Who thinks Australia and NZ have got it right ?

[marilenagrace]

What do you think ? Do you think that keeping everyone out of the country is the right approach long term to deal with covid ? Do you wish we did that here in the UK ?

I'm assuming though that the timeframe given is a projection based on the current rollout speed? Surely once a supply is secured rollout will be a lot quicker!

Absolutely. The issue is about unknown timing of securing entire needed supply so until there is clarity there, it’s a conservative estimate. I think the EU blocking of the initial AZ order leaving EU and only being able to achieve a portion of that order has also made it clear it’s hard to rely on things going to plan also.

I don’t see it as shifting towards acceptance either. I think border closures will be with us for at least another 12-24 months.

Absolutely. The issue is about unknown timing of securing entire needed supply so until there is clarity there, it’s a conservative estimate. I think the EU blocking of the initial AZ order leaving EU and only being able to achieve a portion of that order has also made it clear it’s hard to rely on things going to plan also.

Then there is also the unanswered question of children - will they open borders if 20% of the population isn’t vaccinated? Would they allow unvaccinated under-16s in?

I mean, I desperately hope @spottygymbag is right and my folks are wrong. So do they. We are all heartbroken about the separation.

Before anyone jumps down my throat, I will repeat what I’ve said a number of times here - I think the Australian response to date has been (more or less) right for the country. It’s the lack of a stated long term objective or strategy that is troubling, particularly within a year of a federal election.

Then there is also the unanswered question of children - will they open borders if 20% of the population isn’t vaccinated? Would they allow unvaccinated under-16s in?

Kids aren’t an issue. They are generally low in contracting and transmission when it comes to viral load. So if the rest of the population is vaccinated and they are not it’s not a big deal and wouldn’t prohibit borders from opening.

The reality is that vulnerable people who genuinely can’t be vaccinated will essentially have a choice to self-isolate indefinitely or bite the bullet and take a chance. Once it gets to that point borders won’t stay closed for their sake.

If a sufficient percentage are vaccinated then there won't be a great deal of spread, so that will largely protect the vulnerable. Of course an occasional child could get infected and infect some classmates, the tricky bit is managing the response for children regarding who should isolate or ditching that; and that's as much an issue for UK, USA, EU countries as Australia. One infected child who then stays home plus close contacts at home = limited spread. If all those kids keep going in because they aren't too ill, then the chance of infecting the whole school increases.

Kids aren’t an issue. They are generally low in contracting and transmission when it comes to viral load. So if the rest of the population is vaccinated and they are not it’s not a big deal and wouldn’t prohibit borders from opening.

I think that’s one of the things that’s easy to say but the evidence for transmission in under-16s isn’t as clear cut as you make out, particularly with the variants - as we’ve seen in the UK.

Given the mixed rhetoric and evidence base on the subject I don’t think one can say ‘kids aren’t an issue’ - otherwise we wouldn’t have had school closures, high infection rates in children in line with or higher than the surrounding population.

It’s fair to say that children aren’t a primary driver of overall transmission - that’s certainly what is indicated so far - but I’m not sure the evidence base suggests going further than that.

And given the mixed evidence, I’m not at all confident that the Australian government would let in my unvaccinated Australian children, for example. Or, frankly, even fully vaccinated (as of next Tuesday) me if there isn’t high take up of the vaccine across the rest of the population.

I admire your optimism and again, I hope you’re right. I would like to see this in a strategy rather than calm assertions from people based on which way they think the wind is blowing.

the tricky bit is managing the response for children regarding who should isolate or ditching that; and that's as much an issue for UK, USA, EU countries as Australia.

Though the difference between eg here in the UK and in Australia is that we already have a tolerance level for low (and even not so low) levels of transmission in schools, we are on track to have very high uptake of vaccines which should get us to around 90% of the adult population protected - so around 72% of the overall population. And we have a level of naturally acquired immunity in under-18s - if you assume that it’s in line with the adult population and that T-cell immunity plays no role, then you’re at 75% of the population.

This is going to be the hard bit for countries like Australia - moving up to a level of normalisation of the disease rather than down like those countries that have had much worse experiences of the pandemic to date. I’m not saying I think Australia has been wrong in its response so far, but that the behavioural science challenge for public policy makers from this point forward is probably tougher for countries like Australia and New Zealand from this point forwards.

@JassyRadlett

I mean, I desperately hope *@spottygymbag* is right and my folks are wrong. So do they. We are all heartbroken about the separation.

Before anyone jumps down my throat, I will repeat what I’ve said a number of times here - I think the Australian response to date has been (more or less) right for the country. It’s the lack of a stated long term objective or strategy that is troubling, particularly within a year of a federal election.

I agree entirely.

My Nan is 97 on Sunday - my Aunt is in Perth. She was coming over every year (last in 2019) and unless the borders open up soon she probably wont see her Mum again or come over for the funeral.

One son is in North Carolina and she hasnt seen him either since 2019 either. The other is in Melbourne.

I checked and it seems that Australians must have a valid visa to stay in India. I hope that Australia's government is going to put in place some sort of measures to ensure that Aus citizens are not in danger of being arrested in India for overstaying if their visas run out?

Someone somewhere else online pointed out people with Australian passports don't have to stay in India. They reckon the cricketers, for example, will wait it out somewhere like Dubai. Others will likely do similar.

@Tealightsandd

Someone somewhere else online pointed out people with Australian passports don't have to stay in India. They reckon the cricketers, for example, will wait it out somewhere like Dubai. Others will likely do similar.

Honestly I’m quite surprised they haven’t been vaccinated yet given they could either purchase them in India or, like you say, travel elsewhere and procure them.

In hindsight maybe their management should have organise that before they went. There’s definitely places the vaccine can be bought privately.

Things might've changed but definitely a few months ago, people with a lot of means were getting vaccinated privately in Dubai.

BBC news right now.

Australian citizen who traveled back to India March 2020 because his Dad was about to die.

Still in India. Flights cancelled by Australian government and yet flights from India to Australia on same day flew with IPA cricket teams on board.

They didn't say but he could likely have wife and kids in Aus who were dependant on his income. Guess not many employers will keep a job open and paying someone for over a year.

How anyone can defend it is beyond me. Just quarantine people when you let them back. The are people who live in the country ffs, not just tourists trying to go for a jolly.

Many who are in India are there because they had an exemption to attend a family funeral. Indian Australians have renounced their Indian citizenship to become Australian Citizens as India does not allow dual citizenship.

Our Australian passports say "Queen Elizabeth the Second requests all those who it may concern to allow the bearer, to pass freely without let or hindrance and to afford him or her every assistance or protection of which he or she may stand in need".

The decision to ban Australians from returning home may well be in breach of their obligations under the international covenant on civil and political rights, according to ANU International Law professor Don Rothwell.

It also calls into question the UN universal declaration on human rights by not allowing citizens and residents to return to their homes. It seems very much like the government does not have faith in their hotel quarantine system.

The government’s dilution of what it means to be an Australian citizen is the thing that has finally pushed me towards getting British citizenship.

While I don’t trust the British government much, the disdain with which the Australian government has treated its citizens over the last year (unless they are rich or famous of course) has made me quite fearful of what Australian citizenship actually means.

One aspect to this is the trade in citizenship - bringing in students and skilled (or sometimes not) workers who have the opportunity to obtain citizenship in the future - a citizenship which is prized for the impression of safety and security.

This citizenship trade is necessary to underpin population (due to, often, native born citizens net exiting to some more prosperous western nations) and therefore GDP, house prices and the NZ and AU dollars.

If the citizenship proves worthless and unsafe, and especially given it's often necessary to renounce the native citizenship to take up this un-useful new citizenship, who will seek it out in the future?

For many, the acquired citizenship has proved to be a cheque now cashed on an empty bank account.

Given the mixed rhetoric and evidence base on the subject I don’t think one can say ‘kids aren’t an issue’ - otherwise we wouldn’t have had school closures, high infection rates in children in line with or higher than the surrounding population.

That has been the Govnt line all along. The Feds were opposed to school shutdown here of any sort and at a point were overruled by the States. They were not happy. Most States only did the school shutdown for several weeks though (I think we were half a term here) and then got them back in. They then realised it was pointless. Sure, some kids get it here and there but the viral load needs to be pretty high for a child to be affected and transmit. Most kids who get it you wouldn’t even know. Of course, there will be the odd exception generally due to underlying health issues and even death but in the main the worst is a few sniffles. It doesn’t run rife between them and as the viral load is generally so small transmission is not high with adults. We only had kids sport shut for half a term too then they were all back at it.

That’s the Covid we have experienced to date though and the Feds game plan with kids is pretty much business as usual, they don’t get the same restrictions as adults. If we get another variant in that displays differently in kids in regards to effect and transmission then of course the Feds will adjust their thinking. The States are more conservative again.

I think there is confusion that closed borders equals lack of acceptance/changing position. This is flawed logic in that one does not mean the other.
Borders closed? Yes due to current low vaccination level/roll out and supply issues.
Changing position? Yes. PM here and in NZ have said we will need to accept low level cases once we open up after decent amount have been vaccinated.
Even recent outbreak in WA and border breach in QLD has demonstrated a slight shift in response. Previously certain states would have closed borders/longer lockdown etc. but this time we had a limited brief lockdown and more measured response in other states to those who may have been affected. And although it was reported on and noted as concerning it was far from the media saturation of other potential spreading events.
Without a specific soundbite the actions are showing more acceptance that outbreaks will occur and that we need to manage them but with out the panic of earlier ones.

I also agree with a pp upthread about fully vaccinated people not necessarily being allowed in without meeting certain requirements initially. This makes sense to me because it's about protecting the current resident population. It's about the people living here being vaccinated because we all know by now that it doesn't necessarily prevent you from getting it but reduces your likelihood of getting seriously ill and most likely reduces transmission. Vaccinated arrivals are still a risk to a largely unvaccinated population.

This sums up the change towards acceptance as we move to vaccinated population

I'm wondering how Australians generally feel about having the vaccine? A colleague's son, early 30s, lives in NSW and apparently he, his DW and none of their friends will be having the vaccine. They just don't see the point. Cases are incredibly low, they are at a low risk anyway and at the moment have no desire to travel. Is this attitude common?

@Hettylala

I'm wondering how Australians generally feel about having the vaccine? A colleague's son, early 30s, lives in NSW and apparently he, his DW and none of their friends will be having the vaccine. They just don't see the point. Cases are incredibly low, they are at a low risk anyway and at the moment have no desire to travel. Is this attitude common?

I think it is pretty common worldwide.

I know loads in their 20s and 30s who don't want it. Why would they? If they are healthy and fit and normal weight then the risk of them getting ill is miniscule.

Sure, some kids get it here and there but the viral load needs to be pretty high for a child to be affected and transmit.

The former is true but the latter just isn’t borne out by real world experience or the actual evidence. We were saying that here too a lot last year but asymptomatic transmission in children was well established before B117, and though secondary strike rate is certainly lower it still exists at about 50% of the adult level - including asymptomatic transmission. And B117 definitely exacerbated it here in the UK.

As Harvard point out in this article the theory of a link between viral load in the upper respiratory tract and symptoms has not been borne out by evidence.

Most kids who get it you wouldn’t even know. Of course, there will be the odd exception generally due to underlying health issues and even death but in the main the worst is a few sniffles..

Here in the UK where our weekly population monitoring showed high levels particularly in secondary school ages children in the autumn, long Covid became a documented issue.

Now none of this really matters if you have high enough vaccine-acquired adult immunity. But I expect the medical authorities in countries like Australia will be looking closely at highly vaccinated countries like the UK and US this autumn to see how the transmission dynamics with unvaccinated children play out in a highly vaccinated adult population.

And so will they let my two young unvaccinated Australians into the country before there is a paediatric vaccine? Will they open borders if lower adult vaccination rates combined with an unvaccinated fifth of the population mean herd immunity hasn’t been reached? I don’t think that’s the slam dunk you feel it is.

And so will they let my two young unvaccinated Australians into the country before there is a paediatric vaccine? Will they open borders if lower adult vaccination rates combined with an unvaccinated fifth of the population mean herd immunity hasn’t been reached? I don’t think that’s the slam dunk you feel it is.

Strategy changes every day but if the adult pop was covered and the only barrier to reopening is kids, and variants at the time don’t show a significantly different trajectory, then your kids would be allowed in with a negative test. That can change with the wind though if new variants deem this to be less than ideal.

Lack of concern re kids has been a consistent theme, even with most States and they overreact. Of course all of this hinges on the adult pop being vaxed and we know that’s not going to occur anytime soon due to supply issues of the vaccine many will hold out for. Pfizer will likely also be the first in younger children so that’s extra pressure again, let’s not hold our breath for stock when we’re struggling to achieve it for frontline healthcare and she’s care workers who are under 50 and those over 50 who refuse the AZ. Let’s not even go there with Indigenous reluctance in general and that problem likely won’t be solved with the likelihood of just having to move on and the Govnt taking an international slap for having an Indigenous pop not vaccinated - damned if you do and damned if you don’t open borders due to this issue.