Reti ShaneDr SHANE RETI (National—Whangarei): Thank you Madam Speaker. It's a pleasure to talk to this bill and to collaborate on a piece of work that we think is important. I want to talk to three schedules in this bill: Schedule 11 Schedule 4 Schedule 6. The first two comments I make will be brief the third—to Schedule 6—will be a little bit more substantive. Section 11—I want to talk to the mental health component. The audio and teleconferencing abilities under this schedule are useful. I just want to exercise some caution—a mental health examination done by audio or done by teleconference will be incredibly difficult. It's already difficult in person and there are so many cues in person that you pick up that I would just exercise some caution and great skill in using that part of the bill. Schedule 4 talks to the business debt hibernation scheme and also alludes to the wage subsidy both of which we support and would be particularly useful for people like those we saw in front of the Epidemic Response Committee this morning: the hairdressers for example who tell us that unfortunately there are host employers already handing back their apprentices; the master plumbers who have written to me and said if the wage subsidy is not extended an estimated 35 percent—or about 970 apprentices—will be laid off. I would also like to point to the travel industry who may benefit from this and encourage the Government to look at what they might particularly do for travel agents. The reason I say that is this. It turns out there is about $100 million of offshore refunds cash refunds for New Zealanders who booked with travel agents. If travel agents don't survive the ability to bring that back into New Zealand will be severely compromised because it was done through a one-to-one relationship. Imagine if we could bring that $100 million back—those refunds in fares; cash fares not credits—into New Zealanders' hands. To do that we're going to need to keep some of the travel brokers the face-to-face travel brokers alive. So if we could just apply ourselves to that—how we could also do something good there. I particularly though want to talk to Schedule 6 which is amendments to the Coroners Act. The particular line I want to talk to here is new section 21B(2) inserted by clause 2: a preliminary inspection of the body performed under section 21A of the Act must include the taking and testing of nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal swabs in any case where the deceased is suspected to have had COVID-19 at the time of death." Now we already have under several provisions in law the ability and the requirement to do testing on deceased people. So I see this more as a reminder rather than something dramatically new into the law. I also point out there that the requirement is to do a nasopharyngeal—nose—swab as well as a throat swab and that's a reflection on the times when we've been running out of nasal swabs during this lockdown period—just how important that is that we're going to put that in legislation: you've got to do them both a nose and a throat swab. I also want to comment on the large body of work that needs to wrap around this particular provision so everyone in the House is absolutely agreed it's the right thing to do. We need to do swabs on those who are deceased who we think might have had the infection. But here's my problem. My problem comes from a written parliamentary question four days ago 5604 to the Minister of Health: "How many coronavirus tests if any have been undertaken on deceased patients?" And here's the answer: "I'm advised that this information is not collected by the Ministry of Health in a form that is able to be reported on." Why on earth are we passing legislation if we're not going to be able to do anything with it? Substantially the ministry if they want this piece of legislation to be effective—and it's good. It's important. We need to know if people have deceased and actually had coronavirus because that will give us some sense of where it is in the community and what we may or may not be missing. But if we do that if we pass this if we say yes that's what must be done. It helps us nought if we're unable to report on it. As of four days ago the Minister of Health said to me "We're not able to collect it and we're not able to report on it." That will be a substantial body of work and I'd suggest it's a digital collection because we found that out with contact tracing—you can't answer the questions because it was manual manual manual through until about 6 April when they moved to a centralised digital platform and now we can start getting some reporting on it. These will be important figures. Let's do it right from the beginning. Let's get to a digital platform as soon as we can so that we can report on the nose and throat swabs that are done on deceased patients who we suspect coronavirus. So the point I'm making here is the argument for it to be in the bill is good but it's going to need a lot of wraparound work to actually bring it to life. So if the Government could apply themselves please to get it into a mechanism where we can easily collect and easily report I think it will fulfil the ambition of this schedule. Thank you Madam Speaker."