The 90% Project is a NZ Herald initiative aimed at disseminating information about vaccination to all New Zealanders, saving lives and regaining freedom.Video / NZ Herald
It’s tautology to say that one week of a pandemic is consequential, but if you take a clear line from Orwell and bend it, some weeks are more consequential than others.
for 10 days
Since the government announced that it would ease Covid restrictions in Auckland, it has shattered effective consensus on New Zealand’s Covid response and exposed workers to serious coherence issues.
Following the law, National argued that whatever strategy the government was pursuing, it was clearly not as focused on eliminating the virus as it was in the past.
A few days later, the parties agreed that abolishing the eradication strategy (called eradication by law) was the right thing to do, and that the policy of using vaccines and public health measures to control the virus was a way forward. Did.
There is a political contradiction on the right side of this argument and an epidemiological contradiction on the left side.
If, as the state and the law say, the government has abandoned exclusion, why should we care about each plan-the government is already open?
More likely, both Act and National read the room, recognizing that the government is moving in this direction anyway, and both are starters when next year’s economic opening is inevitable. You want to gain an edge.
Both plans drew some of the best ideas from John Key’s weekend column, and their criticism (very effective) was left to a dizzying level of circulation. These ideas are terrible, but what’s the point, as the government does most of them anyway?
Act and National want to be there and are proposing horrifying ideas that will eventually be adopted by the government. This is a big step for National, a sign of regaining confidence in the pandemic issue, burned by a strange and wonderful menagerie in 2020, but too often there is a dire Covid policy.
The government is also detained. He promised to open up the economy further, but is uncertain about moving away from strategies that worked very well in the past.
For a handful of countries where Covid’s reaction was successful, opening was like a game of snakes and ladders. Going too far or too fast often means returning to the beginning of the pandemic. That is death and blockade.
Hope that New Zealand will one day open to the world has been hit hard by Professor Shaun Hendy’s model this week, skipping outbreaks and deaths in other countries. Massive death was an open economy.
This is clearly a problem for those on the “open” side of the debate, but it is also a problem for governments that have not been able to articulate how far they want to go from a reopening perspective and what that means. To get there.
This was evident from the inability to say how vaccine deployment would play a role, at least in an exclusion strategy in which the Prime Minister officially committed himself.
Prior to vaccination, the government had a clear eight-point framework for changing alert levels. The four criteria highlighted infection trends and the director’s confidence in the accuracy of health data. In either case, if these eight points are met, the Cabinet will lower its alert level.
These eight criteria were quietly littered last Monday. This is because widespread transmission and numerous unlinked cases forced the government to stay at level 4 if it chose to use the old standards.
Instead, both Ardan and Health Director Dr. Ashley Bloomfield said that vaccination rates allowed the country to maintain its exclusion strategy, but met all of the exclusion criteria the Cabinet had used up to that point. Said not.
“The difference this time is that the high vaccination rates are increasing at level 3, which gives us even more opportunities to increase these vaccination rates,” Bloomfield said.
Ardan said, “We didn’t have that tool. [vaccination] Behind the support for previous alert level limits. We will do it now. “
But that position collapsed within a few days. Last Monday, Ardan demanded that Auckland citizens reach a 90% immunization rate for first-time vaccinations by the time the Cabinet confirms Covid’s settings next Monday.
Eight days later, when it became clear that Auckland couldn’t reach its goal well, Ardan doubted his position just a week ago, saying directly that it would “not affect” the decision on alert levels next week. ..
“It will affect our future, but we have been working within a vigilance-level framework that has never been vaccinated,” she said.
Ardan’s reversal doesn’t make much sense. The current alert level framework should be vaccine dependent. It’s clear that without the vaccine, last Monday’s decision wouldn’t have been allowed.
The turmoil in the transition from a blockade-based exclusion strategy to a vaccine-based exclusion strategy is heavily documented in all government policies.
Hendy’s modeling shows that the level of vaccination required to achieve jab removal is incredible (about 99% of the currently eligible population) or illegal (90% of the population over 5 years old, over 5 years old). Jab probably isn’t) suggesting that it’s approved until next year).
New Zealand’s vaccination rates are well below what is needed to achieve exclusion, but the government is trying to open borders and the economy: for business travelers not recommended by the government’s border group. Home segregation pilots for homes will soon begin, the summer festival season will continue as usual (using a vaccine passport), New Zealanders will have a normal Christmas, and the border will widen from early next year.
All of this is being pursued and immunization levels are declining, while the government admits that the number of Covid cases in the community will never be zero.
It is difficult to understand how continuous community communication, an open economy, and sustained low rates of vaccination are comparable to continuous exclusion strategies.
This epidemiological contradiction makes sense for political contradictions.
The workforce is clearly heading towards a more open and Covid-resistant economy. What is likely to be seen in the coming months is the debate over whether Labor was dragged into this position by law and the public, or whether it was a plan all the time, as Labor action suggests.
The law and the public need to be careful. As with the Trans-Tasman bubble, if the resumption turns out to be a disaster, they may find themselves removing much of their responsibilities.
Thomas Cofran: Jacinda Ardern’s Elimination Strategy Is Dead, Elimination Strategy Lives Longer
SourceThomas Cofran: Jacinda Ardern’s Elimination Strategy Is Dead, Elimination Strategy Lives Longer