TUESDAY, 25 AUGUST 2020
The Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.
Prayers.
MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS
COVID-19 Outbreak—Government Response
Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Health): Thank you, Mr Speaker. It's now 14 days since COVID-19 re-emerged in the community and the Government moved Auckland to alert level 3 and the rest of New Zealand to alert level 2. The events of the last two weeks have once again confirmed the value of going hard and going early. The latest outbreak has resulted in the largest single cluster of cases that we have seen in New Zealand in our response to COVID-19 to date, but it could have been so much worse. So far, 108 cases, as at 10.30 this morning, have been linked to the cluster—with cases across multiple workplaces, churches, and public transport. Thanks to the efforts of everyone who's observed the alert level rules, as well as the record levels of testing and outstanding work by public health contact tracers, we can be increasingly confident that we are containing this cluster. This is not a matter of luck; it's a result of a lot of planning and a lot of hard work. 
For example, in the last two weeks we've processed close to 200,000 tests, including more than 100,000 tests in Auckland alone. That gives us real confidence that the virus is not widespread in the community. Our contact tracing has also performed strongly. Since 11 August, 2,446 close contacts have been identified, with 2,390 contacted and in isolation, and we've hit the gold standard target of 80 percent for contacting close contacts within 48 hours. In fact, from 16 to 22 August, 94 percent of close contacts were contacted within that time frame. This work, combined with the impact of level 3 restrictions in Auckland, has massively reduced the opportunity for the virus to spread. I want to thank, once again, everyone who has been tested, our public health staff, lab workers, and the public for following the alert level rules. Your collective efforts continue to save lives. 
None of this is to say that we're out of the woods yet. We'll continue to see new cases reported from this cluster for a while yet. There are still three cases under investigation that have not yet been epidemiologically linked to the cluster, although one of them has so far been genomically linked. So when Cabinet meet yesterday, we again took the precautionary approach and we decided to keep Auckland at alert level 3 until 11.59 p.m. on Sunday, 30 August. I acknowledge that this will not be welcome news for all, particularly for those small businesses that are most exposed by their reduction in trade, but, ultimately, the best health response is the best economic response. Throughout our response to COVID-19, we've used the latest evidence and the best advice available to us at the time. We've learnt and we've adapted as we've gone. That will again be the case as we transition down the alert levels. In Auckland, we will ease our way back. 
So from midnight on Sunday, schools, hospitality, retail, and those entities that are able to operate at level 2 will reopen, but we will keep a limit on mass gatherings. That means that groups of no more than 10—with the exception of tangihanga and funerals, which will be allowed to go ahead with up to 50 people, just as we did the last time we stepped down to level 2 gradually. The rest of the country will maintain current alert level 2 settings. That means, outside of Auckland, gatherings such as church services and social events will continue to be limited to 100 people. These settings will be in place for one week, from Sunday, and will be reviewed before Sunday, 6 September. After 30 August, the checkpoints will go and interregional travel will again be possible. This brings the risk of Aucklanders who may be infected spreading the virus to other parts of the country, or visitors to Auckland picking up the virus and taking it home. That's a key reason for keeping the entire country at alert level 2. 
Cabinet yesterday also considered fresh advice on the use of masks and face coverings. As a result, wearing a mask on public and passenger transport will be the new normal for us at alert level 2 for the whole of the country. New Zealanders will need to wear masks on buses, trains, ferries, planes, taxis, and Ubers. This requirement will take effect from 11.59 p.m. on 30 August this year. 
Can I end by acknowledging, once again, that the last few weeks have been difficult for many people, particularly those in Auckland. No one wanted to see COVID-19 re-emerge in the community, but we always knew that it was possible and that it could happen. We were ready for it with a record testing capacity and a strong contact tracing system. We continue to take a fact-based approach, and base our strategy on the view of medical and scientific experts. We know that the best way to protect our people and our economy is to stamp out this virus, and we are on track to do that again.





Dr SHANE RETI (National—Whangarei): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I want to thank the Minister for advising us of the Government's position and plans. Just here and now, there is great uncertainty for all of us. To use a game-day framework—and coronavirus is no game—the question is: where are we in the coronavirus journey for New Zealanders? Are we at quarter-time? Are we at half-time? Are we at golden overtime? We don't know. The Government doesn't know. None of us can possibly project where we are on that continuum. That is our uncertainty, and, where there is uncertainty, very quickly anxiety fills that vacuum, and then fear. New Zealanders can never let this virus lead us with fear. Respect and caution, yes; fear, no. We can never be afraid in our own country. 
While uncertainty springs from the unknown, there are things we do know that can fill that void. We do know the answers to the eight criteria, the eight steps that the Prime Minister said would determine if we move levels or not. We do know all of the options that health officials presented to Cabinet on Monday, from which one was chosen. We do know the economic and health implications of every choice that was made as we crossed levels. So we ask the Government to share that information with New Zealanders. Let us have some control of our own destiny and fill the void of uncertainty with knowledge and understanding. Crowdsource this problem. Bring all the imagination into one room.
To conclude, the outcome for this current four-day extension will be better and more durable if we take New Zealanders with us, and so we say to the Government: please share this information.
David Seymour: Mr Speaker.





SPEAKER: Well, the member doesn't have a call.
David Seymour: It was a ministerial statement. It was agreed at Business Committee. Is that not the case?
SPEAKER: Well, the member might want to seek leave, but if he wanted a Business Committee decision, he should have asked the Business Committee decision for—
David Seymour: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. 
SPEAKER: The member's seeking leave to have a call. Is there any objection? There appears to be none.





DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): Well, thank you, Mr Speaker. I join with other members in response to the ministerial statement. I think that there will be people up and down New Zealand who take issue with a couple of points that the Minister made. The Minister said that we are in control of this situation as a country because the response to the resurgence has been so much stronger. Well, the question that might come back is: why has the regime of testing, contact tracing, and isolation not got ahead of the outbreak in the time frames that the Government promised? 
Well, at first, last Tuesday—the 11th, if I recall—we were told it was necessary to have three days where the Government would evaluate and, it was suggested, get on top of the outbreak. A couple of days later, on the Friday, it became clear that the Government had not succeeded in doing this, and we were to extend the restrictions—level 3 in Auckland and level 2 for the rest of the country—for another 11 days. And then we thought, well, surely, with everybody dutifully following the restrictions and staying home, the Government will be able to trace to the perimeter of this outbreak, to the end of the chains of transmission, and actually get us to a stage where we are on top of it and can go back to business as usual. Yet yesterday we saw the Prime Minister announce, oh no, we're still not there and we must remain in this restricted state for a further four days until midnight on Sunday.
Now, people might reasonably question the Minister's statement that we're in control and the Government has handled this well when they see the costs imposed upon New Zealanders, when they see businesses closing and saying they will not be able to open again, when they see students anxious about the loss of learning as they approach high-stakes exams, and when they see the fiscal cost. You know, by one estimate, the cost of this lockdown is the equivalent of a whole year's Pharmac budget for taxpayer-funded pharmaceuticals. That is quite an extraordinary cost, and it puts in perspective that this is not just lives versus dollars or health versus the economy; it's actually a question of lives versus lives. 
I would put it that people may well say the Government could be forgiven for its lack of preparedness back in March. I don't think anybody was ready for this then—with perhaps one or two Asian countries as the exception. But where people might question the Minister's statement is in what the Government was doing to mend the roof in the fair weather for the storm that they knew would come. They say they've improved contact tracing. Well, a million people scanning a QR code everyday—well, that is one-fifth of the team of 5 million. I'm doing it five or six times a day on average, so I suspect you've got four percent of New Zealanders doing it five times a day—a million scans. Four percent of people using it, if you square it, gives you a 0.2 percent chance of actually making a contact. That's the mathematical reality, and that's with people finally starting to use the Government's contact tracing app. Imagine if they'd used the 102 days of COVID freedom to invest in proper contact tracing so we could be saved these unsustainable, expensive, and rolling lockdowns that are so expensive for New Zealanders. 
They don't like to hear it, but that's the truth. They don't like to hear it, but that is what people are thinking—what is the strategy, when do we stop making it up as we go, and how do we get out of this thing in a way that is sustainable? That's what people are thinking when they hear that ministerial statement, and that is the conversation our country needs to start having in honest terms. Thank you, Mr Speaker.





Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Health): Just very briefly picking up where David Seymour began, I think he misunderstands the escalation process around alert levels. We moved up the alert levels at the beginning, for a defined period of time, in order to scope the extent of the problem—how far had the virus spread, how many people were involved. The extension was then for a full infection cycle, which is two weeks. Our decisions here have been made based on science. The continuation of that period is because we have not yet found the absolute outer limit of the cluster. We're still seeing new cases in the cluster, but the recent ones have all been linked to the cluster, which does give us confidence that we're getting on top of things.
But I want to reiterate the most obvious point: it's a virus. You know, viruses can't be completely controlled. If it was a matter of snapping our fingers and controlling it, we wouldn't be in this position in the first place. It is a virus and, at this point, there aren't any definitive answers as to how this latest cluster came about, so we have to continue the contact tracing and testing regime in order to get those answers, and responsible leaders will withhold their judgment until they actually see what they are.





RESPONSES
Rachel Morton and David Farrer—Statements by Rt Hon Winston Peters
SPEAKER: I also present responses under Standing Orders 159 to 162 on the applications of Rachel Morton and David Farrar relating to references made by the Rt Hon Winston Peters on 22 July 2020. Those papers are published under the authority of the House.





ORAL QUESTIONS
QUESTIONS TO MINISTERSQuestion No. 1—Finance
1. GREG O'CONNOR (Labour—Ōhāriu) to the Minister of Finance: How is the Government supporting New Zealand businesses and workers through the global COVID-19 pandemic?
Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): The Government has provided over $13.3 billion in wage subsidies since the first scheme was launched in March. This means wage subsidies have been available over a maximum of 22 weeks for eligible businesses. For a sole trader, this equates to $12,887.60 in direct assistance; for a business with 10 full-time workers, this equates to a cash grant of over $128,000; for a business with 25 workers, over $322,000; and for a business with 40 workers, over $515,000. These 22 weeks of wage subsidies have been available during a period in which the entire country has spent seven weeks at levels 3 and 4, and with Auckland at level 3 for an additional 2½ weeks. The rest of the period we have operated at either level 2 or 1, when wage subsidies are being paid. Over and above these subsidies, the Government has also helped to cushion the impact of higher alert levels through the small business cash flow scheme, the business finance guarantee scheme, and a range of other business-friendly initiatives.
Greg O'Connor: How do these support measures fit into the Government's wider strategy to respond to COVID-19?
Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: This Government believes that the best economic response to COVID-19 is a strong public health response. This stance is in line with our wellbeing approach and the Living Standards Framework. In deciding yesterday to extend current restrictions until Sunday, we are giving ourselves the time to fully bring the current outbreak under control. Doing so means that we can return to normal levels of economic activity faster, allowing a more rapid recovery. This is exactly what we saw in New Zealand in June, July, and the first 12 days of August. In the meantime, we have provided the wage subsidy to help businesses pay and retain workers over this period. This is in addition to the previous wage subsidy extension, which remains open for applications until 1 September. We know that the current restrictions are difficult for businesses and households, but by going hard and early to eliminate the virus wherever it appears, while cushioning the blow, we put our economy in a better position to recover—as we saw in June, July, and the beginning of August.
Greg O'Connor: What recent reports has he seen implying the relative success of the Government's COVID-19 response strategy?
Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I've seen reports today that New Zealand Trade and Enterprise (NZTE) is experiencing a dramatic increase in interest for investor visa applications as a result of the relative success of the elimination strategy. The NZTE general manager of investment said, "New Zealand's response to COVID has definitely been noticed in other countries, and has created … [an] interest in relocating businesses … or investing here [that] is higher than normal." He said that New Zealand's coronavirus response had multiplied its existing advantages of lifestyle, our Pacific Rim location, trade deals, and innovative businesses. While we know we have to stay the course to bring this current outbreak under control, it is pleasing to see that our elimination strategy is paying dividends through increased interest from overseas investors.




Question No. 2—Health
DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): I seek leave for this question to be addressed to and answered by the Prime Minister, as originally submitted. 
SPEAKER: Order! I am not prepared to put that leave to the House. This is a matter which has been—that approach has been taken and ruled out by Speakers many times in the past. The member knows that it is a right of the Government to transfer the question. Does the member want to continue with the question? 
DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): Certainly, Mr Speaker. I just thought that maybe the House would make a different choice, but I appreciate—
SPEAKER: Order! Order! If the member wants to proceed with the question, he will, without any further preface. 
2. DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT) to the Minister of Health: Does he agree with the Prime Minister's statement that "The ability to contact trace quickly is one of the key tools we have to find new cases and get them in isolation to avoid future lockdowns, so always using the app is a big investment in keeping our businesses and economy open"; if so, how many of the identified 2,300 close contacts of cases have been identified by two people checking in at the same location using the NZ COVID Tracer App? 
Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Health): Yes, but as I've said before in the House recently, the COVID Tracer app is just one of the tools that's available to us. The work and expertise of the public health units and the National Close Contact Service remain the mainstays of our contact tracing system, and I have confidence in the effectiveness of their work. In regard to the second part of the question, the COVID Tracer app helps people to record where they've been and can be used to notify potential contacts of exposure to COVID-19. Public health units do not specifically record how they've identified the close contacts across all 2,446 cases, but I've been advised that the app is being used to help find the up-to-date contact details for close contact follow-up. It is in the case investigators' operating procedure to request the digital diary of a case, where they have one. 
David Seymour: Can the public take from the Minister's answer that he doesn't know if the NZ COVID Tracer app has been at all useful in tracing the current outbreak? 
Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: No, and if he'd listened to my answer, he would know that. 
David Seymour: If the Minister said there is no record of how many people have been traced using the NZ COVID Tracer app, how could he know whether it's been useful? 
Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The better the records people have of their movements, the faster that we can get in contact with all the people they've been in contact with. But I'd also point out that one of the things that we have been very clear about is that by registering for the COVID Tracer app, the Ministry of Health gets people's up-to-date contact information, and that's actually one of the most important steps in the process. It can slow down the contact tracing process considerably if we can't get hold of people. 
David Seymour: Why should people register and use the app when he, as Minister of Health, can't even explain if it's being useful in containing this outbreak? 
Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Well, I just did. 
David Seymour: If the Government believes that contact tracing is useful, why didn't it make it mandatory to have QR codes in every business earlier, so that more people used it and it might have been useful for tracing this outbreak? 
Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: In the early days after the last lockdown was ended, there were a number of different tracing applications that were being used by people, and we've been working to improve the quality of the Government's COVID Tracer app so that we can have a standard system. One of the things that we've been working through is making sure that businesses only need to display one QR code, even if people are using a different tracer app, and that has involved working with other providers of tracer apps to make sure that the QR codes that we supply can be the one and only code that businesses need to display. We were able to conclude that work, and, actually, businesses have welcomed that because it means less compliance for them and the need to display multiple codes is reduced. 
Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern: Can the Minister confirm that of all the analysis that's been done in overseas jurisdictions, almost every single one of them has confirmed that the use of on-the-ground contact tracing through human-to-human contact is always necessary and that technological solutions alone will never be sufficient? 
Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Yes, absolutely. I've always said, and I think the Government has always said, that our person-to-person contact tracing system is the mainstay of the system, and I'd point out that no Government anywhere around the world has found that one magical technological solution that would short-circuit that process. What we've always said is that the COVID Tracer app helps to speed up the manual contact tracing process, but that will always be the mainstay of the system. 




Question No. 3—Prime Minister
3. Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Leader of the Opposition) to the Prime Minister: What led to her announcing the appointment of Heather Simpson and Sir Brian Roche as part of "a small team to support Health to stand up the comprehensive testing strategy that we set out in June"?
Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN (Prime Minister): As I said when I announced their appointment, "So far, the roll-out of our resurgence plan is working as we intended. However, as has been discussed in recent days, there are constantly things that we can and should be improving with our COVID response, as we have done all the way through. Cabinet signed off a good, solid testing plan for border and managed isolation workers … in late June, but, as [we have] discussed, it has not been executed at the scale and speed necessary. … as with our response in all things with COVID, when we've identified gaps or issues, we have moved at speed to fill them, and we do so now again."
Hon Judith Collins: What will Heather Simpson and Sir Brian Roche do?
Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Implement the testing strategy passed by Cabinet in June.
Hon Judith Collins: Why wasn't that done before?
Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: As I said in my original answer, it was not done at the scale and speed that Cabinet had expected.
Hon Judith Collins: To whom does the small group that Heather Simpson and Sir Brian Roche are part of report?
Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: It will be reporting to the Minister of Health. I also expect that it will be dealing directly with the Director-General of Health as well.
Hon Judith Collins: Does convening the small group reveal that she doesn't have confidence in the Ministers she's tasked with responding to COVID-19?
Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: No.
Hon Judith Collins: Does the small group standing up the comprehensive testing strategy have any terms of reference?
Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Yes, and they're being drafted currently. I expect that that and the wider membership will be released shortly, but, again, as I've already indicated, we passed the testing strategy in June, and that is what this group will be assisting Health with to ensure it is rolled out. I remind the member that the testing strategy cuts across multiple agencies: border staff, port staff, managed isolation and quarantine. We want to make sure that we have a regime that will be able to ensure regular routine testing across all of those sites, including asymptomatic testing, as well as making sure that we have good surveillance testing across those vulnerable communities. That is what that group will be supporting Health to do.
Hon Judith Collins: Did the Prime Minister just say that the terms of reference are still being drafted?
Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: They have not been released yet, but will be shortly. As I've said, though, we already have the plan that they are implementing.
Hon Judith Collins: Which of her Ministers is ultimately responsible for the COVID-19 response?
Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Obviously, as a Government, we have Ministers that are responsible for individual strands, but, as a Cabinet, we take responsibility for the entire implementation of our COVID response and resurgence plan.
Hon Judith Collins: Is there one Minister who she can rely on to be ultimately responsible for the COVID-19 response?
Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I have trust and faith in my entire Cabinet, and every single Minister has been contributing in some way to our response and has played a role. I would happily have reference to my team on a billboard.
Hon Judith Collins: Then why doesn't she?
SPEAKER: Order! Order! There was a comment that the Prime Minister shouldn't have made, and a question for which she has no responsibility being asked.
Hon Judith Collins: I'll go ahead then, thank you. When will the full membership of the small group be announced?
Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I expect the Minister of Health to do that shortly, but, obviously, we already have Sir Brian Roche and Heather Simpson already working on it. Again, I would reference to the member, she seems to be neglecting the fact that this is the implementation of a strategy that already exists. So of course that sets us well on our way.




Question No. 4—Housing
4. GINNY ANDERSEN (Labour) to the Minister of Housing: What recent announcements has she made about adding additional layers of assurance to the managed isolation and quarantine system?
Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Minister of Housing): Last week, I made two significant announcements that will give additional layers of assurance to our operations at managed isolation and quarantine facilities. Around 500 more New Zealand Defence Force (NZDF) personnel will be deployed at our facilities and at the maritime border, further bolstering protections against community COVID-19 spread. We are also reducing our reliance on private security guards, and we will move to a model of direct employment of security guards, with the appropriate training and paying the living wage. I have also announced a roll-out of security enhancements, including the use of CCTV and audible alarms at all managed isolation and quarantine facilities, as well as a trial of the CovidCard at one facility. These measures are part of the continual improvement in the managed isolation and quarantine system. To date, over 42,000 people have been through our managed isolation system and only a single case has been identified in a staff member. The system is working, but more than ever we need to ensure that these layers of assurance built into our system protect the community from the spread of COVID-19.
Ginny Andersen: How does this build on the existing processes in place at managed isolation and quarantine facilities?
Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Since I took over responsibility for the managed isolation and quarantine facilities on 17 June, along with Air Commodore Webb, we have visited 13 facilities and introduced a range of measures to improve all the processes at the facilities. In this time, we have also doubled our capacity from 16 facilities to 32. On 19 June, a rapid review was initiated of the managed isolation and quarantine system. Seventeen actions were identified, and we have implemented 17 of these actions, with a sub-action around document management—obviously, an ongoing task. These include the doubling of NZDF staff at quarantine facilities; an urgent review of the end-to-end protocols and their application at managed isolation and quarantine facilities; oversight of exit testing, ensuring no one leaves a facility without a negative COVID-19 test; strict medical-standard cleaning protocols, including the use of a Bioquell machine; methodical management of facility capacity and returning New Zealanders to ensure systems remain robust; and dedicated standard operating procedures for each facility. There is no playbook for quarantining tens of thousands of New Zealanders at our border. If we see issues, we fix them, and the latest improvements are part of a process of continuous improvement and are another example of the active approach this Government is taking at the border.
Ginny Andersen: Why is it important to utilise technology inside these facilities?
Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: We have learned recently just how easily this virus can be spread. In the instance of the maintenance worker at the Rydges hotel, transmission is now thought to have most likely occurred via a lift. This is a tricky virus. The technology we announced on Friday adds another layer of security to our systems. These include thermal CCTV around the perimeter, with geo-fenced alarming—this technology would create an alarm when people move within a defined area—CCTV in public and exercise areas to monitor distance breaches, and CCTV in accommodation corridors to monitor any breaches between rooms; security-controlled desks and rooms dedicated in each facility; audible alarms on fire exits; and electronic access systems to restrict or track movement around a facility. This Government will also be commencing a pilot of the CovidCard with staff and returnees inside managed isolation facilities. Human error is something that we try to minimise but is an ever present risk. But as keeping COVID at the border is a priority for the Government, these enhancements are another set of tools in the toolbox to ensure that returnees stay in facilities and limit risks in our community.
Ginny Andersen: What feedback has she received from returnees who have been through the managed isolation and quarantine system?
Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: I have received a range of feedback from returnees about their time spent in managed isolation. One returning New Zealander spoke positively about how they felt thankful to be a New Zealander when they entered a system that was well organised and had fantastic processes in place. They also spoke positively of staff and how well they were looked after during their stay. Another returning couple spoke about how their stay was made as bearable as possible and how their needs were met swiftly and helpfully. They were complimentary of the staff, who cared for them so well. I'd like to take this opportunity to thank our hard-working managed isolation and quarantine facilities staff for doing their utmost to protect our communities from COVID-19.




Question No. 5—Health
5. Dr SHANE RETI (National—Whangarei) to the Minister of Health: Does he stand by his statements and actions around coronavirus testing in isolation facilities?
Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Health): Yes, in their full context.
Dr Shane Reti: How does he reconcile his answer to written questions that day three testing has not been compulsory in managed isolation, despite the national testing strategy requiring day three testing, and is this another hole in the border?
Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: No, there's been no issue with the compliance with day three testing, as I've said to the member many, many times.
Dr Shane Reti: Is day three testing compulsory in managed isolation facilities?
Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: No, it is not, under the order. But as I've said to the member many, many times, people are doing it.
Dr Shane Reti: How does he reconcile not testing everyone around day three, with Dr Bloomfield's comments five days ago that "if you have 14 days, plus the day three and day 12, plus … good infection prevention and control, that seems to be the best way of ensuring the lowest risk of someone leaving managed isolation who is infectious."?
Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Because those are the things we're doing.
Rt Hon Jacinda Ardern: Can the Minister confirm that aside from there not having been compliance issues, if someone refuses testing, they have to stay in a managed isolation facility for longer?
Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Yes, and as I've indicated many, many times to the member opposite, people are doing their day three and day 12 tests.
Dr Shane Reti: How, then, does he reconcile not testing everyone in managed isolation around day three, with Dr Bloomfield's June comments that "Everyone in our managed isolation facilities will be tested around day three."?
Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I would encourage the member not to stick to pre-scripted questions, and listen to the answers I've already given.
Hon Dr Megan Woods: Can the Minister confirm that since 17 June, no one has left a managed isolation or quarantine facility without returning a negative day 12 test, the test most important to the protection of New Zealanders?
Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Yes, I can confirm that. I'd also note that one of the reasons the day 12 test is so important is that we have had people who have tested negative on day three that have subsequently tested negative on day 12. This virus can have quite a long incubation period.
SPEAKER: I think the member might want to just give the last bit of his answer again.
Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Sorry, positive on their second test, yeah.
Dr Shane Reti: Are hotel isolation staff put at risk if day three testing of arrivals in managed isolation is not compulsory?
Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: No.
Dr Shane Reti: Have the Government's border policies been informed in any way by modelling that formally assumed day three testing was compulsory, when we now know it is not?
Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I'm not entirely sure what the thrust of the member's question is. As I've said, day three testing is happening.
Hon Dr Megan Woods: Can the Minister confirm that staff at managed isolation facilities are not put at risk, because within our managed isolation facilities, we behave as if everybody has COVID, and there are strict protocols in place to protect both returnees and staff, and that is why we've had 40,000 people through these facilities and one positive case in a staff member?
Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Yes, I can confirm that, and I can also say that I visited several of these facilities myself and saw firsthand the great lengths that the people working in them are going to to keep themselves and the people who are staying there safe.
Dr Shane Reti: Given that answer, was the maintenance man at the Rydges shown on CCTV to be wearing a mask?
Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: My understanding is that they haven't yet been able to identify exact footage of the lift trip in question.
Dr Shane Reti: Does he agree that New Zealanders believe and have been reassured that testing of all arrivals into managed isolation occurs around day three?
Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I've just given those answers. People are being tested at day three and day 12. There is no issue with compliance.




Question No. 6—Prime Minister
6. Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Leader of the Opposition) to the Prime Minister: Does she have confidence in the testing and managed isolation protocols for people coming into New Zealand, and is she confident that all MIQ and border-facing workers are now being regularly tested?
Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN (Prime Minister): Yes, and yes. The Government has continuously worked to strengthen our border measures to ensure we minimise the risk of COVID-19 to New Zealand, including daily health checks, personal protective equipment usage, appropriate cleaning, and social distancing. In fact, for managed isolation and quarantine (MIQ) workers, those protocols and training go even further to include, for instance, the washing of clothes and the way that they should behave on return home at the end of each day. In terms of testing, the most recent sweep of border and MIQ staff has been completed; a second sweep has now begun. We have used orders to mandate this testing, but in future we'll have a regular rotation of testing with greater regularity for those at the highest risk working at our borders.
Hon Judith Collins: So how regularly does she expect the highest priority border-facing staff who were tested for COVID-19 last week to be tested in future?
Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: At the moment, we're going through a blanket second wave, but, at the same time, we've asked the Ministry of Health to work through a protocol, a matrix, which prioritises more regular testing for those staff who are more front-facing and at higher risk. To give the member a bit of an insight—for instance, at our borders, those at Auckland Airport who are considered to be at higher risk because they are more passenger- and crew-facing are approximately 280 staff. We'll, again, need to identify that with agencies at the ports, and those staff will have a higher frequency of testing than others. That's the work that the Ministry of Health is undertaking, and we expect to be supported by the team that are helping support the roll-out of our testing strategy.
Hon Judith Collins: Is weekly testing of border-facing staff now occurring?
Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: As I've just outlined, we've already had a sweep of all staff. We're going through the next two weeks, we'll have another sweep of staff, and, in that time frame, the Ministry of Health is working up a matrix of the most at-risk staff being regularly tested. I expect that will be on a rotation that is regular, in the order of weekly. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith: How many days?
Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: But, again, it will depend on whether or not those staff are front-facing or not.
SPEAKER: I'm sorry, before the member continues—if Dr Nick Smith wants to have a question, he should stand up and call; he shouldn't take it from his seat. 
Hon Judith Collins: Will stevedores who board ships and who were tested for the first time last week be tested next week and on a weekly basis in future?
Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I see that those port workers are part of our next sweep. And, again, we're asking Health to work up the matrix of the frequency of testing across ports, across airports, across all sectors. What I would add, because it is slightly misleading: again, as we have always said, testing is not sufficient on its own. We have a maritime order in place, for instance, that dictates how those international freight crew must behave when they are at our ports—that includes not being able to move beyond the port side if they have not returned a negative test. They also have to have been at sea for a period of 14 days; we did have a longer period, but we added testing into that regime. They also must practise social distancing to make sure that we maintain safety for port workers, and, of course, we have a regime around surveillance testing.
Hon Judith Collins: Well, would it concern her if ports that tested priority border-facing staff last week have not yet scheduled a second round of testing?
Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I'm not sure what the member means by "scheduled". We, of course, have made sure that we have—
Hon Louise Upston: They have an appointment.
Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: The idea of every single worker having an appointment—we put them on site so workers can flow through. That is the best way that we can make sure—for instance, at MIQ we put them at the worksite. We've been working on making sure we capture change of shift so it can be done within work hours quickly and easily. For the border, the airport staff, we've put them on site from July. On 10 July, 16 July we had pop-ups on site so that we weren't relying on people having to make journeys away from their place of work to be tested. At the port, I expect we make it as easy as possible also.
Hon Judith Collins: Does it, then, concern her that a crew member of the Bahamas-registered cargo ship the Charles Island, currently moored in Tauranga Harbour, having travelled here from Mexico, flew into New Zealand from Belgium three days ago, spent just one night in Auckland's Novotel, and was then driven two hours to the vessel by a privately contracted van driver and was allowed to board without being tested?
Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: There are protocols in place that allow port workers—because, essentially, freight would not be able to move internationally if international freight companies were not able to access their staff. So that has been an issue globally. We, essentially, wouldn't have international freight coming into our ports if they were unable to access staff. So there are protocols around whether or not individuals in those circumstances can have any contact outside of being immediately on vessels or immediately departing from vessels and going home.
Hon Judith Collins: So should stevedores or other priority border-facing staff working at the port of Tauranga be socially distancing themselves from a crew member of the Charles Island who just flew in from Belgium, where there are currently over 8,000 cases of COVID-19; if so, how will they identify him?
Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I wouldn't want to speak to an individual case without having details, but what I would refer the member to are maritime orders in place that have been in place for some time to supplement the other surveillance testing we have, because, as the member will well know, we need to treat ports in the same way we do airports. We need to make sure that we keep people at a distance and operating in a way that's as safe as possible, keeping in mind their work conditions given the circumstances of international travel.
Hon Judith Collins: Is there any requirement for ships' replacement crew members flying into New Zealand to be tested for COVID-19 at any port before boarding their vessels?
Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: I wouldn't want to speak in too much detail without reminding myself of the specific arrangements, but I do recall that, for departing individuals, they do have the ability to depart directly. And, again, much of this hinges on the ability of New Zealand to keep freight moving, but these protocols have been worked up carefully to ensure that we can ensure that there is access still to freight for our exporters and importers, but also to do it safely. Again, I would remind the member that the idea of this—simply, this is an individual who has to depart directly; they cannot be outside of the port and have contact with anyone else.




Question No. 7—Education
7. KIERAN McANULTY (Labour) to the Minister of Education: What action is the Government taking to support distance learning while Auckland is at alert level 3?
Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Education): I can report that the Ministry of Education is making strong progress in getting support to schools and to students. For instance, in the area of hardcopy packs of materials for different year levels, over 16,000 packs of materials in the English language have been dispatched to schools and students while over 2,500 packs in Māori language have been dispatched to schools and students so far.
Kieran McAnulty: What progress has been made with digital devices?
Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: As I told the House last week, the Government's committed further funding to enhance distance learning support for schools, particularly focused on Auckland's secondary school students. The Ministry of Education is using this, firstly, to meet the unmet demand of students in year 9 and above in secondary schools in Auckland: 3,281 devices have now been sent to Auckland secondary schools and kura from this second wave of funding, and the Ministry of Education is currently confirming the final demand for Auckland secondary schools, and these orders are being placed right now.
Kieran McAnulty: Is Home Learning TV also making a contribution to connecting with Auckland students?
Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Yes, definitely; we've had great feedback about it. Auckland viewership of Home Learning TV remains reasonably consistent with the previous lockdown. For the week of 17 to 24 August, Home Learning TV had an Auckland viewership of 128,000 viewers.




 Question No. 8—Minister of Research, Science and Innovation
8. Dr SHANE RETI (National—Whangarei) to the Minister of Research, Science and Innovation: What are the latest waste-water testing results for coronavirus in Auckland?
Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Minister of Research, Science and Innovation): Waste-water testing is taking place as part of a research project led by Environmental Science and Research (ESR), with funding from the COVID innovation fund that I established in early April. Positive results for viral RNA have been received from four of the five collection points in Auckland. The latest results are the Jet Park Hotel, with strong, positive results on 18 August, which is to be expected, given it is our quarantine facility; the Southern Interceptor, where waste water from the Jet Park Hotel mixes with waste water from 100,000 households, a positive result on 18 August; the Central Interceptor, a weak positive result on 17 August; the Rosedale Interceptor, a weak positive result on 13 August. There have been no positive results from the Western Interceptor collection point. These results correspond with what we know about the location of cases across Auckland. These results tell us that there is COVID-19 in these areas but do not give us precise information about the number of people infected or the stage of infection. One-off testing was also carried out in Christchurch and Queenstown in early August, returning negative results. This is another useful tool that can help us in the fight against COVID-19, and I look forward to providing further updates as the research project progresses.
Dr Shane Reti: When was the first positive test in sewage outflow testing in Auckland?
Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: The Jet Park Hotel started weekly testing on 12 July. As you would expect, given this is the facility where we house people who are COVID-positive, that would have started in early July. One of the reasons why ESR, with the research money they have, is concentrating the efforts around testing of the Jet Park Hotel, and the interceptor associated with the Jet Park Hotel, is because we have such low levels of COVID in New Zealand, getting the sensitivity of the test is proving a challenge. So the first test would have been in early July.
Dr Shane Reti: How does she reconcile that answer with written questions received last week saying that weekly testing at Jet Park had been negative?
Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: My understanding is that there has been a correction to the written question from the Minister of Health that was put through today, that the question did say that it had been daily, since the beginning of July, at Jet Park, returning negative results—that has been corrected to say "usually return positive results as expected". This was put down to an administrative error. 
Dr Shane Reti: How many managed isolation facilities are linked to the Southern Interceptor, and has upstream testing occurred with the Southern Interceptor?
Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: As I went through in my primary answer, as well as the Southern Interceptor, we're also doing the Central Interceptor, the Rosedale Interceptor, and the Western Interceptor points, as well. In terms of the number of facilities that connect to the Southern Interceptor, I'd ask the member to put that in writing to me, but it will be several—but I'd like to get the precise details in a written question.
Dr Shane Reti: Has upstream testing occurred with all the sites that she's identified here today so that we can further localise where the positive tests may come from?
Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: I went through the number of interceptors across Auckland that we are looking at—the Southern, the Central, the Rosedale, and the Western Interceptor. So we are doing a broad sweep across Auckland to be able to identify where cases are. In terms of whether they technically qualify as upstream, I'll need to look at that, but we are looking broadly across Auckland. The patterns where we have seen it emerge fit with where we are seeing positive tests come from, and the fact that we are seeing negative results from the Western Interceptor also fits firmly with the pattern of positive cases we are seeing.
Dr Shane Reti: Was there an increasing trend in positive coronavirus tests in waste water, leading up to the start of the current outbreak?
Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Not that I am aware of. As I said, one of the most important things from why we instituted it at the Jet Park Hotel is actually around method development, because this is a place that is quite unique in New Zealand, in that we know there is coronavirus there; obviously, we didn't have the ability to do any sensitivity testing in other parts of New Zealand while we were coronavirus free. So it was really important that we were using our quarantine facility waste water to do this. The fact that there have been reasonably consistent results from the Jet Park Hotel is because we consistently move COVID-positive patients there.
Dr Shane Reti: Apart from the Jet Park, was there an increasing trend in coronavirus in waste water in Auckland leading up to the current outbreak?
Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: Not that I'm aware of, no.




Question No. 9—Finance
9. Hon PAUL GOLDSMITH (National) to the Minister of Finance: What advice, if any, has he received from the Treasury on potential job losses and other economic consequences for families and businesses from the return to stricter lockdown levels in response to the latest community outbreak, and for the lockdown extension announced yesterday?
Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance): I've received a range of advice from Treasury on the fiscal and economic impacts of this global pandemic and, indeed, the Government's strategy to respond to it. This continues to support the view that the best economic response is a strong public health response. Treasury's assessment of the latest alert level decision includes looking at the Government's approach through the wellbeing approach and Living Standards Framework. This is important because the Government can not only take a narrow, short-term view on these significant decisions which impact New Zealanders' lives and livelihoods. Our approach is to take a balanced decision which incorporates all advice, including from health experts, and which incorporates the potential medium- and long-term implications of the decisions we make. On this specific resurgence of the virus, Treasury's estimate is that the impact on GDP is $500 million per week. This fits within the range of other economic forecasters who have estimated this to be between $300 million and $600 million per week. The number of jobs affected by the current resurgence is difficult to forecast given that these are specific business decisions that will take into account the impact of wage subsidies, other Government support, and how quickly we move back down the alert levels.
Hon Paul Goldsmith: What analysis, if any, has he had done on the impact of the current lockdowns and their extensions on workers, business owners, and their families, both financially and in terms of mental health?
Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Well, I've given the member some detail of the financial impact. When it comes to mental health, that is an ongoing piece of work undertaken by the Ministry of Health. If the member wants further details on those questions, he'd be best to put that down to the Minister of Health.
Hon Paul Goldsmith: What's his response to Adrian Evans, owner of Auckland barber shop The Gentry, who told TVNZ's Breakfast, "The second lockdown, however, has had a much deeper impact on, not only financially but also on the team's wairua—you know, the mental health aspect. I'm not saying anyone's calling up the helplines or anything, but there's a lot more chat amongst my guys on the team. So that's certainly an aspect. If we go to another level 3 again, that'll be fatal, I reckon."?
SPEAKER: There's no ministerial responsibility for that for this Minister.
Hon Paul Goldsmith: The Minister, as Minister of Finance—talking to the point of order—is responsible for the economic consequences of the lockdown. And this is in relation to the broader wellbeing responses to the lockdown. We've just had a Wellbeing Budget and we haven't defined economics and strictly sort of dollars and cents but a broader wellbeing. I don't know why you've taken such a narrow view of responsibilities for consequences.
SPEAKER: Well, I'm not responsible for you not understanding that.
Hon Paul Goldsmith: All right. Thank you very much. That's very kind of you, Mr Speaker. Has he specifically asked for any analysis from Treasury on the impact of these lockdowns on workers, on business owners, and their families, both financially and in terms of mental health?
Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: As I indicated in my answer, one of the lenses through which Treasury are looking at this is in the context of the wellbeing framework, and I thank the member for his endorsement of the importance of that broader approach. So the Treasury are looking at it in that context, and clearly, when it comes to specific matters around the mental health response, as I said in my primary answer, that is a matter for the Minister of Health.
Hon Paul Goldsmith: So what does the analysis show?
Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: As, again, I said in my primary answer, what it shows is that the best economic response is a strong public health response. That is a matter that on this side of the House, we have been utterly consistent on from day one.
Hon Paul Goldsmith: Well, if, indeed, that is the case that "the best economic response [to this pandemic] is a strong public health response.", why did his Government not regularly test everyone who worked at the border or in quarantine facilities?
Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Well, as the member knows, that matter has been traversed at length, both in this House and outside of this House. What we do know is that nearly 40,000 people have been through our managed isolation facilities and we have had one case which is not linked to the current community outbreak. What we also know is that the approach that the Government has taken has meant that our economy was back up and running in June, July, and the first 12 days of August in a way that few other countries were able, enabling a strong economic recovery. That is because of the strong public health response.
Hon Paul Goldsmith: What responsibility, if any, does the Government take for the severe economic damage caused by having to return to lockdown and to extend it?
Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: As has been covered in an earlier answer by the Minister of Health, this is a virus; it is a tricky virus. When you compare New Zealand's response to the rest of the world, you will see that New Zealand's response—which was strong, which was decisive, and which happened early—allowed the New Zealand economy to get back going again in a way that other countries have not been able to do.
Hon Paul Goldsmith: So—
SPEAKER: No, no, the member's run out of supplementary questions.




Question No. 10—Māori Development
10. PAUL EAGLE (Labour—Rongotai) to the Minister for Māori Development: What reports has she received regarding a targeted response to support Māori communities and iwi to implement a resurgence plan in light of the most recent community transmission cluster impacting South Auckland?
Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Minister for Māori Development): I receive multiple reports weekly from Te Puni Kōkiri regional teams who are working alongside Māori communities and iwi to implement a resurgence plan across the motu. While there are regional variances, we know that Māori make up approximately 16 percent of the South Auckland population. Specifically on the ground in South Auckland, we know that the key issues being reported across Tāmaki-makau-rau concern job losses, a change in household income to pay bills and get necessities, non - COVID-19 health and welfare needs, access to kai and personal care items, provision of masks, education, and social and mental health issues. In conjunction with the Government's COVID support package, Whānau Ora commissioning agencies, iwi in the Tāmaki collective, Māori health and social service providers are all contributing to a response across Tāmaki-makau-rau. During this resurgence phase, it's becoming increasingly evident that a joined-up effort of Māori and Pacific health providers is necessary to ensure their communities have access to the necessary health and welfare supports to help whānau get through this phase of resurgence of COVID-19.
Paul Eagle: What actions have been taken to support a resurgence plan in Māori communities?
Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: Since the resurgence began, Government funding through Te Puni Kōkiri has enabled Whānau Ora commissioning agencies to provide 8,488 support packages, and supported over 22,500 whānau members nationwide. Our marae are also contributing to a collective response. They too have mobilised quickly to broker support for whānau to access employment, health, and welfare support. Take, for example, Ngātiwai and Ngāti Rehua, who are working with 18 marae to broker support for 1,400 whānau; Te Mahurehure marae, who is assisting more than 3,000 whānau of Te Tai Tokerau and Te Hiku living in Tāmaki-makau-rau; Papatūānuku Kōkiri Marae, who are providing care packages to whānau in their South Auckland community; Waikato-Tainui, who are working with Te Puea marae, Makaurau, Pūkaki, Umupuia, Nga Hau E Wha, and Whatapaka Marae, all in the Auckland area, to deliver essential packs to those marae communities. There's still more work to do; however, it's evident that a collective effort at all levels will ensure communities have access to the necessary health and welfare support so that whānau get the help they need.
Paul Eagle: What other feedback has she received in relation to the longer-term aspects of a health and welfare response targeted at Māori communities?
Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: Like many New Zealanders, Māori communities are not sure how long this uncertainty will continue. Online engagements with iwi and health professionals have indicated that it is important for iwi to participate in the economic recovery in key priority areas signalled by the Government, such as housing, skills training, and bespoke infrastructure opportunities. On the health front, I have received feedback that there remains anxiety about the multiple health vulnerabilities in Māori and Pasifika communities, which, in a COVID-19 resurgence context, requires the collection of robust data sets. This will enable and inform future planning and refinement of a targeted health response, and can be consistently implemented across DHBs, and inform a consistent approach to surveillance testing for Māori and Pasifika whānau. This feedback has been passed on to Associate Minister of Health Minister Henare who regularly meets with clinical professionals in the Māori health sector.





Point of Order—Number of Questions Lodged
Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Leader of the House): I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I note that today, as with the two days that the Parliament sat last week, there are fewer than 12 primary questions on the question sheet. You may be aware that the Government has been publicly criticised for not being subject to sufficient parliamentary scrutiny. I wonder if you could confirm for me that you have not ruled out any primary questions that have been lodged by the Opposition.
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National): I can understand the Leader of the House's being a little perplexed by the fact that the Opposition have lodged less than the number of questions that they could in a primary sense—
SPEAKER: Fewer.
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: Fewer—fewer. Thank you, Mr Speaker. That's very good of you. That's why our questions are always so beautifully presented, due to your overview and advice. But what needs to be understood is that while—
SPEAKER: The member's risking misleading the House if he continues down that road.
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: That would take a certain amount of self-admission, Mr Speaker, which I'm relying won't be coming forth. Might I just get back on the point here: we have lodged less than the number of questions that we could lodge, only by about one. [Interruption] OK. Would you like to say it for me, Mr Speaker? Would that make you feel better?
SPEAKER: Do you want me to deal with—
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: No, I just want to make the point—
SPEAKER: We're getting to it.
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: I want to make the point that we are limited by the number of supplementary questions that we're able to ask, and that by asking one less—
Hon Members: Fewer!
SPEAKER: No, one less is right; it's a number.
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE: —primary question, we have more supplementaries available to us, and the questions that we have asked have been constructed in a way that they would require a larger number of supplementaries to extract some kind of answer out of the Government.
Hon Chris Hipkins: Speaking to the point of order, Mr Speaker.
SPEAKER: I feel like the original point of order was not a point of order at all, and I don't want to test my patience any further with additional comments—
Hon Member: Is he meant to sit down?
SPEAKER: —yes, that's exactly right; the member will sit down—that stretch my patience further than he has already stretched it with the aid of the shadow Leader of the House.
David Seymour: Point of order.
SPEAKER: No, I'm going to deal with this one first.
David Seymour: Oh, well, speaking to it.
SPEAKER: No, you can't, because I'm going to deal with it. The answer is that the number of questions that are submitted by the Opposition is a matter for them, and details of what happens in my office with regard to ruling them out is not something for traversing here. That concludes oral questions—
DAVID SEYMOUR (Leader—ACT): I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. 
SPEAKER: I'm finding it very hard to work out what point of order is available to the member now. It's only because I was slack with the Leader of the House that I'll let the member raise one.
DAVID SEYMOUR: I seek leave, in the spirit of helpfulness, for ACT to be granted an additional primary question and five supplementaries tomorrow to make up the shortfall the Leader of the House complained about.
SPEAKER: Order! Order! I'm taking that as facetious. The member has been getting plenty of extra questions, including today, from his friend Jami-Lee Ross. In accordance with a determination of the Business Committee, the House stands adjourned until 2 p.m. tomorrow.
 
The House adjourned at 3.07 p.m.