Page:New Zealand Parliament Hansard 2021-03-09.pdf/17

9 Mar 2021 Hon Judith Collins: What were the criteria used for deciding to go out of lockdown on 17 February and back into lockdown 10 days later?

Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: We have a set of criteria that we’ve been using continuously throughout COVID-19 and movements around alert levels. It is not based solely on whether or not we have single cases or, indeed, whether or not a case emerges; it’s all about whether or not we can identify the source of it and whether there are high-risk exposure events. So, to give you a specific example, the decision to go into level 3 in the most recent outbreak was because we had an individual where we could not immediately identify the source, but more importantly, perhaps, a high number of significant exposure events that we considered to be high risk, given the sheer number of people who may have come in contact with the case.

Hon Judith Collins: Why did Cabinet decide to come out of lockdown when only 76 percent of close contacts had at that time returned a negative COVID test on 17 February?

Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Of course, at that time—and we had the discussion with the Director-General of Health and followed the advice there—we had still, of course, identified those who were needing to be tested. They had been told and required, of course, to isolate at home. They were not able to return, for instance, to their schooling environment until they had been tested. So we absolutely knew there were a cohort that remained for testing, but also had high confidence that that process would continue. There was an expectation that we could have a positive case from that cohort, but that was not contingent on us moving alert levels.

Hon Judith Collins: Does she agree with the Unite against COVID-19 Facebook page that the KFC worker was not required to isolate while they awaited the results of their test?

Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Oh, I think this has been well traversed. I don’t have personal responsibility for the individual comments that are made in response to comments on a Facebook page, and nor, as I understand, do those responses go through the Ministry of Health, who ultimately are the ones that provide the advice on what people should or shouldn’t be doing when they’re isolating.

Hon Judith Collins: Well, does she agree with the Unite against COVID-19 Facebook page, that said that the KFC worker was not required to isolate while they awaited the results of their test?

Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: Obviously, I do not agree with what was stated there. I stand by the Ministry of Health advice that was issued quite publicly.

Hon Judith Collins: Does she agree it is now clear that the KFC worker was told conflicting things?

Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: We would never give public health advice via Facebook comments and messages. That is not where we provide health advice. The other point that I’d make to the member is that this line in a comments section is not the place where we would be providing specific information to a household. The point that I think I’d also make to the member is the member is conflating these two cases. What happened with that particular household was not responsible for our return to level 3, and I think it was unfair to give any implication in this House that it may have been the case. David Seymour: So should the public pay any attention at all to the Government’s official New Zealand COVID Facebook page?

Rt Hon JACINDA ARDERN: What I’m clearly identifying here is that the statement made in a comment section was conflicting advice and not correct. We, of course, have stood by the advice, which was that all of those school students needed to be tested and needed to return a negative result.

David Seymour: So is the Prime Minister’s advice to the public: 'Listen to the comments on the Government's official Facebook page but not the posts." or is it "Listen