Parker DavidCOVID-19 PUBLIC HEALTH RESPONSE BILLFirst ReadingHon DAVID PARKER (Attorney-General): I move That the COVID-19 Public Health Response Bill be now read a first time.This bill creates a bespoke legal framework to support the Government's future efforts to limit the spread of COVID-19 in New Zealand. This is designed to last for a maximum of two years although can be brought to an end earlier if the threat passes.New Zealanders have been on a precarious journey combatting this virus. We're not at our final destination yet but together we've made extraordinary progress through the largely voluntary efforts of our people who accepted the need for unprecedented actions to isolate ourselves in bubbles to cut off the chains of infection. We went hard and we went early to fight a virus for which there is currently no vaccine and no cure. We know it can hide and spread through those with no symptoms and around the world we've seen the devastation and loss of life it can cause especially in aged care and in dementia units. We've negotiated difficult terrain and have broken the chain of community transmission. In the meantime we've improved our stocks and supply lines for polymerase chain reaction test kits and reagents as well as personal protective equipment supplies and distribution. We've ramped up testing and the quality and capacity of track and tracing. We've minimised the damage the virus would have otherwise done to our people and to our economy.We cannot afford to be complacent but we can take a moment as a nation to pat ourselves on the back. New Zealand is now able to restore civil and economic freedoms at a far faster rate and to a wider extent than many other countries. The move to level 2 is welcome. We can reconnect with friends and family we haven't seen for a couple of months catch up—with appropriate social distancing—for coffee and dare I say it get a haircut. But level 2 does not mark the end of our precarious journey. It does not remove the need for vigilance nor for the measures we need as we do our best to ensure the virus does not get a second chance. Level 2 does allow us to live our lives with greater flexibility but still with great care and some restrictions and that is what this bill addresses. Some critics including this House have said we went into lockdown too late then argued we should leave it sooner and now argue that we should take another week to consider this legislation which would extend the social and economic impacts.Managing the epidemic has required the fast escalation of measures to stop the spread of the virus for primarily health reasons. The step down has to be prompt for different reasons. Each additional day has significant economic costs for New Zealanders. Delays which can be avoided also risk undermining the social consensus we need to maintain. We considered whether to allow this bill a select committee process; this would have either delayed level 2 or risked a level 2 without the more nuanced enforcement powers that we believe are warranted for an interregnum. We concluded that passing it under urgency is necessary for New Zealand to move to alert level 2 at 11.59 p.m. on Wednesday.We provided an exposure draft to other political parties and to legal academics overnight. We recognise this is a short period—we have received feedback and we thank you. The bill doesn't change the alert level framework or any of the measures or restrictions that have been required at former levels; it does modernise the legal framework that sits behind and supports these measures. As New Zealand moves out of lockdown and looks ahead to level 2 and beyond it's necessary to create a bespoke legal regime. I must emphasise now as I have before that there is already a solid legal basis for all the legal restrictions that have been placed on New Zealand's freedoms and liberties at this extraordinary time. However the current legal framework is not fit for purpose for enforcing certain measures at level 2 where there is increased freedom of movement and more nuanced restrictions. New legislation is necessary as we don't want to rely on a national state of emergency and the Health Act alone to enforce measures at these lower levels.To date restrictions at alert levels 3 and 4 were given legal effect by notices under section 70 of the Health Act in conjunction with the state of emergency under the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act and the Epidemic Preparedness Act. To support alert levels 3 and 4 the director-general has issued notices to close premises except those providing essential services prohibit congregation in outdoor places and require people to remain at home in their bubble except to access essentials and to exercise. These orders are lawful under the Health Act and the restrictions proportionate to the scale of the COVID-19 threat.That said some aspects of the Health Act do need to be modernised and adapted and this is particularly true for the detailed level 2 measures which are not well suited to the existing Health Act and Civil Defence Emergency Management regime. This bill provides new enforceable measures that don't depend on a state of emergency being in force. The bill allows the Minister of Health to issue orders to give effect to these measures either for all of New Zealand at a regional level or for a particular class of people businesses or other activities. For example it includes powers to require people to maintain social distancing measures to require people to refrain from travel to or from any area to require people to be isolated or quarantined to prohibit gatherings of any specified kind to report for testing and requiring premises to be closed or allowed to open only if specific measures are complied with.The measures in the bill take into account the particular characteristics of COVID-19 and give us the best chance to keep it under control. Due to its asymptomatic and contagious nature measures may need to be imposed at a nationwide regional or group level where necessary to reduce the risk of transmission. The Government recognises the restrictions and measures to combat COVID-19 have had an enormous impact on our lives and livelihoods and so the social and economic impacts will be important factors in decision making under this bill. The bill moves decision making from medical officers of health to the Minister of Health who needs to be satisfied the measures are appropriate and they must take into account any decision by the Government on how to respond to those risks and avoid mitigate or remedy the effects of COVID-19 which may have taken into account any social economic or other factors and must take into account advice from the director-general about the risks of the outbreak or spread of COVID-19 and the extent and nature of measures appropriate to address those risks. The Minister of Health must consult the Prime Minister the Minister of Justice and any other Minister the Minister of Health thinks fit.The bill will give police and other authorised enforcement officers clearer powers to enforce the orders consistent with the graduated approach police have taken to enforcement to date. Those powers sit aside along voluntary measures public health and other guidance. This bill creates a power to enter premises a power to direct people to stop activities that are in breach of the order a power to close roads and public places and a power to close businesses operating in breach of the rules for 24 hours. Clause 23 allows a constable to enter a private dwelling house without a warrant only if they have reasonable grounds to believe that people have gathered there in contravention of an order and entry is necessary to give a direction to cease the activity. We acknowledge that it is unusual—though not unprecedented—for a constable to have warrantless power of entry into a private dwelling house. This is due—the fact that it is unusual—to the high expectation of privacy that citizens have in these places.Hon Michael Woodhouse: What's the precedent Minister?Hon DAVID PARKER: The extraordinary risk posed by COVID-19—I will cover instances in later speeches; I haven't got time to detail that now—and the fact that it can be spread readily in large social gatherings whether in public or in private justifies the power in these circumstances and the limits it places on rights. There are safeguards in the bill so that a constable must report every time a warrantless entry power is exercised summarising the circumstances and the reason why the power needed to be exercised.This bill will create a new infringement offence regime. Some breaches will be dealt with as an infringement offence and an intentional breach will be a criminal offence which may result in a fine or imprisonment on conviction. An infringement offence regime gives police another graduated step in their enforcement options where the breach is not serious enough to warrant criminal prosecution. The bill also amends the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002 to ensure a nationally consistent approach to the response and to management of risks arising from COVID-19 and to better deal with concurrent emergencies that are not COVID-19 but which might arise during the period of the COVID-19 response. We believe this legislation is needed to appropriately continue our response to the unique and unprecedented challenges of COVID-19. Madam Speaker I commend this bill to the House.