Bishop ChrisCHRIS BISHOP (National): Thank you very much Madam Speaker and I thank the Minister for COVID-19 Response for those illuminating remarks. National will be opposing this motion because we opposed the initial public health response bill which is now the Act and we feel duty bound to oppose the continuation of the Act for that reason. We oppose it with the judicious remarks that we oppose the scope and the breadth of the legislation albeit there are some very sensible measures and I just want to make three very brief points in this call.The first is that the history of this legislation I have to say is an untidy one for the Government. There are a few new members in the Chamber and welcome to all and congratulations on your maiden speeches—but if you were here in the preceding Parliament the 52nd Parliament there was quite a bit of back and forth it would be fair to say about this legislation. We heard from the Government for quite a long period of time that the legal basis upon which the orders that were made by the then Minister of Health David Clark was totally fine that there was no question. We heard the Attorney-General give fulsome public comments about how there was a wide-ranging legal background to the orders that were made and that people should have no concerns whatsoever about the legality of the various measures that were put in place most of which the National Party supported actually—in fact most of which the National Party supported before the Government did by the way. But the point remains—and it's a fundamental one—that Government must act according to the law. That is what the rule of law means in New Zealand society. I've got to say one thing that I was quite surprised by during the preceding months was that many people actually rejected that simple proposition. I had many people say to me What are you worried about? The Government's done the right thing. Fantastic. They've done well." And that is true as far as it goes. But the simple proposition that Government must act according to the law which I would have thought was a non-controversial view actually it turns out it's quite controversial. But that's what the rule of law means. It means Government's subject to the law Government must act according to the law and if the Government wants to act to a different standard of law they've got to change the law. In New Zealand with our Parliament it turns out the Government changing law is actually pretty easy particularly in this Parliament. Because this Government's got a majority they do what they like. You know Palmer called this Parliament the "fastest lawmaker in the West" and he designed MMP to make sure it never happened again and it turns out here we are again. So I hope that the Government doesn't go back to the bad old days of the pre-1996 era and act like they can do what they like. But that is a little bit what happened when it came to the COVID-19 Public Health Response Act the first time around. As National said—as the Opposition said—"We're concerned about the legality." And a guy called Mr Borrowdale actually thought the same thing. He took the Government to court and he won and that surprised quite a few people. It didn't surprise me and it didn't surprise Christopher Penk over here the shadow Attorney-General. It didn't surprise those who've studied public law because there were very shaky legal foundations for the Government's activities. So the history of this is very untidy and eventually the Government was forced to act after insisting for month after month that there was no necessity. So the history is an untidy one. Secondly we feel duty bound to oppose the continuation of the legislation because of the powers given to the Government particularly when it comes to warrantless searches which is something that—the Government would say to you that we have that power in legislation currently and that is true. But it is very rare very rarely exercised and not to the same extent and breadth that this gives. The third point is a plea to the Minister to take seriously the concerns in the Brian Roche and Heather Simpson report because this legislation deals with orders in relation to testing at the border and around our maritime border and around our aircraft and around the way in which COVID can come into New Zealand. The Minister said himself publicly—and we agree—borders are our first line of defence against COVID. I understand that there is a very negative review as to the activities of the Ministry of Health. I encourage the Minister to release that report soon so that we can see for ourselves and so can the public. We will be opposing this with the caveat that there are some sensible things in the legislation. Thank you."