Hodgson Pete: Law Reform (Epidemic Preparedness) Bill — Second Reading 
Hodgson Pete: Law Reform (Epidemic Preparedness) Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:636;Page:6900] 
Hon PETE HODGSON (Minister of Health) 
: 
 I move  
That the Law Reform (Epidemic Preparedness) Bill be now read a second time 
. I thank the Government Administration Committee for its unanimous agreement on reporting this bill back to the House and for the work it put in. I acknowledge the chair and my own colleagues who sat on the committee. This major cross-party support is a reflection of the seriousness of the risk and of the time and effort of the members of the committee. 
This bill is part of New Zealand’s planning for any pandemic we may face particularly from a mutated bird flu that affects humans. There are two main foci of the bill. The first is to ensure that legislation is sufficient to manage the health risks associated with the outbreak and spread of disease and in particular infection control. The second main focus—for which New Zealand has shown leadership in the world—is planning for the disruptions to society that may occur from a pandemic. The Law Commission supported this focus and provided constructive suggestions to the committee to ensure that the legislation could work well. 
In relation to health management medical officers of health will have clearer and more modern powers to deal with communicable disease at the border and in an emergency. The key to knowing whether people need to be isolated or quarantined is the ability to ask them questions particularly at the border. The bill enhances that ability. Complementary to that is the clarification of the right to examine and test people in order to determine whether they are infected. The rights of people in our communities have to be weighed against individual rights. The bottom line is that people in our communities deserve a good degree of protection from being unnecessarily infected with a dangerous disease so some of the measures in this bill will infringe on the personal liberties of some individuals in order to prevent them from unnecessarily infecting others. The select committee has agreed to that. The bill does not however require compulsory medical treatment. Most people with a dangerous disease will choose treatment; if not the powers in the bill allow them to remain isolated while they remain infectious. 
The key part of the bill is the epidemic notice issued by the Prime Minister when a disruptive pandemic threatens or has arrived. The Minister of Health must have agreed that it be issued and the Director-General of Health must have given a written recommendation. The notice has to be gazetted and tabled in the House. It lasts for 3 months at the most but can then be extended. Parliament must meet within 7 days of the making of the notice unless it would be too risky to parliamentarians’ health to do so. The select committee raised a concern that this bill does not deal with the situation of an epidemic possibly occurring during an election period. Addressing that concern involves amending the Electoral Act and Constitution Act. The Government expects to have legislation drafted for that purpose by the end of June 2007 at which stage we will need to debate or decide whether to introduce it. 
The epidemic notice triggers some special powers such as the emergency provisions of the Health Act. Those powers mean that people in our community can be isolated quarantined or medically tested when they need to be. Premises may be closed. Public gatherings may be prohibited. Land buildings vehicles medicines and other things may be requisitioned to help communities with those affected by the requisitioning having rights to compensation. 
The issuing of an epidemic notice will trigger the ability to make modification Orders in Council. Those notices must also be gazetted tabled in the House and kept under review. A modification Order in Council can adjust statute law so as to make laws more workable in the crisis that New Zealand faces. Two examples of such adjustments would be allowing health professionals to work across occupational boundaries in order to provide health care for sick people and the ability to be flexible in relation to the payment of benefits under the Social Security Act. 
Those modification orders can be made in advance in which case they are called prospective modification orders or they can be made during the period of an epidemic notice in which case they are called immediate modification orders. Prospective modifications orders will allow advanced scrutiny of the orders by Parliament. Those orders must go no further than is reasonably necessary in the circumstances. The Ministry of Health is beginning the process with other departments of making prospective modification orders. Immediate modification orders are a last resort. They will receive enhanced parliamentary scrutiny and there is a truncated disallowance process of 6 sitting days. We will amend the Standing Orders to make the disallowance motion debatable and for it to be given priority on the Order Paper. 
Modification orders cannot amend the Bill of Rights 1688 the Constitution Act the Electoral Act the Judicature Amendment Act 1972 the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act or the epidemic preparedness legislation itself. Our judiciary is given the power when an epidemic notice is in force to modify the rules of the courts in the interests of justice taking into account the effects of the epidemic. 
I am extremely pleased that we have this legislation before us and I look forward to its continued passage through the House. I thank the very many people who have contributed to it.