COVID-19 Orders — Approval

I move, That this House approve the following orders made under the COVID-19 Public Health Response Act 2020:

COVID-19 Public Health Response (Required Testing) Amendment Order (No 2) 2021;

COVID-19 Public Health Response (Air Border) Order (No 2) Amendment Order (No 4) 2021.

I should probably begin with a bit of an apology to the House for bringing things back down to this level after the very uplifting waiata that we have just had. This motion is the latest in a series of similar motions to approve orders made under section 16 of the COVID-19 Public Health Response Act 2020, and it ensures that two of the orders made under that provision are not revoked. Under that particular Act, I, as Minister for COVID‑19 Response, am able to issue orders. Unless they are confirmed by the House of Representatives in this debating chamber, then those orders are revoked.

I want to thank the members of the Regulations Review Committee. As always, they have diligently gone through these orders, checking them against the rules to make sure that they all comply with the rules under which I have to operate, scrutinising them. I’m very heartened to say that, in the case of these two particular orders, they had no matters that they wanted to bring to the attention of the House. But I can also assure members of the public who may be watching on, that that’s certainly not always the case with the Regulations Review Committee, and they do take their responsibility to scrutinise these orders very closely very seriously, and they have made suggestions for other orders, including suggestions that the Government has accepted, around changes that should be made. So I’m heartened that in these two particular orders, they don’t have matters to bring to the House.

In terms of the two orders that we are confirming, the COVID-19 Public Health Response (Air Border) Order (No 2) Amendment Order (No 4) 2021 has a relatively simple purpose, and that is to add Air Chathams as a recognised quarantine-free carrier. Therefore, they join Air New Zealand, Qantas, and Jetstar in being allowed to fly the trans-Tasman as part of the safe travel zone. So we welcome the Air Chathams to quarantine-free travel. They are flying services between Auckland and Norfolk Island, and in order to do that, they have to be added to the list of authorised quarantine-free carriers. At the moment, there are only four, including Air Chathams. I hope that further airlines will join the trans-Tasman bubble soon and add additional competition to the trans-Tasman route. A lot of airlines would normally fly the trans-Tasman, and we’re down to only four at the moment, and, of course, I’m looking forward to the time when other airlines express an interest in coming back.

COVID-19 Public Health Response (Required Testing) Amendment Order (No 2) 2021 also has a relatively simple purpose, and that is that increasingly we’re seeing healthcare assistants, if you like, working alongside those doing the required testing at the border for COVID-19. So the order extends the same testing provisions that apply to registered health practitioners, who undertake testing, to any other health worker that may be assisting them in that task. So the other health workers assisting them in that task are currently required to be tested every fortnight. This brings them into line with the health workers in requiring them to be tested every week. These are the people who potentially are most at risk of exposure to COVID-19, and therefore they need to be put in that same cycle.

In anticipation, I know, of one of the issues that one of the members opposite I’m sure will raise, those who are subject to a weekly testing cycle are those who are being prioritised for eligibility for saliva testing on a more frequent basis, with less frequent nasopharyngeal swabs, which are recognised as one of the less comfortable ways of being tested, and I certainly expect to see the roll-out of that speeding up. All of the barriers for saliva testing from the central government end have been removed, and so I hope that there will be greater uptake of that to ensure that those who could have those tests—

💬 David Seymour: Why’s it taking so long?

Sorry, what was the question?

💬 David Seymour: Why is it taking so long?

Why is it taking so long? Well, that would be a question to ask those who are rolling out the saliva testing, as opposed to me, because in terms of the central government’s approval for saliva testing, that approval was granted some time ago.

I would like to see a greater use of saliva testing. It is more comfortable, although we are, as I’ve indicated previously, seeing some reluctance amongst those who can get it now, as of today—and there are people who can opt in now. The opt-in rates are very low amongst those who have the opportunity right now, as of today, but I hope that that will change over time. I think it is a potential change that will benefit the workers who are being added to this more frequent testing cycle under this particular order. So these are relatively straightforward orders, and I commend them to the House.

Thank you, Madam Speaker, and I thank the Minister for his illumination of these two relatively minor, but still important, orders. We, the National Opposition, will support the approval of both of them. Just in relation to the first one, I had forgotten—I mean, this sort of sounds terrible, but it’s true—about the Norfolk Island flights, which perhaps is a reminder to me for something to do in the recess, potentially—

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: Beautiful place to go.

Well, I’m told it’s a beautiful place to go. I have never been there.

💬 David Seymour: Chris Hipkins will close the border.

Ha! I have never been there, but, potentially, it is something that is available, and isn’t it great to see the mighty Air Chathams put on par with Air New Zealand, Qantas, and Jetstar? You know, as the Minister says—

💬 David Seymour: It’s more a compliment for Air New Zealand, Jetstar, and Qantas.

Ha! Yeah—well, as Mr Seymour says, it’s more a compliment for Air New Zealand, Jetstar, and Qantas. That’s potentially true. And I echo the Minister’s remarks—

💬 Hon Member: Great Barrier Air?

Well, I don’t know if Great Barrier Air is going to end up going to—I mean, I have been to Great Barrier Island, and it may as well be a separate jurisdiction. Sometimes it certainly feels like that, but I don’t think you need quarantine-free travel to go to Great Barrier Island yet.

💬 David Seymour: Well, you probably should. What’s the Minister doing about that?

You probably should. Nikki Kaye’s there, so—I don’t know what that says. But anyway, Air Chathams—we welcome them, and I echo what the Minister says around the return, potentially, in time, of other international operators to New Zealand, to operate that trans-Tasman route. Prior to COVID-19 coming upon us, we had Emirates and Singapore Airlines at various points, and other operators on that route providing freedom flights and competition on that route. You know, it’s not going to happen straight away, obviously, but—

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: One of the most competitive in the world.

Indeed. The Minister says it’s one of the most competitive routes in the world, and he’s exactly right, and the prices at the time, prior to COVID-19, reflected that. That’s a good thing, but it’s also not just great for consumers but also in terms of freight and our freight connections and goods connections to the rest of the world—very important as well. So it’s not going to happen straight away, obviously, or overnight, but we welcome that in the future.

Just in relation to the second one, around the required testing amendment order bringing health workers into the principal order, we support that as well, for the reasons the Minister has outlined.

I do just want to make a point, because the Minister did raise it, in relation to saliva testing, which is that this is a sorry tale. With respect to the Minister, who says he’s in favour of it and the Government has made all the necessary changes to the orders and to the Cabinet approvals, he cannot duck responsibility for this. This is something that was recommended to Government in September 2020 by the Roche-Simpson report. It said that it should be a matter of priority and all steps should be taken forthwith to roll out saliva testing at the border. And here we are in July 2021, and we still don’t have a time line for the national roll-out of saliva testing. So it’s all very well for the Minister to say, “Well, I’m as frustrated as you are, and I want to see it rolled out further.”, but, at the end of the day, Ministers and the Government have to take some responsibility here. It’s not good enough, frankly, for Ministers to blame officials like they did back in August last year, when it turned out that what Ministers thought was happening on the ground in relation to the border was not actually happening. At the end of the day, ministerial responsibility has to start and end somewhere, and Ministers need to take some responsibility for the deficiencies when it comes to saliva testing. We welcome it. We’ve called for it for many months now, and it turns out that New Zealand’s had, for the better part of six to nine months, a private sector provider of saliva testing with the resources and the capability to provide saliva testing. In fact, they’ve been doing it in a private sector capacity at Auckland Airport for many months. In fact, I went and got a saliva test because I wanted to see for myself exactly what it was like.

💬 Anna Lorck: What?

You’d be lucky—you’d be pleased to know, Anna Lorck, that I passed.

💬 Hon Chris Hipkins: I hope you didn’t smoke beforehand.

Ha, ha! No, no, no, no. You’d be pleased to know that I passed and it was incredibly easy. I bear in mind that, you know, not everyone wants to do the saliva testing, but there are a lot of people out there who do want to do it. That’s, I think, a good thing, and we encourage people to go out and do it and we encourage the Government to hit the go button and expedite the roll-out of saliva testing more widely. Thanks.

Tēnā koe e te Māngai o te Whare. The Green Party is very pleased to support both of these COVID-19 orders and we thank the Minister for his kind comments about the diligence of the Regulations Review Committee, because it is under the House’s Standing Orders that the Regulations Review Committee must examine all regulations, including legislative instruments and disallowable instruments that are not legislative instruments. The committee does that in a very careful way and is greatly assisted by the work of the committee secretariat and also legislative counsel. And, as the Minister noted, when the Regulations Review Committee has made recommendations about the change, perhaps, in the language of orders to ensure that the powers in them are clearly expressed and don’t unduly burden or trespass on individuals’ rights, those changes have generally been accepted.

The committee went and examined both these orders, the COVID-19 Public Health Response (Air Border) Order (No 2) Amendment Order (No 4) 2021 and the COVID-19 Public Health Response (Required Testing) Amendment Order (No 2) 2021, and did not have any concerns to report to the House. And the Minister has highlighted what the purpose of both these orders is.

While others in this House may be critical about the roll-out of saliva testing, I would really like to emphasise the Green Party’s thanks to everyone working in quarantine facilities, everyone working at the border, all of our health workers that the second order applies to, in ensuring that they need to undergo testing, that the work that they have done ensures that we are able to be here today under alert level 1, because of their precautionary approach and their attention to protection at the borders.

These two orders, while they may be relatively minor in terms of their impacts, have been closely examined and the Regulations Review Committee will continue to do that. It has to do that within 12 working days after the orders are presented to the House, and we will continue to do that. Thank you.

The question is that the motion be agreed to.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. The ACT Party rises in support of these orders being passed into law and accepted. They’re both doing useful things, and yet the fact that they’re necessary—the fact that they’re being debated now—allows us to illustrate some of the broad themes and failures of this Government’s response to COVID-19.

First of all, nominating Air Chathams, the mighty Air Chathams, as a quarantine-free trans-Tasman, or “QFT”, carrier—fantastic. We do want more free enterprise, more businesses competing to offer the New Zealand customer a good deal. That’s a wonderful thing. But I would argue that this shouldn’t be necessary, because one of the great failings of this Government’s response to COVID is that it has failed to make sound rules of the game that apply without fear or favour. So, instead, we have a Government that is naming particular entities in its laws and regulations—particular businesses qualify if they get the Government’s favour—and that is not the way that we would like commerce to work in a free society. Actually, businesses that meet the criteria meet the criteria. That’s what it means to make rules based on the risk that we face from the threat of COVID-19 rather than the identity of the particular person. Nevertheless, the way the Government has chosen to write its legislation is that clause 4A(2)(a) of the principal order here requires us to name Air Chathams, and so it is right to name another airline as a QFT carrier so that New Zealanders can have more choice.

The second of the two orders is the COVID-19 Public Health Response (Required Testing) Amendment Order 2021. Again, you cannot fault the outcome. It clears the way for greater use of saliva testing. As the Minister just said, 10 months after the Simpson-Roche report recommended the Government uptake saliva testing, all the barriers from the central government’s side have been removed for the greater use of saliva testing. Well, better late than never. A good thing that the Government is no longer standing in the way of saliva testing being used in our fight against COVID-19 infections. But hasn’t it taken a long time? And, again, one of the key things that the Government needs to do in response to an epidemic is make clear rules of the game that don’t discriminate and are proportionate to risk. They appear to fail to do this. But the Government is not only a regulator in the case of the kind of test; it is also engaged in the provision of tests. It has contracted an organisation to provide saliva PCR testing—polymerase chain reaction testing, that is.

And let’s just stop on that for a moment, because when the Prime Minister was answering questions in this House back in March, I think it was, she said the Government is not going to use saliva testing; it’s going to use PCR testing. Now, let’s just think about this; let’s just unpack this for a moment. PCR is the test that is used to detect COVID on the material taken from the person’s body. That material can be either phlegm or mucus taken from the nasal cavity, or it can be saliva taken from the person’s mouth. Now, to say “We’re not going to use saliva testing; we’re going to use PCR testing”, as the Prime Minister did, shows that, on one of the most critical aspects of the COVID-19 response—using good technology to test rapidly—the Prime Minister had no idea about the first and most basic elements of how this technology works. And, of course, it starts at the top, and the rot goes down, because we’ve just heard from the Minister that it’s not the Government’s fault there’s not more saliva testing.

And then we had another failing of this Government—again from the Prime Minister. When we had the February outbreaks—remember when it was the KFC worker? Remember when the Prime Minister, from the highest podium in the land, from a very great height, bore down on a person who had no platform other than, apparently, Michael Morrah in Newshub—and wasn’t it great that he got an award for standing up for that citizen against the Prime Minister? But the common theme here is that we’ve just heard the Minister for COVID-19 Response try to say, “No, no, no, we’ve removed all the Government barriers; it’s the people’s fault. They don’t want to.” We’re expected to believe the problem is, now, according to what the Minister said, that people are so eager to have a swab put into their nasopharyngeal tract that they’re refusing the saliva testing. That’s what he’s trying to tell us; just like the Prime Minister in February. When it’s all falling apart, blame the citizens of New Zealand. Don’t serve them, blame them!

I think the real problem is something else. He said it’s not the Government fault. He then said we should ask the people who are rolling out the saliva testing. Well, who’s that? The people that the Government contracted. Well, contracting out Government services is a big and difficult topic. It is, in essence, a principal-agent problem, where, as the principal that issues the contract, you’ve got to get the agent, the contractor, to do what you want. And if it’s done well, good procurement means that the people of New Zealand get good services, paid for by the Government, but it sounds as though one of the big problems with saliva testing is that something is not quite right with the Government’s contract. It sounds as though they’re not getting what they thought they were getting, and that’s why it will be a year, from September 2020 to September 2021, from when the Simpson-Roche report said the New Zealand Government should be using saliva testing to when it’s used in any great volume—a year, maybe longer.

And this takes us to another major problem and failing with this Government’s COVID-19 response: it’s inability to work with the private sector and augment its response to COVID-19 with better technology. First they told us they couldn’t have saliva testing because it wasn’t accurate—well, actually, first the Prime Minister didn’t understand what it was. But then, once we solved that problem, they started to say it’s not as accurate. And then Janet Pitman from Victoria University of Wellington said it’s just as accurate. Saliva testing is as accurate; it’s just faster and less inconvenient to the person giving the sample. That’s the result they’ve come to. And then they say, “Oh, but it doesn’t have quite the same sensitivity, depending on the particular stage of the infection.” Even if that was true—and it appears now that it’s not, but even if that was true—there’s a trade-off between the cost, the inconvenience, and the frequency of testing. If you want to make sure that you actually catch COVID-19 with a test, perhaps a less sensitive test might actually catch it if you apply it more often than a less sensitive test that can’t be applied as often because of cost or because of the inconvenience and people’s reluctance to have it.

The Government has never explained what that trade-off is, and this episode tells us how much trouble we’re in when it comes to the question of responding intelligently to COVID-19 and getting our way of life back. This crazy problem of trying to accept what the evidence is on testing, understanding what saliva testing is, contracting someone to deliver it—all of this has taken a year for a relatively simple technology to be absorbed. Now, can you imagine this Government as the COVID world becomes more complex, as we’re trying to safely reconnect with the world, as other countries are doing, to get our way of life back? This Government doesn’t have the ability to make rules that are proportionate to risk, that apply equally to all; to assess the evidence and use the best technology; or, apparently, to write good contracts and get the technology so that we can have a better and stronger response that’s more nuanced and can deal with COVID as the world begins to reopen and safely reconnect different countries.

That’s why this episode is such a good example of how this Government constantly fails, and it’s only fall-back is “Hallelujah! Thank the Lord that New Zealand is an island.” Because, if we were anything else, with this Government and its aptitude in responding to COVID-19, we would be in carnage. Despite that, we support the order. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Motion agreed to.

Orders approved.

I declare the House in committee for consideration of the Education and Training (Grants—Budget Measures) Amendment Bill.