of order. I actually do recall that discussion and I don't think comments like the one you just made are helpful for the standing of your Chair or for the standing of this House.SPEAKER: Well I am almost certain that the member was not there for the final meeting where that was discussed.David Seymour: Almost?SPEAKER: Sorry? You were not always there.DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): Point of order. How is it helpful for the order of the House for you to engage in this sort of argument? It's completely superfluous unnecessary and I don't know why you do it.SPEAKER: Well I am not going to be responsible for the member's ignorance."