Brown SimeonSIMEON BROWN (National—Pakuranga): Thank you Mr Speaker. No one in New Zealand wanted COVID-19 no one in New Zealand asked for it no one in New Zealand could have predicted it and no one in New Zealand wants to see it flare up and spread through our communities again.Over the last eight weeks we've seen New Zealanders at their best. They've stayed home saved lives. New Zealanders have done the right thing fighting COVID-19. People in my electorate have done the right thing: staying home saving lives. We're proud of how we've done as a country. I'm proud of what we've achieved. I feel a sense of national pride which I know is felt deeply across our country. We're proud of what we've achieved. We're proud of our front-line health workers. We're proud of the fact that we have not seen significant numbers of fatalities from COVID-19.However New Zealanders are also proud of our values we're proud of our democracy and we're proud of our freedoms. We don't give up our freedoms lightly: our freedom of movement our freedom of association our freedoms to gather and meet with like-minded people our freedom to start a business and to work hard to make a living our freedom of religion and to worship or not to worship our freedom to mourn the loss of a loved one. This bill cuts to the heart of those freedoms. Yes we know that we must give up our freedoms in times of a national emergency to unite to achieve a common goal against a common enemy: COVID-19. We know that this may need to be done for a temporary period of time but we don't give up those freedoms lightly and we don't give up those freedoms permanently. When we do give them up we don't give them up without some level of proportionality. This bill the COVID-19 Public Health Response Bill is not a proportionate response to COVID-19 and the threat that it provides.I'd like to focus on a number of areas. Firstly in highlighting how this bill is disproportionate to New Zealanders. This bill is one of the most extreme pieces of legislation to ever come to this Parliament. Under clause 11 of this bill the Minister of Health and the Prime Minister will have the ability to substantially affect every area of New Zealanders' lives: the ability to refrain people from associating with specific people to enforce physical distancing rules to prohibit gatherings of specific kinds in specific places in specific circumstances require isolation prohibit things from entering or permit the entry of things into any port or place. The impact that this bill has on our society is extreme. I go back to the point I made at the start: we understand that we give up our freedoms temporarily but we don't give them up permanently and we don't give them up without there being some form of proportionately.When you have such extreme legislation in place which gives such extreme powers to the Government there is always a risk of those powers being misused. We only need to look at what has already been announced by the Government over the last week in regards to what level 2 will mean to see that these will be misused. You can look at the examples of weddings of funerals of tangi of church and religious services which last week were told could have a maximum number of a hundred and now are being told that they can only have a maximum number of 10.I'd like to read a letter that I received today from a funeral director in my electorate who said We currently have in our care a well-known local gentleman whose family visit most days to sit with him. They were hoping level 2 would allow them to hold a farewell at the club in honour of him; now they're having to rethink this due to the level 2 announcement. This is one of many families from varying cultures in our care that have been waiting for level 2 to hold a service. They feel let down and confused as to how to move forward." This is not only an unfair change to the rules it's not only a misuse of the rules; it's an inhumane use of the rules and it is an untrusting use of the rules. New Zealanders have been told to be kind; New Zealanders have been told that the Government trusts them to make the right decisions; but now when it comes to level 2 we're being told: "No we don't trust you to hold a funeral and to physically and socially distance at that period." We've heard speakers argue and say "Well you can go to a cafe a restaurant a cinema a school and we trust you there but we don't trust you at one of the most important moments in life which is actually death a moment of grief a moment where people come together to remember their loved ones."I come also to the area of church and religious services and these have also been limited to 10. My colleague Nicola Willis mentioned the consistency with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act and the Ministry of Justice advice and how this advice didn't even touch on the freedom of worship under section 15 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. I quote section 15: "Every person has the right to manifest that person's religion or belief in worship observance practice or teaching either individually or in community with others and either [publicly] or in private." The advice didn't even cover that fundamental right and I find that abhorrent.I'm not ashamed of the fact that I'm someone who goes to church every Sunday. We've done the right thing: we've held our church services on Zoom as have many other churches up and down the country. They've had live streams on YouTube they've played their part. Most churches aren't big churches in New Zealand. Our church only has 50 people. We won't be able to meet this Sunday under these new rules as will many other churches across New Zealand. These rules go to the heart of what it means to be a Kiwi and I find it abhorrent. It comes down to then the enforcement of these rules—and I find these provisions extreme. The powers in this bill under clause 20 give enforcement officers the ability to enter any premise and close it at any time. It gives powers to the police to enter any premise anywhere at any time to ensure that people are following the rules. They could enter your home. They could enter your business. They could enter your most sacred place. Your home being your castle at any time is no longer sacred under this legislation. And then the ability to fine you and potentially imprison you. Those are all powers which this bill has.Lastly I come to the area of safeguards because when Parliament puts in place legislation with such extreme provisions the question has to be: where are the safeguards? Where are the safeguards in this piece of legislation? Well it has a two-year time limit. Two years. This piece of legislation will be in place for two years. I understand the Government is looking at making that three months at a time; however that is still an extremely long period of time. This Parliament will have the numbers without the Opposition having to be part of that to extend that three-month period every single time.This bill has a number of occasions where it says the Minister must have regard to any Government decision on the risk and consult the Prime Minister the Minister of Justice and any other Minister that the Minister of Health thinks fit. "Have regard to" "consult"—those are words which are so weak that you could drive a bus through them. The Leader of the Opposition is not required to be consulted. When we go through a time of national crisis we should do that together and we should have both the Government and the Opposition playing an important role in that. This legislation does not provide the Opposition any single area where it can have influence over the decisions which are made by the Government or the powers.I heard David Seymour speak about the ability of the judicial review. Judicial review is available but how much does it cost to take a case to court? You hear people on the Government benches constantly talking about the cost of justice in our country and now they're saying that if you want to stand for your freedoms you've got to take a case to court under judicial review. Where are the freedoms where are the checks where are the balances in this piece of legislation?So this is not a proportionate piece of legislation. I oppose it alongside my National Party colleagues. Thank you."