I think there is an element of proportionality missing here. In this case, it's a very low risk of what? Well, it's a very low risk of going through yet another lock down. The previous one cost the NZ economy billions and threw something like 10% of their population out of work.

In case the picture isn't clear, I'm an Australian. We have benefit of experience here. One state, Victoria, managed to screw up their quarantine regime. The result has been over 700 deaths, and 100's of billions of dollars in lost work, and an economy that shrank by 40%.

The other extreme is Western Australia. Unlike the rest of Australia's states, they shut their borders completely, turning themselves into almost a country within a country. They have been and continue to be heavily criticised for it. The outcome has been no new cases for months, no lockdown whatsoever for months, and they are the only state whose economy grew in the last quarter.

In economic terms, it's very clear what the right course of action is. And given the cost of just one case leaking through the quarantine wall, I'm sort of surprised the penalties aren't hasher to send the strongest possible message. Burn the boat maybe?