Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Misha Ketchell, Editor & Executive Director, The Conversation

You might have seen recent media reports in various outlets of a paper, commissioned by the federal government, reporting the coronavirus advice of a group of experts from Group Of Eight universities.

Dated March 22, the letter said “we support the stronger decisions being now taken by government and what we term as the ‘go now, go hard and go smart’ strategy.”

As demand grows for greater transparency around the advice informing government measures aimed at fighting the coronavirus spread, The Conversation is publishing the letter in full below.

The four key recommendations in the paper are that:

1. Australia without delay implements national stronger social distancing measures, more extensive banning of mass gatherings, school closure or class dismissal.
2. Australia urgently seeks mechanisms to enable a much-enhanced and coordinated regime of COVID-19 testing without delay. This should include community testing to estimate the rates of disease in the population – and this should guide further decision making.
3. Strengthen the messaging around the importance of people complying with all of the requirements of isolation or quarantine and having increased compliance monitoring and support to allow them to do so (estimated that around 20-30% will not comply).
4. Social distancing, especially when introduced vigorously across so many areas of life, will have significant costs for individuals and groups in society. These consequences will impact unequally. Governments should plan for this and ensure flexible and supportive policy responses for all who may be disadvantaged.

Some of these recommendations informed stronger measures enacted last week. However, schools in some states remain open but parents are being urged to keep children home where possible.

Read more: Grattan on Friday: Which leaders and health experts will be on the right side of history on COVID-19 policy?

– ref. ‘Go now, go hard and go smart’: the strategy Group of Eight universities experts urged the government to take – https://theconversation.com/go-now-go-hard-and-go-smart-the-strategy-group-of-eight-universities-experts-urged-the-government-to-take-135031

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Albert Van Dijk, Professor, Water and Landscape Dynamics, Fenner School of Environment & Society, Australian National University

2019 was the year Australians confronted the fact that a healthy environment is more than just a pretty waterfall in a national park; a nice extra we can do without. We do not survive without air to breathe, water to drink, soil to grow food and weather we can cope with.

Every year, we collate a vast number of measurements on the state of our environment: weather, oceans, fire, water, soils, vegetation, population pressure, and biodiversity. The data is collected in many different ways: by satellites, field stations, surveys and so on.

We process this data into several indicators of environmental health at both national and regional levels.

The report for 2019, released today, makes for grim reading. It reveals the worst environmental conditions in many decades, perhaps centuries, and confirms the devastating damage global warming and mismanagement are wreaking on our natural resources.

Immediate action is needed to put Australia’s environment on a course to recovery.

Environment scores in the red

From the long list of environmental indicators we report on, we use seven to calculate an Environmental Condition Score (ECS) for each region, as well as nationally.

These seven indicators – high temperatures, river flows, wetlands, soil health, vegetation condition, growth conditions and tree cover – are chosen because they allow a comparison against previous years. In Australia’s dry environment, they tend to move up and down together, which gives the score more robustness. See the interactive graphic below to find the score for your region.

Nationally, Australia’s environmental condition score fell by 2.3 points in 2019, to a very low 0.8 out of ten. This is the lowest score since at least 2000 – the start of the period for which we have detailed data.

Condition scores declined in every state and territory. The worst conditions were seen in the Northern Territory (0.2 points), New South Wales (0.3 points) and Western Australia (0.4 points), with the latter also recording the greatest decline from the previous year (-5.7 points).

What is most striking is that almost the entire nation suffered terrible environmental conditions in 2019. In each case, the changes can be traced back to dry, hot conditions. Only parts of Queensland escaped the drought.

Comparing local government areas, the worst conditions occurred in Armidale and Gwydir in northern NSW. In contrast, Winton and Townsville in Queensland escaped the overall poor conditions, thanks to the beneficial impact of high rainfall early in the year – although those same events also caused floods killing around 600,000 livestock.

Extreme drought and extreme heat

So what exactly happened in Australia in 2019 to cause such widespread environmental damage? There were several causes.

Across most of Australia, the environment was already reeling from poor conditions in 2018. Also, cool temperatures in the Indian Ocean delayed the onset of the monsoon in northern Australia and reduced the flow of moisture to the rest of the continent, creating hot and dry conditions. Average rainfall was a mere 229 mm across the continent, the lowest in more than 119 years and probably longer than that.

The heat was also extraordinary. The average number of days above 35°C across the country was 36% more than the average for the 19 years prior.

In eastern Australia, arid and hot conditions pushed farmers and ecosystems deeper into drought. In many regions, dryness and declining protection from wind erosion created the worst soil conditions in at least 20 years. Consequences included several dust storms and widespread dieback of forests, especially in NSW.

The severe drought also affected inland water systems, especially the Darling River and its tributaries. Town water supply reservoirs ran out of water, the rivers stopped flowing, and the heat turned the remaining pools into death traps for fish.

Other rivers in northwest Australia, southeast Queensland and northeast NSW also saw their worst flows in 20 years.

Unprecedented fires

Of course, 2019 will be remembered as the year of unprecedented bushfires. Nationally, the total area burnt was not unusual, not even when the fires of early 2020 are included. But this is only because fire activity was much below average in northern Australia, where ongoing dry conditions left little vegetation to burn.

The extent of forest fires last year was unprecedented, however. As predicted well in advance, the tinder-dry forests in eastern Australia provided the fuel for a dramatic fire season that started in September. Between then and the first month of 2020, vast areas of forest in New South Wales, eastern Victoria, Kangaroo Island and the Australian Capital Territory went up in flames.

The fires destroyed more than 3,000 homes and directly killed 33 people. Indirectly, the most hazardous air quality in living memory created major but poorly known health impacts. The fires also damaged the reliability of drinking water supplies.

Read more: Yes, the Australian bush is recovering from bushfires – but it may never be the same

The ecological damage was also profound. Fires raged through ecosystems poorly adapted to fire, from rainforests in tropical Queensland to alpine vegetation in Tasmania and the Snowy Mountains of NSW. It remains to be seen whether they can recover. Across NSW, 35% of rainforests were turned to cinders.

About 191 species of animals and plants saw more than one-third of their living area burnt, among them 52 species that were already threatened. Thankfully, the last remaining stands of the prehistoric Wollemi pine and the rare Nightcap Oak were saved.

Even before the fires, 40 plant and animal species were added to the threatened list in 2019, bringing the total to 1890. Following the fires, more species are likely to be added in 2020.

We’re not doomed yet

Last year was neither an outlier nor the “new normal” – it will get worse.

Greenhouse gas concentrations continued to increase rapidly in 2019, causing the temperature of the atmosphere and oceans to soar. Australia’s population also continued to grow quickly and with it, greenhouse gases emissions and other pollution, and our demand for land to build, mine and farm on.

Whether we want to hear it or not, last year represented another step towards an ever-more dismal future, unless we take serious action.

Read more: Here’s what the coronavirus pandemic can teach us about tackling climate change

The current coronavirus pandemic shows that as individuals, and collectively, we can take dramatic action once we acknowledge the urgency of a threat. By comparison, addressing environmental decline will cost less, whereas the long-term costs of not acting will be far greater.

There is much we can do. In the short term, we can help our natural ecosystems recover from the drought and fires. Government agencies and land owners can cull and manage invasive species in fire-affected areas – from weeds, to foxes, cats and feral horses – and stop damaging logging in fire-affected areas.

Individuals can do their bit. We can donate money or time to organisations committed to helping ecosystems recover. Record what you see on bushwalks to help environmental managers monitor and assist ecological recovery.

But the damage of climate change is not limited to natural environments. We must get serious about curbing greenhouse emissions. Humanity has the tools, technology and ingenuity to do it and Australia, one of the countries worst affected by climate change, should lead the world.

Beyond that, individuals can also make a contribution: recycle and reuse rather than buy new, choose low-emission and renewable energy technology and reduce waste – it can save money even now. Let governments and politicians hear your voice. Try to convince friends and family that things need to change.

In the long term, we must find a more balanced relationship with the natural world, understanding that our own survival will depend on it.

The full report and webinar are available here.

Read more: Lots of people want to help nature after the bushfires – we must seize the moment

– ref. A major scorecard gives the health of Australia’s environment less than 1 out of 10 – https://theconversation.com/a-major-scorecard-gives-the-health-of-australias-environment-less-than-1-out-of-10-133444

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Yale Z Wong, Research Associate, Institute of Transport and Logistics Studies, University of Sydney

ZMinimising health risks has rightly been the focus of discussion during the coronavirus outbreak. This includes efforts to protect both frontline public transport employees and the travelling public. But we should also be concerned about the strategic, financial consequences for transport operators and their workforces.

We have already seen the struggles of the aviation industry. The COVID-19 pandemic also has major financial implications for the public transport sector. While it has been declared an essential service, fears about coronavirus, widespread work-from-home directives, cancellations of major events and potential city-wide lockdowns will result in massive drops in patronage.

Railways are a high fixed-cost industry (like airlines) and are particularly vulnerable to demand volatility.

Read more: To limit coronavirus risks on public transport, here’s what we can learn from efforts overseas

The Chinese experience has been that people preferred to use private cars and services like taxis and ride hailing rather than public transport. In New York, we have seen a surge in cycling as people seek to avoid the subway crowds.

What are the impacts on revenue?

Developments like these appear inevitable. However, the loss of revenue for transport operators depends very much on the design and specifications of their contracts with government.

Most urban public transport systems in Australia are “gross cost” regimes. This means operators are paid on a per kilometre basis regardless of the number of passengers carried. These operators are much less susceptible to changes in demand.

Transport operators who work off “net cost” contracts – meaning they keep their fare revenue – are facing huge financial pressures. This in turn has implications for the cash flows of their suppliers, including vehicle manufacturers and consultancies.

Hong Kong rail operator MTR (which has businesses in Melbourne and Sydney), already battling almost a year of protests, has been forced into significant service reductions. In Japan, some Shinkansen services are being suspended as patronage plummets. Many Asian operators have diversified revenue streams from property developments, but large falls in patronage also affect the ability to collect rents (such as from retail).

We are also seeing US transit agencies calling for emergency funding as demand drops. Major service cuts are on the horizon – suggestions include running a weekend schedule on weekdays. This is likely to reduce patronage further as the service becomes less useful for the travelling public.

Read more: Who’s most affected on public transport in the time of coronavirus?

Any service reduction has major ramifications for public transport workforces. Permanent staff may have their work hours reduced, while casual staff will struggle to get rostered. This will add to the psychological impacts on staff.

The global collapse in oil prices is another factor as the lower cost of fuel makes driving more attractive.

Beyond government-contracted public transport there are many intercity coach operators and small-to-medium-sized charter operators (many family-owned). These operators serve the school, tourist, airport, hotel and special-needs markets. They are all private commercial operators.

Many charter operators have already seen a massive reduction in bookings due to the summer bushfires and travel bans. The loss of international tourism and cancellation of school excursions and extracurricular activities will bring even greater pain to charter operators and their workforces. Chinese tours have been a large part of the charter market.

On the other side of the ledger are increased costs arising from enhanced cleaning efforts and changes in operational practices to reduce the risks of COVID-19 infection for as long as the crisis lasts.

Read more: Scott Morrison has said we’ll face at least 6 months of disruption. Where does that number come from?

A major issue in these circumstances is how to provide incentives for transport operators to go above and beyond what is required as part of their usual remit. Do operators merely “comply” with their contract specifications, or do they see an opportunity to extract value from proactively deploying, for instance, an enhanced disinfection regime? Should the contracted operator bear the extra costs, or should government share these costs?

Reshaping the industry

COVID-19 brings enormous unknowns for the public transport sector. Cost and revenue pressures may lead to transport operators fighting for survival. The result could be market consolidation and less competition in the industry.

In the longer term, how can future contract design for both transport services and transport assets ensure resilience to “black swan” events and encourage a proactive, rather than reactive, response? Too often, a myopic focus on cost reduction has governed these discussions.

Finally, is there a way to protect commercial operators from huge swings in demand?

The coronavirus pandemic demands an urgent operational response by our public transport systems. But it should also encourage a strategic rethinking of our institutional structures and how public services are procured. Let us create an opportunity for longer-term reform out of the crisis.

– ref. For public transport to keep running, operators must find ways to outlast coronavirus – https://theconversation.com/for-public-transport-to-keep-running-operators-must-find-ways-to-outlast-coronavirus-134224

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tyler Riordan, PhD Candidate, The University of Queensland

Along with home delivery of groceries, pharmaceuticals and alcohol, demand for food delivery is booming.

Services such as Uber Eats and Deliveroo have become essential to cafes and restaurants that can now only sell takeaway food.

It is good news for the likes of Uber, whose stock price has risen since it announced a ten-fold increase in the number of restaurants signing themselves up to Uber Eats.

But it’s a situation that has provoked serious questions. Not only about whether delivery services are safe, but whether it’s ethical to use them.

Digital platforms like Uber Eats and Menulog are not, after all, ideal employers. In fact, they don’t regard themselves as employers at all, merely facilitators of work by “independent contractors”.

Food delivery drivers and riders often work for less than the minimum wage, and have no employee rights such as sick leave.

Now we are collectively relying on them to provide an essential service during social distancing, we need to ask what, as a society, we owe these workers in return.

Vulnerable to exploitation

We’re interested in how this economic crisis affects food delivery drivers and riders due to our research into the experience of migrant gig workers.

Our research has found migrants are already “socially distanced”, without deep networks of family or friends. They are vulnerable to exploitation and discrimination.

Most food delivery work is done by migrants, through third-party digital platforms like Uber Eats and Menulog. The platforms treat drivers and riders as independent contractors, not employees with the protections and rights of employees.

Read more: Redefining workers in the platform economy: lessons from the Foodora bunfight

A 2019 survey commissioned by the Victorian government suggested about 7% of the workforce used digital platforms to get gig work, the most common being Airtasker (35%), Uber (23%), Freelancer (12%), Uber Eats (11%) and Deliveroo (8%).

Previous research suggests many choose gig work simply because it is better than other forms of low-paid work.

Now food delivery workers face pressure from those displaced from such jobs in hospitality or retail. Complicating the situation is the lack of clarity about whether those on temporary work visas are eligible for income support announced for other workers.

Platforms don’t owe gig workers a minimum wage so can sign up as many “independent contractors” as they like. This improves the service for customers, and increases profit for the platform, but means individual deliverers make less money.

Increased health risks

Many delivery services are implementing contactless delivery procedures. But the lack of defined employer responsibility in the platform economy means patchy attention to the extra physical and mental health risks gig workers now face.

Unions and others have urged delivery platforms to provide protective equipment such as gloves, face masks and sanitisers. Responses from platforms have been limited.

This was Uber Eats’ response on March 17, by its regional general manager for the Asia Pacific, Jodie Auster:

Our plan to address challenges born by COVID-19 includes making A$5 million in funding available for independent restaurants across Australia and New Zealand. The multi-million dollar fund will allow restaurants to deploy promotions to attract customers and will help restaurants time promotions to suit their individual business needs.

What Auster didn’t mention was a plan to issue safety gear, though she did note the company had started a campaign “reminding Uber Eats users that they can request deliveries be left on their doorsteps”.

Not surprisingly, delivery workers are scared they will catch the coronavirus.

Uber says it will financially assist drivers and riders “diagnosed with COVID-19 or placed in quarantine by a public health authority” for a period of up to 14 days.

But what if a worker with viral symptoms wants to self-isolate as a precaution? There’s no sick leave or workers compensation, and they risk “deactivation” if work isn’t accepted.

Read more: Workers’ compensation doesn’t cover gig workers – here’s a way to protect them

Legal protection

Social distancing measures mean the delivery economy and the health of the general population are now intimately linked.

To secure and safeguard this now essential service, it is time the law ensured gig workers have the same legal rights and protections as other employees.

Read more: How to stop workers being exploited in the gig economy

We need the delivery drivers coming to our doors to be healthy. That health depends on their safety as well as economic and social inclusion.

– ref. Delivery workers are now essential. They deserve the rights of other employees – https://theconversation.com/delivery-workers-are-now-essential-they-deserve-the-rights-of-other-employees-134406

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nishanathe Dahanayake, PhD Candidate, Ethics/Philosophy, University of New England

The coronavirus pandemic is challenging our health, work, family, food and fun. It’s also disturbing our peace of mind and forcing us to question our own existence.

We are each asking our own existential questions: Why is this happening to me? Why can’t I go on with my usual life? Who created the problem and why?

While scientists are working hard to find medical solutions, concepts from Buddhism can provide us with some solace for our overburdened minds. The Buddha’s answer would be to focus solely on the existential facts, aiming first for understanding and then to adopt a pragmatic meditation practice.

A troubling disciple

Consider the case of Mālunkyaputta, a disciple who kept troubling the Buddha some 2500 years ago in ancient India. Mālunkyaputta prompted him to answer a series of complex questions.

One particular day, he walked up to the Buddha and insisted he needed to be given the answers.

The Buddha responded with an anecdote of a man wounded with a poisonous arrow coming to see a physician for medication. The man insisted that he would not let the arrow be taken out until he knew who shot him and how. The Buddha said by the time all the answers had been given the man would be dead.

The Buddha defined this teaching as eschewing answers to philosophical questions and dealing only with the existential facts: “there is birth … ageing … dying … grief, sorrow, suffering, lamentation, and despair” and their “suppression … here and now”.

What this means for us is that although it is natural for us to have such questions, worrying about the answers may only bring more suffering. We would be wiser to work to reduce our own suffering and that of others.

Three marks of existence

What remains in this core Buddhism is the pure existentialism of dispassionate detachment from the space-time world that results in nirvana. This state is defined simply as the absence of greed, hatred, and delusion.

Buddhism teaches us the coronavirus is causing us to experience some heightened forms of the three marks of our existence (tilakkhaṇa). They are the impermanence (aniccā), the un-satisfactoriness or suffering (duḥkha) and the non-self (anatta).

The pandemic’s sudden encroachment on our society, causing death and misery, reminds us of that impermanence. It shows us the inevitable nature of our own death and the associated suffering, leading us to do some soul-searching.

The little things

Buddhism teaches meditation practices with deep introspection. These are designed to make us mindful of nature and help us relieve us from sufferings, as described so in several Buddhist suttas – the records that hold the Buddha’s original utterings.

The process involves loosening our grasp – those things we cling to that are governed by our desires – on both tangible and intangible things in life by realising their true nature – relating them back to three tilakkhaṇa. Meditation invites us to be happy with the simplest and most basic things in life.

The meditation steps taught in the suttas can guide our mind, calm our body and help our senses find peace and delight. It is hoped that meditation bring about our inherent yet dormant happiness without relying on our body or our dispositions, which are impermanent.

The big picture

While these deliberations, because of their psychological effect, can bring in peace, happiness and even health benefits to the individual, there are other benefits.

Firstly, such mindful practice can help us get on with our day-to-day life in a more disciplined and safer manner, which as we can see is extremely valuable in a crisis situation such as today.

Meditation might help us not to panic (or panic buy), to be conscious of our own behaviour so that we will be careful even with what we touch, or not touch (including our face). It would help us to be conscious of cleaning our hands regularly and mindful of others around us so that we are careful about any chances of passing on germs.

Many believe that meditation can help the rest of the world as well, because of the thoughtfulness it creates. The pandemic can affect rich and poor (although there are also concerns it may increase inequity). Our meditation practices can help us evaluate the impermanence, decay and inevitable death of our existence, against any privileges we may have. Meditation can direct us to consider the possibility of living a happy life by meeting basic needs alone. For some, this can make us reevaluate what we see as our misfortunes.

Buddhism may be seen as yet another of the world’s religions, with its own rituals around praying to deities and sending away demons. But the Buddha can be also seen as simply an insightful thinker and teacher. He proposed a natural outlook, providing solutions that do not appeal to any supernatural force.

Coupled with psychological solutions and health benefits that meditation can bring, we may find that it is possible to adopt Buddhist concepts into a framework for contemplation – one geared for salvation from our current crisis.

– ref. Thinking like a Buddhist about coronavirus can calm the mind and help us focus – https://theconversation.com/thinking-like-a-buddhist-about-coronavirus-can-calm-the-mind-and-help-us-focus-134651

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

No more than two people are to gather together in public spaces, and playgrounds will be closed in the latest restrictions in the coronavirus crisis.

Meanwhile the government will now scrutinise all foreign investment proposals as well as impose longer time frames on examining applications “to protect Australia’s national interest” during the crisis.

The only exception to the two-person rule, endorsed by the national cabinet on Sunday, will be for people of the same household going out together, funerals (maximum ten), weddings (maximum five) and family units.

But it will be up to individual states and territories to decide whether to make the new rule enforceable. A ten-person limit is currently enforceable in most states and territories.

As of late Sunday, more than 211,000 tests had been undertaken and there had been 3,966 confirmed cases in Australia, with 16 deaths.

The government is hopeful the curve of the virus may be flattening but the national cabinet warns that in some jurisdictions retail outlets should be prepared for further measures.

States and territories have agreed they will put in place additional measures specific to their own regions, including closing categories of venues, where medical advice supports this.

Announcing the latest restrictions on Sunday night, Scott Morrison said public playgrounds, outside gyms and skate parks will now also be closed, adding to the extensive list of closures already in place.

This means the earlier limit of 10 people for an outdoor bootcamp, set last week, comes down to an individual and their trainer.

Morrison reiterated that in general, people should stay at home except for shopping (as infrequently as possible) for necessary items, medical care or compassionate reasons, exercise, and work or education that can’t be done at home.

He also said the strong advice for those 70 and over was to self-isolate to the maximum extent practicable for their own protection; this applied to those over 60 with chronic illnesses, and indigenous people aged over 50.

Asked why, given the two-person rule, shopping centres were still being allowed to remain open, Morrison said people needed to buy things other than food.

He gave the example of his own family. “Our kids are at home now, as are most kids, and Jenny went out yesterday and bought them a whole bunch of jigsaw puzzles.

“I can assure you over the next few months, we’re going to consider those jigsaw puzzles absolutely essential.

“It’s important that parents and families and households can get the things that they need to completely change the way they are going to live for the next six months at least.” This included people buying sporting equipment for home exercise.

The national cabinet agreed on principles for commercial and residential tenancies.

There will be a moratorium on evictions over the next six months for those in financial distress who can’t meet their commitments due to the virus.

Commercial tenants, landlords and financial institutions are being encouraged to find ways to ensure businesses can survive.

The federal government is working on a huge third support package expected to include wage subsidies.

Announcing the foreign investment changes, Treasurer Josh Frydenberg stressed this was not a freeze on foreign investment and was temporary, lasting for the duration of the crisis.

“Australia is open for business and recognises investment at this time can be beneficial if in the national interest,” he said.

Under the foreign investment regime there are various thresholds for triggering scrutiny, according to type, value and source of the investment.

But now all proposed foreign investments that are subject to the the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act will need approval.

To ensure enough time for scrutiny the Foreign Investment Review Board (FIRB) would work with existing and new applicants to extend the review time from 30 days to up to six months, Frydenberg said.

The government would give priority to “urgent applications for investments that protect and support Australian business and Australian jobs,” he said.

“The Government recognises that foreign investment will play an important part in helping many businesses get to the other side – securing jobs and supporting our economic recovery.

“However, these measures are necessary to safeguard the national interest as the coronavirus outbreak puts intense pressure on the Australian economy and Australian businesses.”

A reason for the change is likely to be the fear companies could be targeted for takeovers when they are weak or collapsing.

– ref. Public gatherings restricted to two people and all foreign investment proposals scrutinised, in new coronavirus measures – https://theconversation.com/public-gatherings-restricted-to-two-people-and-all-foreign-investment-proposals-scrutinised-in-new-coronavirus-measures-135000

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Linda Botterill, Professor in Australian Politics, University of Canberra

The novel coronavirus sees Australia facing major unprecedented health and economic crises. The key to preventing a downward spiral of the economy is to avoid a collapse in incomes of newly laid-off workers who won’t be able to afford what they normally purchase, and temporarily closed businesses which won’t be able to pay rents or other fixed costs, nor buy goods and services to trade.

It is likely that once a vaccine is delivered by science, or even before, the economic recovery will begin. Thus the question: what are the most equitable ways to handle this major short-term trauma?

There is an instrument that should be used to add to the size and efficacy of the necessary fiscal boost. Income contingent loans provide extra financial support without threatening future fiscal solvency.

Read more: Coronavirus supplement: your guide to the Australian payments that will go to the extra million on welfare

What are income contingent loans?

Most people in Australia would be familiar with our HECS (Higher Education Contribution Scheme) for tertiary education fees. Students take a loan from the government to cover the cost of their university now, and pay it back when they are earning over a certain threshold in the future.

In what was a world-first, Australia implemented this style of loan scheme in 1989 and it has now been copied in around ten other countries.

For those with a HECS debt, when incomes are low in certain periods, such as from unemployment, looking after an infant or caring for aged parents, no repayments are required at that time.

The government gets the money back later when the debtor’s financial situation has improved. This is known as an “income contingent loan”.

How could we use these loans for the COVID crisis?

It’s useful to distinguish three categories of financial stress that have emerged and which an income contingent loan could assist:

1) for individual employees recently, or soon to be, laid off

2) small businesses forced by health rules or insufficient trade to suspend activity

3) large businesses forced by health rules or insufficient trade to suspend activity.

Income contingent loans can be designed for all three cases although each is quite different.

1. Now jobless employees

For employees now jobless, a HECS-type system could take the form of the government providing a fixed payment (for example $5,000) per person. Some part of that payment would be required to be repaid according to existing (or new) HECS parameters.

Those people whose incomes do not recover repay nothing, or much less than those who regain their financial security (who would repay fairly quickly). The experience of 30 years of efficient HECS collection, including lessons learned, has shown us this would all be administratively straightforward.

Read more: Which jobs are most at risk from the coronavirus shutdown? 

2. Affected small businesses

In the case of an income-contingent loan for business, a different approach should be used, that doesn’t involve personal incomes. What is needed instead is a revenue-contingent loan – a system designed and promoted by Linda Botterill and Bruce Chapman nearly 20 years ago.

The reporting of business revenue is a quarterly legal requirement of business through the existing Business Activity Statement which is used to collect the GST. Unlike profits, revenue cannot legally be manipulated to suit the timing of repayments. The revenue-contingent loan obligation would be linked to the Australian Business Number.

In the case of a small business, the government could provide a loan, which would be capped at a level reflecting a firm’s capacity to repay when revenues recover. This could be a fixed amount (for example 25%) of the average of the past three years of annual revenue.

To minimise the chance of non-repayment, eligibility could be restricted to firms that have a good chance of future solvency as reflected, for example, in them having been around for a fixed number of years (for example three years).

The government would need to set a repayment rate, and past modelling has revealed small rates of say 5% to 8% of future annual revenues would be sufficient.

To make sure all this would be equitable for business and healthy for future budgets, the government would need to now model different loan amounts, and different collection and interest rates.

Modelling the different assumptions for budgetary planning would be required to be more precise about the policy details.

Read more: The real economic victims of coronavirus are those we can’t see

3. Bigger businesses

In the case of assistance for not-so-small business, the sums of money needed for the current situation necessitate the involvement of the banks in cooperation with the government.

Government is not equipped to take over large-scale commercial borrowing. But a revenue-contingent loan would still have an important role to play in such a partnership with commercial banks for current not-so-small financial borrowing needs.

The arrangement of joint bank and government lending would be the government providing a revenue-contingent loan which is a proportion of the bank loan. The government loan could repay the bank loan in the very short-term until business reopens and recovers.

A partnership of this kind would be ideal for business, which then has the capacity to repay the normal loan even when there is no short-term revenue coming in.

It would also be beneficial for the banks, which would then have far higher prospects of full loan recovery. It also provides a future return to the taxpayer for the government support of banks during these difficult economic times.

The provision of income contingent loans to individuals, and the revenue contingent loans for business, would have major potential to sustain the Australian economy during a sharp temporary downturn, while not putting additional pressure on future fiscal solvency. This is a bridge to a sustainable recovery.

The authors are fellows of the Academy of the Social Sciences Australia. However these views are their own and not representative of the Academy.

– ref. Give people and businesses money now they can pay back later (if and when they can) – https://theconversation.com/give-people-and-businesses-money-now-they-can-pay-back-later-if-and-when-they-can-134998

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

The federal government says there are signs the coronavirus curve may be flattening in Australia.

Scott Morrison told a Sunday news conference the rate of increase in cases had fallen to about 13-15% a day over the last few days, compared with 25-30% a day this time last week.

Health Minister Greg Hunt highlighted these numbers as “positive early signs of flattening of the curve”.

Hunt said there was much more work to do, but by people isolating and social distancing, “Australians are rising magnificently to this challenge”.

But Victoria’s chief health officer Brett Sutton tweeted on Saturday, after pictures of many people at the beach, “Some of the behaviour today – when we’re asking people to stay home – has been really crap.

“It’s hard to change habits and it’s hard to see dangers that aren’t apparent yet. But with 3,000 cases of COVID in Australia this week, we’re headed to 100,000 in 2-3 weeks without change.”

As debates rage about how the crisis should be handling on both the health and economic fronts, The Conversation has learned the Prime Minister’s office heard sharply conflicting views from two economists at a dinner in Parliament House’s private dining room on Tuesday March 17.

The economists were Henry Ergas, who previously worked at the OECD and has advised companies and governments, and Warwick McKibbin, professor of public policy at the Australian National University. Present were Scott Morrison’s chief of staff John Kunkel and senior bureaucrats.

The view Ergas presented was substantially the same as he wrote in the Australian on Friday when he warned of the dangers of going “too far” in trying to combat the spread of the virus.

He wrote: “Whatever governments do should preserve, to the greatest extent possible, the economy’s ability to rebound, including by limiting the debt that is loaded on to companies and individuals.

“Would such an approach save as many lives as a complete shutdown? Possibly not. However, if it could achieve two-thirds of the health objectives at one-third the costs, it would be reckless not to choose it”.

McKibbin argued the line of epidemiologists that it was best to try to stop the spread as fast and comprehensively as possible, with drastic measures.

He proposed companies and individuals should be supported with a system of contingent loans – like the student loan scheme – that would be paid back later via the tax system but only when the firm of individual passed, respectively, a certain cash flow or income level.

Morrison has repeatedly given equivalence to the health crisis and the economic crisis. The government will release within days its third package of economic support which will aim to put businesses into “hibernation” so they can restart later. Speculation has been that it will include a wage subsidy.

On Sunday Morrison appealed to employers to wait to see the package before doing anything.

“I would say to employers, who I know are going through very difficult times, these changes will be announced soon and I would ask that before you make any further decisions that you take the opportunity to see the further measures.”

Morrison said the next package would be “bigger than anything you have so far seen”. The last package was $66 billion.

It would “ensure that we are working together with companies to keep people connected to companies”.

The package would include support for those who had recently been the victims of closures.

In an open letter released on Sunday more than 100 Australians including economic, social and public policy experts, unionists, consultants, writers, business people and religious leaders, called for “a Liveable Income Guarantee” to protect people.

– ref. Government says Australia’s coronavirus curve may be flattening – https://theconversation.com/government-says-australias-coronavirus-curve-may-be-flattening-134997

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

Scott Morrison will unvieil on Sunday a $1.1 billion set of measures to make Medicare telehealth services generally available during the coronavirus pandemic and to support mental health, domestic violence and community services.

The “Medicare support at home” initiative will extend telehealth to the whole population. In the early stages of the pandemic, the government announced limited telehealth access.

The $669 million medical spending will also include extra incentives for doctors.

People will be able to get consultations from their homes via telephone or video conferencing for GP services, mental health treatment, chronic disease management, and a wide range of other services that do not require face-to-face contact

This will include after hours consultations and access to nurse practitioners.

The broad telehealth service limits the exposure of patients and health professionals to the coronavirus and will take pressure off hospitals and emergency departments, while supporting self-isolation and quarantine policies.

The GP bulk billing incentive is to be doubled for GPs and an incentive payment given, to ensure practices stay open for face-to-face services where patients cannot be treated through telehealth.

The new arrangements will run until September 30, when they will be reviewed.

The government is spending an initial $74 million to help with the mental health impact of the virus crisis.

The government’s digital health portal, Head to Health, will be a source of authoritative information on how to maintain good mental health during the pandemic and in self-isolation, and how to support children and others.

A national communications campaign will also provide guidance about mental wellbeing.

Money will go to bolstering the capacity of mental health support providers, who are experiencing an unprecedented surge in calls.

Health workers are to get dedicated mental health support.

To support people in aged care, who risk becoming socially isolated due to restrictions on visitors, funds will be provided to the Community Visitors Scheme, to train extra volunteers, who will connect with older people online and by telephone.

Funding will also go to assisting young people “stay on track” in their education and training, via the headspace digital work and study service and eheadspace.

For indigenous Australians, culturally appropriate mental health support will also receive funding.

An initial $150 million will go to supporting people experiencing domestic, family, and sexual violence due to the fallout from coronavirus.

Some $200 million will support charities and other community organisations that provide emergency and food relief as demand increases.

Vulnerable people will be helped with bills, food, clothing and other needs such as financial counselling through this community support package.

Scott Morrison said: “As we battle coronavirus on both the health and economic fronts with significant support packages in place and more to come, I am very aware many Australians are understandably anxious, stressed and fearful about the impacts of coronavirus and what it brings.

“This new support package will provide much needed care and help to so many Australians facing hardship”

Family and Social Services Minister Anne Ruston said given the unprecedented situation, emergency relief services would likely be relied on more heavily in coming months “than we have seen in our lifetimes.”

“Many people reaching out to these services may have never needed this type of assistance before,” she said.

– ref. All Australians will be able to access telehealth under new $1.1 billion coronavirus program – https://theconversation.com/all-australians-will-be-able-to-access-telehealth-under-new-1-1-billion-coronavirus-program-134987

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

All Australians arriving from overseas will be quarantined in hotels or other facilities under strict supervision for a fortnight, under the latest crackdown in the battle against the coronavirus.

Announcing the measure after Friday’s meeting of the national cabinet of federal and state leaders, Scott Morrison said people would be quarantined where they arrived, even if this was not their ultimate destination.

The current requirement has been for arrivals to self-isolate for two weeks.

The states will administer the quarantine and pay for it but the Australian Defence Force and Australian Border Force will assist, as the attempt to deal with imported cases tightens.

The ADF will bolster police efforts in visiting the homes of people who are in isolation and will report to local police on whether the person is at home.

But the ADF personnel will not have legal power to take action against people breaching conditions – that rests with state and territory police.

The ADF will be there “to put boots on the ground, to support [state authorities] in their enforcement efforts,” Morrison said.

Read more: Grattan on Friday: Which leaders and health experts will be on the right side of history on COVID-19 policy?

The government has made the move – starting from Saturday night – to strongly-supervised quarantine because incoming travellers present the highest risk.

Figures before the national cabinet showed about 85% of cases in Australia were overseas-acquired or locally acquired contacts of a confirmed case.

Numbers of people arriving in Australia are drastically down. For example on Thursday there were 7,120 arrivals at airports around the country. This compared with 48,725 a year ago.

Morrison also flagged a third economic assistance package – to be announced as early as Sunday or Monday – which would aim to have companies “hibernate” so they could recommence operations after the crisis has passed.

This “means on the other side, the employees come back, the opportunities come back, the economy comes back,” Morrison said.

“This will underpin our strategy as we go to the third tranche of our economic plan,” he said.

“That will include support by states and territories on managing the very difficult issue of commercial tenancies and also dealing ultimately with residential tenancies as well.”

States are now moving to tougher restrictions at different paces. NSW, where the situation is most serious, is closest to a more extensive form of shutdown, with Victoria not too far behind it.

Victorian premier Daniel Andrews repeated that Victoria would at some point move from the present stage two to “stage three”.

There is not public clarity at either federal or state level precisely how the next stage would operate.

Morrison rejected the language of lockdown. “I would actually caution. the media against using the word “lockdown”.

“I think it does create unnecessary anxiety. Because that is not an arrangement that is actually being considered in the way that term might suggest,” he said.

“We are battling this thing on two fronts and they are both important. We’re battling this virus with all the measures that we’re putting in place and we’re battling the economic crisis that has been caused as a result of the coronavirus.

“Both will take lives. Both will take livelihoods. And it’s incredibly important that we continue to focus on battling both of these enemies to Australia’s way of life.

“No decision that we’re taking on the health front that has these terrible economic impacts is being taken lightly. Every day someone is in a job, for just another day, is worth fighting for”, he said.

He said some businesses would have to close their doors and the government did not want them so saddled with debt, rent and other liabilities that they would not be able to reopen.

Morrison enthused about how Australians had responded to the tougher measures announced this week. “On behalf of all the premiers and chief ministers and myself, the members of the national cabinet, we simply want to say to you, Australia – thank you. Keep doing it. You’re saving lives and you’re saving livelihoods”.

Read more: Politics with Michelle Grattan: Nobel Laureate Professor Peter Doherty on the coronavirus crisis and the timeline for a vaccine

On schools, the states have now bypassed Morrison, who wanted children to keep attending them.

A statement from the national cabinet said: “We are now in a transition phase until the end of term as schools prepare for a new mode of operation following the school holidays.

“While the medical advice remains that it is safe for children to go to school, to assist with the transition underway in our schools to the new mode of operation we ask that only children of workers for whom no suitable care arrangements are available at home to support their learning, physically attend school.”

– ref. Hotel quarantine for returning Aussies and “hibernation” assistance for businesses – https://theconversation.com/hotel-quarantine-for-returning-aussies-and-hibernation-assistance-for-businesses-134922

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jon MacKay, Lecturer, Business Analytics, University of Auckland

New Zealand and much of the world is now under an unprecedented lockdown. Public health experts say this is the best way to suppress the spread of the virus. But how long will such a lockdown be socially sustainable?

As someone who’s worked in the mobile device software industry and now lectures on business analytics at the University of Auckland, I’d argue technology could play a bigger role in ensuring more New Zealanders stay home to save lives.

Data analytics, based on our mobile phone usage, would allow us to provide a mixture of incentives and gentle nudges to do the right thing, while also supplying crucial information for health researchers.

But using mobile phone data can be a threat to personal privacy: critics rightly warn that once tracking systems are put in place, those in power have little incentive to remove them. While we need to act quickly to stop the virus spread, we also need to respect personal privacy.

So what more could New Zealand be doing to use our phones and our love of the internet to fight COVID-19?

Read more: As NZ goes into lockdown, authorities have new powers to make sure people obey the rules

Using big data for the greater good

Different nations have chosen different models to fight coronavirus – and some of those approaches clash with our values in New Zealand.

While some point to the success of China’s lockdown of Wuhan as a model of how to stamp out transmission, the scenes of people literally welded inside their apartment buildings shouldn’t be forgotten. Clearly, that is not what we want our society to look like.

But the social problem we face in New Zealand now is a classical liberal dilemma: pitting individual rights to free movement and privacy against those of the community. Right now, given the scale and severity of COVID-19, it is currently the right choice to prioritise community health and safety over individual rights.

That means some of our normal concerns about digital privacy may have to be temporarily overridden in favour of a greater good. However, we must remain true to our liberal traditions and continue to try to balance individual and community rights.

What New Zealand can learn from overseas

Europe has strong privacy laws but has also endorsed the use of personal data in a limited set of circumstances to fight the spread of the virus.

While the United States and Europe struggle with containment, Singapore seems to have escaped some of the worst effects of the virus. Tracking information voluntarily provided by a contact tracing app on mobile phones has made it possible to find people who have been in contact with infected people.

Other nations are beginning to implement similar solutions but valid concerns about privacy remain.

Tracking applications on phones or using the data mobile network operators collect could allow authorities to trace the prior movements of people found to be infected, and test those they came into contact with. Israel has implemented a system designed to protect user privacy.

Crucially, both Singapore and Israel have committed to making their software freely available through copyright-free, open-source licences. This means software developers wouldn’t have to start from scratch in implementing similar solutions here in New Zealand.

Read more: Why Singapore’s coronavirus response worked – and what we can all learn

Safeguards and time limits on digital surveillance

We can and should take advantage of this opportunity. Until recently, the adoption of such tools for surveillance would be unprecedented and concerning for many, myself included. Before the crisis, tech companies’ use of big data to monitor and track people’s everyday habits was increasingly coming under scrutiny by legislators across the globe.

To gain acceptance, the public needs to have confidence that more intrusive data collection is necessary for public health, that it will not have negative effects for them or enrich others at their expense, and that it will be shut down after the crisis.

Any system implemented in New Zealand needs to have a clear end date, with public reporting and independent oversight. For instance, that public reporting could be done via the new cross-party committee led by opposition leader Simon Bridges, which is scrutinising the government’s response to COVID-19. Once the crisis is over, the program needs to be shut down.

What kind of tracking and targeted public health prompts might be possible in New Zealand?

Mobile phone companies can use standard GPS and triangulation between phone towers to track your location when you’re out. One possible idea would be for mobile phone network providers to use their real-time data to text message people who appear to be a long way from home – in breach of the level 4 lockdown rules, unless you’re working for an essential business.

These automated messages would be sent by an algorithm if certain criteria were met, and could remind people of lockdown rules and let them know their choices have consequences for others.

It appears that New Zealand is already exploring how it can use software in these kinds of ways. As Stuff has reported, the director-general of health has been holding early talks with the private sector – including software developers and mobile network operators – about using technology in the fight against COVID-19.

Read more: Privacy vs pandemic: government tracking of mobile phones could be a potent weapon against COVID-19

Free data, discounted internet: ideas to keep people home

Incentives could also encourage New Zealanders to follow social distancing rules.

Modern analytics allow us to target incentives at specific individuals or groups deemed to be at higher risk of flouting the level 4 rules. One idea worth considering would be paying internet and mobile service providers to offer discounts or other incentives for people staying home: such as free mobile data at home for those who don’t have wifi, subsidised internet for those working or studying from home, or game subscriptions or access to online classes.

Such incentives would likely be paid for out of the public purse. But targeted analytics could minimise costs while maximising the health benefits for us all – potentially ending New Zealand’s lockdown sooner.

These types of policies could also have positive economic effects. For instance, at a time when some of those households might have difficulty paying internet or phone bills, such incentives could enable some lower-income people to stay employed by having more opportunities to work from home, or provide children without current internet access at home with the ability to keep learning while schools are closed.

These are just a few ideas that could be effective. The difference between ideas such as these and those employed by surveillance states is that they use analytics to nudge people to make better choices, rather than relying solely on policing people in a heavy-handed manner.

– ref. Tracking your location and targeted texts: how sharing your data could help in New Zealand’s level 4 lockdown – https://theconversation.com/tracking-your-location-and-targeted-texts-how-sharing-your-data-could-help-in-new-zealands-level-4-lockdown-134894

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Allen Cheng, Professor in Infectious Diseases Epidemiology, Monash University

According to Google Trends, the top globally trending topic this week is “orthohantavirus”, as spurious sites claim it’s the next pandemic on the horizon.

Take it from me: it’s not.

This baseless claim circulating online underscores the need to get health information from reputable sources – and that you shouldn’t believe everything you read on social media.

What is orthohantavirus?

“Orthohantavirus” – commonly known as hantavirus – is a very, very rare virus. There have never been confirmed human cases in Australia. The last two reported confirmed cases worldwide were in January in Bolivia and Argentina.

It is in a class of diseases called zoonoses, meaning it is a virus transmitted from animals to human. In this case, the animal in question is rodents (usually rats). Hantaviruses can cause severe disease, including bleeding and kidney failure.

Read more: Health Check: what bugs can you catch from your pets?

How does hantavirus spread?

According to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), hantavirus is spread from several species of rodents in their urine, droppings, and saliva. It is thought that transmission occurs when they breathe in air contaminated with the virus.

CDC also reports:

• if a rodent with the virus bites someone, the virus may be spread to that person, but this type of transmission is rare;
• scientists believe that people may be able to get the virus if they touch something that has been contaminated with rodent urine, droppings, or saliva, and then touch their nose or mouth;
• scientists also suspect people can become sick if they eat food contaminated by urine, droppings, or saliva from an infected rodent.

How worried should I be about hantavirus?

Not very. In general, infectious disease specialists do worry about zoonoses – the coronavirus that causes COVID-19 and Ebola are both important recent examples of animal-associated diseases that have crossed the species barrier.

Hantavirus, however, is not thought to be a big threat at the moment.

There’s certainly no chatter among infectious disease physicians about hantavirus right now. I’m not seeing anything concerning about it on any of my researcher networks and mailing lists that warn about virus outbreaks.

There was a recent report of a single case in China but there’s no indication of any sort of spread.

I think, for now, let’s concentrate on the pandemic we have – which is coronavirus and also the annual influenza season – rather than worry about uncommon viruses.

However, this coronavirus outbreak and everything that’s come before reinforces that we need early warning systems to work out what’s out there that could be threatening.

Yes, it is true that animals carry a lot of viruses but very few come across to humans.

Hantavirus is certainly not one we are particularly concerned about right now.

Read more: How does coronavirus kill?

– ref. What is orthohantavirus? The virus many are Googling (but you really don’t need to worry about) – https://theconversation.com/what-is-orthohantavirus-the-virus-many-are-googling-but-you-really-dont-need-to-worry-about-134901

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Erica Mealy, Lecturer in Computer Science, University of the Sunshine Coast

These past few weeks have shown the brittleness of Australia’s online systems. It’s not surprising the federal government’s traditionally slow-moving IT systems are buckling under the pressure.

On Sunday, the federal government announced it would double unemployment benefits as part of its coronavirus rescue package. But when MyGov’s online services crashed, thousands of desperate Australians felt compelled to disobey social distancing rules – forming long queues outside Centrelink offices across the country.

With widespread school and university closures, IT services are now the contingency plan of the education sector. For many, they’re the main means of interacting with the outside world.

Unfortunately, these services are only as good as their design. And unless designers prepare for extreme circumstances such as this pandemic, they’re destined to fail.

MyGov’s failure outlined

This week, Australia’s welfare system ground to a halt as thousands of people anxiously tried to register for promised federal government support.

According to the 2016 census, the number of Australians working in hospitality makes up 6.9% of the population. Thus, we can estimate about 1.75 million people were affected by sector-wide hospitality service closures.

Economists estimate additional coronavirus measures to #flattenthecurve could see the unemployment rate double to over 11%. This would represent 2.8 million Australians – more than 22 times the number of users MyGov can support at any one time.

Read more: The internet is surprisingly fragile, crashes thousands of times a year, and no one is making it stronger

As of Sunday evening, the online government portal (which people were directed to to access additional welfare) was able to cope with about 6,000 people at one time. This is a mere 0.3% of the expected number of Australians affected.

By mid-Monday, the amount of users MyGov could support increased to 55,000 or 3.1% of those affected. By Tuesday, this figure rose to 123,000 users, or 7.5%.

But why was the system poorly provisioned?

Having a large number of users access an online portal at once has many costs. Maintaining computer servers that allow this much load is expensive for any business, let alone a government facing the threat of an economic crisis.

The IT industry has solved this problem through cloud computing. This involves having a set of computers owned by companies such as Amazon or Google, and “renting” their storage and processing power as needed.

To understand this, think of Elton John on tour. He doesn’t own stadiums in every city. When he needs to perform, he leases them as needed. He also selects a venue of the appropriate size, as needed.

The same concept applies in computing. The IT industry now has the capacity to rent appropriately-sized computing resources as needed. Furthermore, systems can be designed to automatically increase leased storage and processing power when required. This is called “elastic computing”.

Read more: Why we need to improve cloud computing’s security

Had MyGov and Centerlink used elastic computing, the failures this week could have been prevented. Even the government’s Secure Cloud Strategy doesn’t mention using or supporting elastic computing strategies. This is despite last year’s announcement that the Amazon AWS cloud, which supports elastic computing, is the Australian government’s cloud computing provider.

Denial of service attacks

In 2016, the federal government showed exactly how poorly they understand users’ needs. The online census was, in simple words, disastrous. Many people were unable to login to complete it, and from those who were, many had their session fail and logout prematurely.

But what caused #censusfail?

The system designers failed to anticipate everyone would login at once, on the same night. The number of users competing for access at one time (allowing for different time zones across the country) was up to a quarter of the population. Given Australia has about 25.4 million people, this means about 6.3 million people were trying to complete the census at the same time.

The system was not designed to cope. In computing, when a computer has more users than it can service, we call this a Denial of Service (DoS) attack. And a Denial of Service attack that comes from multiple devices is called a Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attack. This is the mechanism many hackers use to prevent online systems from functioning properly.

Services Minister Stuart Robert blamed the recent MyGov crash on a targeted Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attack, rather than the website’s inability to handle the amount of people seeking access. He later redacted his claim, saying: “DDoS alarms showed no evidence of a specific attack”.

Read more: Hacked by your fridge: the Internet of Things could spark a new wave of cyber attacks

Not too late to fix it

It was obvious well before Sunday that additional social welfare would be required when COVID-19 left thousands unemployed. The government had no excuse for not organising additional computing resources. Services Australia, co-owner of the MyGov and Centerlink systems, should have increased the number of allowable users on the website at one time before this need became a national issue.

In terms of security, cloud computing providers arguably have better cybersecurity records than our federal government.

Until the government adopts elastic computing strategies, essential online services will keep failing under pressure. If events from earlier this week were any indication, it’s safe to say this transition would be better late than never.

– ref. MyGov’s ill-timed meltdown could have been avoided with ‘elastic computing’ – https://theconversation.com/mygovs-ill-timed-meltdown-could-have-been-avoided-with-elastic-computing-134665

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Arindam Basu, Associate Professor, Epidemiology and Environmental Health, University of Canterbury

The number of New Zealanders testing positive for COVID-19 will continue to rise despite the strict conditions of the four-week lockdown that began this week.

As of today, there are 368 cases in New Zealand, up from 39 recorded a week ago, and just over three weeks after the first case was reported on March 3.

The question now is how long it will take before we see numbers going down again. We can draw on the experiences of other countries such as China, which imposed a lockdown on Hubei province on January 23, 2020.

As this graph shows, the number of confirmed cases only reached a plateau at the beginning of March, suggesting that it takes a little over a month for a strict lockdown to take effect.

How lockdown works and why we must be patient

The virus is now spreading within the community in New Zealand. Testing is focused on people who are likely to have contracted COVID-19, which means there are a lot more people with the infection in the community than the number of cases reported.

The disease spreads exponentially and, with limited testing capacity, this difference gets larger each day. This is why the lockdown conditions are so strict.

Read more: Social distancing can make you lonely. Here’s how to stay connected when you’re in lockdown

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has encouraged everyone to act as if they have COVID-19 and to stay within their own “bubble” at home.

Staying at home is essential. It’s a simple but highly effective way to constrain the virus. It denies it a place to go and will help give our healthcare system a fighting chance.

Even if somebody within a home develops the illness, the virus will be limited to the group of people there and won’t be able to spread any further. By isolating individuals and confining communities, a lockdown effectively disrupts the chains of people-to-people transmission the virus needs to sustain itself.

Read more: We know how long coronavirus survives on surfaces. Here’s what it means for handling money, food and more

If we delay breaking the chain of transmission, the gap between actual and reported cases will get larger.

The graph above shows what happened in China in terms of new cases of coronavirus before and after they locked down their cities. The longer, darker bars show the number of cases at the time of onset of symptoms, and the orange bars represent cases that were found by testing people. The underlying case counts start dropping immediately after lockdown, and then the reported counts follow suit.

This means that in New Zealand, we may see the numbers surge before they drop, but based on what we’ve learned from the outbreak in China, we will bring COVID-19 infections down faster the more resolutely the lockdown continues.

This is why we should remain optimistic and patient, and do the best we can to “fast track” the drop in actual cases, which will eventually bring down reported cases as well.

– ref. Why New Zealand’s coronavirus cases will keep rising for weeks, even in level 4 lockdown – https://theconversation.com/why-new-zealands-coronavirus-cases-will-keep-rising-for-weeks-even-in-level-4-lockdown-134774

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Fiona MacDonald, Senior Research Fellow, Victoria University

For children, school is about more than just learning. This is even more the case for children living in disadvantage as many schools also provide vital food and a welcoming environment.

As the COVID-19 pandemic spreads across the world, many schools are closing and fewer children are attending. In term two, it seems, most Australian schools will be moving online.

We must consider how to replicate the physical, nurturing environments of schools for children living in poverty.

Breakfast clubs at school

As many as one in five children in Australia start the school day without eating breakfast. About 15% arrive at school without lunch, or the money to buy it at the canteen.

It’s hard to know exactly who hasn’t eaten since these children look the same as any other student, and often don’t admit to being hungry to avoid feelings of shame. But hunger affects a child’s ability to learn and the impact can be lifelong.

Adequate nutrition is important for childhood learning and development. Research shows children who have access to breakfast at school have improved concentration, engagement, focus and academic outcomes compared to those who don’t.

Many schools across Australia have set up breakfast clubs, or have emergency food and lunches for children who might otherwise go hungry. These programs are not consistent across Australia though, with some funded by schools, and others through food agencies or state governments.

Read more: What happens when kids don’t eat breakfast?

The Victorian government, for instance, spent A$13.7 million on breakfast clubs from 2016 to 2019. As a result, students in around 500 of Victoria’s most disadvantaged primary schools have had access to nutritious food.

The Victorian government committed a further $58 million to expand the program to 1,000 schools in the state from 2019 to 2023, providing free lunches and holiday food supplies to many schools that never had them before.

Other examples include the NSW government’s commitment of $8 million in June 2019 to expand their School Breakfast 4 Health program to an additional 500 schools in NSW and the ACT.

More than just food and nutrition

But breakfast clubs are about more than just nutrition. They provide opportunities for schools to engage with children and develop relationships that help students achieve a sense of connection.

They are about creating nurturing and caring spaces for children and making them feel safe and welcome, even before they start their school day.

As one student said about their school’s breakfast program:

The people there are really nice as well. The workers, and the kids. You can make friendships, you can talk to friends, chat, talk about things.

Schools are ideally placed to run breakfast clubs and other food programs when they are open, but how equipped are they to continue these programs when schools close, or parents – many of whom act as program volunteers – keep their children at home?

Expanding a program that provides food supply packs to homes should be feasible with the level of funding committed by some state governments, such as Victoria’s.

However, it is yet to be seen if a door-drop delivery of food packs conveys the same level of connection, nurturing and care for a child as we all adjust to new ways of social engagement.

The dedicated coordinators and volunteers of breakfast clubs would undoubtedly be keen to keep them running, but there are challenges:

• not all children will have access to technology at home, to an iPad or computer, to internet access, or to parents who are able to troubleshoot connection issues

• not every child will get out of bed to join a virtual breakfast at 8.30

• daily routines may no longer follow the structure of a normal school day

• not all children will be motivated by welcoming and nurturing environments online

• safe and welcoming environments may not be able to be replicated online, when children would now be located in the physical spaces that perpetuate their disadvantage.

One of the greatest challenges of COVID-19 is managing the gap between advantage and disadvantage. This example is about school breakfasts, but there are many other programs and services run by schools that seek to address the impact of disadvantage such as the Kids Hope and Future Foundations art program.

Read more: Schools are moving online, but not all children start out digitally equal

Achieving a sense belonging at schools is acknowledged as a key protective factor for children’s health, education, social and emotional development and well-being.

How we maintain that, and keep children who are living with disadvantage engaged and connected throughout – and in the aftermath of – COVID-19, is vital to ensuring this period in a child’s learning and development does not further perpetuate their disadvantage.

– ref. Schools provide food for many hungry children. This needs to continue when classes go online – https://theconversation.com/schools-provide-food-for-many-hungry-children-this-needs-to-continue-when-classes-go-online-134384

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tony Walker, Adjunct Professor, School of Communications, La Trobe University

Leaders of the world’s largest economies came together at a virtual G20 this week to “do whatever it takes to overcome the coronavirus pandemic”. But the reality is that global capacity to deal with the greatest challenge to international well-being since the second world war is both limited and fractured.

A G20 statement at the end of a 90-minute hookup of world leaders said the right things about avoiding supply-chain disruptions in the shipment of medical supplies, and their agreement to inject A$8.2trillion into the global economy.

Read more: ‘Where no counsel is, the people fall’: why parliaments should keep functioning during the coronavirus crisis

By all accounts, interactions between the various players were more constructive than previous such gatherings in the Donald Trump era.

However, emollient words in the official statement, in which the leaders pledged a “common front against this common threat”, could not disguise deep divisions between the various players.

The US and China might have acknowledged the need for coordinated action to deal with the pandemic and its economic consequences, but this hardly obscures the rift between the world’s largest economies.

While Trump says he and Chinese President Xi Jinping have a good relationship, the fact remains Washington and Beijing are at loggerheads over a range of issues that are not easily resolved.

These include trade in all its dimensions. And central to that is a technology “arms race”.

Then there is Trump’s persistent – and deliberately provocative – reference to a “Chinese virus”. Beijing has strongly objected to this characterisation.

Overriding all of this is China’s quest for global leadership in competition with the US and its allies. The US and its friends see this quest as both relentless and disruptive.

In its response to the coronavirus pandemic, which originated in China’s Hubei province, Beijing has sought to overcome world disapproval of its initial efforts to cover up the contagion by stepping up its diplomatic efforts.

In this we might contrast China’s approach with that of the Trump administration, which continues to emphasise an inward-looking “America first” mindset.

These nativist impulses have been reinforced by a realisation of America’s dependence on Chinese supply chains. The US imports a staggering 90% of its antibiotics from China, including penicillin. America stopped manufacturing penicillin in 2004.

In remarks to pharmaceutical executives earlier this month, Trump said dependence on Chinese pharmaceutical supply chains reinforced the

importance of bringing all of that manufacturing back to America.

Tepid American support for international institutions like the United Nations and its agencies, including, principally, the World Health Organisation, is not helpful in present circumstances.

Trump’s verbal onslaught against “globalism” in speeches to the UN has undermined confidence in the world body and called into question American support for multilateral responses to global crises.

Ragged responses to the coronavirus pandemic are a reminder of the dangers inherent in a world in which global leadership has withered.

In Europe, leaders spent most of Thursday arguing over whether a joint communique would hint at financial burden-sharing to repair the damage to their economies.

Germany and the Netherlands are resisting pressures to contribute to a “coronabonds” bailout fund to help countries like Italy and Spain, hardest hit by the pandemic.

This reluctance comes despite a warning from European Central Bank president Christine Lagarde that the continent is facing a crisis of “epic” proportions.

Resistance to a push by European leaders, led by France’s Emmanuel Macron, to collectively underwrite debt obligations risks fracturing the union.

These sorts of geopolitical tensions are inevitable if the pandemic continues to spread and, in the process, exerts pressures on the developed world to do more to help both its own citizens and those less fortunate.

Read more: In the wake of bushfires and coronavirus, it’s time we talked about human security

In an alarming assessment of the risks of contagion across conflict zones, the International Crisis Group (ICG) identifies teeming refugee camps in war-ravaged northern Syria and Yemen as areas of particular concern.

In both cases, medical assistance is rudimentary, to say the least, so the coronavirus would not be containable if it were to get a grip.

In its bleak assessment, the ICG says:

The global outbreak has the potential to wreak havoc in fragile states, trigger widespread unrest and severely test international crisis management systems. Its implications are especially serious for those caught in the midst of conflict if, as seems likely, the disease disrupts humanitarian aid flows, limits peace operations and postpones ongoing efforts at diplomacy.

In all of this, globalisation as a driver of global growth is in retreat at the very moment when the world would be better served by a “globalised” response to a health and economic crisis.

These challenges are likely to far exceed the ability of the richest countries to respond to a global health emergency.

The disbursement of A$8.2trillion to stabilise the global economy will likely come to be regarded as a drop in the bucket when the full dimensions of a global pandemic become apparent.

In the past day or so the United States became the country hardest hit by coronavirus, surpassing China and Italy.

Medical experts contend the spread of coronavirus in the US will not peak for several weeks. This is the reality Trump appears to have trouble grasping.

Leaving aside the response of countries like the US, China, Italy, Spain and South Korea, whose health systems have enabled a relatively sophisticated response to the virus, there are real and legitimate concerns about countries whose healthcare capabilities would quickly become overburdened.

In this category are countries like Pakistan, India, Indonesia and Bangladesh, which is housing some 1 million Rohingya refugees.

Questions that immediately arise following the “virtual” leaders’ summit are:

• How would the world cope with a raging pandemic that is wiping out tens of thousands in places like Syria and Yemen?

• What body will coordinate the $8.2trillion to stabilise the global economy?

• What role will the International Monetary Fund play in this rescue effort?

• What additional resources might be allocated to the World Health Organisation to coordinate a global effort to withstand a health tsunami?

The short answer to these questions is that the world is less well-equipped to deal with a crisis of these dimensions than it might have been if global institutions were not under siege, as they are.

The present situation compares unfavourably with the G20 responses to the Global Financial Crisis of 2008/9. Then, American leadership proved crucial.

In this latest crisis, no such unified global leadership has yet emerged.

The further splintering of an international consensus and retreat from a globalising world as individual states look out for themselves may well prove one of the enduring consequences of the coronavirus pandemic. This would be to no-one’s particular advantage, least of all the vulnerable.

– ref. Coronavirus shines a light on fractured global politics at a time when cohesion and leadership are vital – https://theconversation.com/coronavirus-shines-a-light-on-fractured-global-politics-at-a-time-when-cohesion-and-leadership-are-vital-134666

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nicole Lee, Professor at the National Drug Research Institute (Melbourne), Curtin University

Bottle shops remain on the list of essential services allowed to stay open and Australians are stocking up on alcohol.

In these difficult times, it’s not surprising some people are looking to alcohol for a little stress reduction. But there are healthier ways of coping with the challenges we currently face.

Why do we drink more in a crisis?

People who feel stressed tend to drink more than people who are less stressed. In fact, we often see increases in people’s alcohol consumption after catastrophes and natural disasters.

Although alcohol initially helps us relax, after drinking, you can feel even more anxious. Alcohol releases chemicals in the brain that block anxiety. But our brain likes to be in balance. So after drinking, it reduces the amount of these chemicals to try to get back into pre-drinking balance, increasing feelings of anxiety.

People may also be drinking more alcohol to relieve the boredom that may come with staying at home without much to do.

What happens when we drink more?

Alcohol affects your ability to fight disease

Alcohol impacts the immune system, increasing the risk of illness and infections.

Although the coronavirus is too new for us to know its exact interaction with alcohol, we know from other virus outbreaks drinking affects how your immune system works, making us more susceptible to virus infection.

So, if you have the coronavirus, or are at risk of contracting it, you should limit your alcohol intake to give your immune system the best chance of fighting it off. The same applies if you have influenza or the common cold this winter.

Alcohol affects your mood

Drinking can affect your mood, making you prone to symptoms of depression and anxiety.

This is because alcohol has a depressant effect on your central nervous system. But when you stop drinking and the level of alcohol in your blood returns to zero, your nervous system becomes overactive. That can leave you feeling agitated.

Read more: Coronavirus is stressful. Here are some ways to cope with the anxiety

Alcohol affects your sleep

Alcohol can disrupt sleep. You may fall asleep more quickly from the sedating effects of alcohol, but as your body processes alcohol, the sedative effects wear off.

You might wake up through the night and find it hard to fall back to sleep (not to mention the potential for snoring or extra nocturnal bathroom trips).

The next day, you can be left feeling increasingly anxious, which can kickstart the process all over again.

Read more: Can’t sleep and feeling anxious about coronavirus? You’re not alone

Alcohol affects your thoughts and feelings

Alcohol reduces our capacity to monitor and regulate our thoughts and feelings.

Once we start drinking, it’s hard to know when we’re relaxed enough. After one or two drinks, it’s easy to think “another won’t hurt”, “I deserve it”, or “I’ve had a huge day managing the kids and working from home, so why not?”.

But by increasing alcohol consumption over time, eventually it takes more alcohol to get to the same point of relaxation. Developing this kind of tolerance to alcohol can lead to dependence.

Alcohol ties up the health system

Alcohol related problems also take up a lot of health resources, including ambulances and emergency departments. People have more accidents when they are drinking. And drinking can increase the risk of domestic and family violence.

So an increase in drinking risks unnecessarily tying up emergency services and hospitals, which are needed to respond to the coronavirus.

Read more: Alcohol leads to more violence than other drugs, but you’d never know from the headlines

How to manage your alcohol consumption

Don’t stock up on alcohol. The more you have in the house, the more likely you are to drink. Increased access to alcohol also increases the risk of young people drinking.

Monitor your drinking. If you are getting on board with the new virtual happy hour trend, the same rules apply if you were at your favourite bar.

Read more: Cap your alcohol at 10 drinks a week: new draft guidelines

Try to stay within the draft Australian guidelines of no more than four standard drinks in any one day and no more than ten a week.

Monitor your thinking. It’s easy to think “What does it matter if I have an extra one or two?”. Any changes to your drinking habits now can become a pattern in the future.

How to manage stress without alcohol

If you are feeling anxious, stressed, down or bored, you’re not alone. But there are other healthier ways to manage those feelings.

If you catch yourself worrying, try to remind yourself this is a temporary situation. Do some mindfulness meditation or slow your breathing, distract yourself with something enjoyable, or practise gratitude.

Read more: How to stay fit and active at home during the coronavirus self-isolation

Get as much exercise as you can. Exercise releases brain chemicals that make you feel good. Even if you can’t get into your normal exercise routine, go outside for a walk or run. Walk to your local shops to pick up supplies instead of driving.

Maintain a good diet. We know good nutrition is important to maintain good mental health.

Try to get as much sleep as you can. Worry can disrupt sleep and lack of sleep can worsen mental health.

Build in pleasant activities to your day. Even if you can’t do the usual activities that bring a smile to your face, think about some new things you might enjoy and make sure you do one of those things every day.

Read more: Coronavirus: tiny moments of pleasure really can help us through this stressful time

Remember, change doesn’t have to be negative. Novelty activates the dopamine system, our pleasure centre, so it’s a great time to try something new.

So enjoy a drink or two, but try not to go overboard and monitor your stress levels to give you the best chance to stay healthy.

If you are trying to manage your drinking, Hello Sunday Morning offers a free online community of more than 100,000 like-minded people. You can connect and chat with others actively managing their alcohol consumption.

If you’d like to talk to someone about your drinking call the National Alcohol and Other Drug Hotline on 1800 250 015. It’s a free call from anywhere in Australia. Or talk to your GP.

– ref. Coronavirus: it’s tempting to drink your worries away but there are healthier ways to manage stress and keep your drinking in check – https://theconversation.com/coronavirus-its-tempting-to-drink-your-worries-away-but-there-are-healthier-ways-to-manage-stress-and-keep-your-drinking-in-check-134669

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Julie Sonnemann, Fellow, Grattan Institute

Australian schools and teachers are preparing to shift classes online – some independent schools already have. Remote learning is likely to be the norm in the second term and possibly longer.

Even if done well, there are still likely to be learning losses.

Rigorous US studies of online charter schools show students learn less than similar peers in traditional face-to-face schools.

This makes sense, because learning is a social activity. The evidence shows positive effects are stronger where technology is a supplement for teaching, rather than a significant replacement – the situation we face now.

Our disadvantaged students will be hardest hit. Children from poorer households do worse at online learning for a host of reasons; they have less internet access, fewer technological devices, poorer home learning environments and less help from their parents when they get stuck.

Students who are struggling academically are at risk too. Asking students to independently work through large parts of the curriculum online can create extra stresses as it requires them to regulate their own learning pace. Many struggle with this, especially students who are already behind.

Read more: Schools are moving online, but not all children start out digitally equal

To be clear, this is not an argument against online learning. Digital learning offers much potential for schools and students. Several online programs, including digital games, simulations, and computer-aided tutoring show positive results when used to support to learning.

But the success of online initiatives relies on preparation and good implementation. A rapid-fire response to shift teaching online to large populations during a pandemic is unlikely to produce above-average results.

So what should the government do post-COVID-19 when school re-opens to help students bounce back?

Catch-up programs

Many students are likely to be behind, and some will be very far behind. If schools are closed for all of term two, and possibly term three, many students will have a lot to catch up on to move up a grade in 2021. What lies ahead is a difficult and unprecedented situation for our educators.

Governments and schools have several options. Getting struggling students to repeat a year shouldn’t be one of them, unless school closures go much longer than expected. Evidence shows repeating a year is one of the few educational interventions that harms a student academically. Those who repeat a year can become unmotivated, have less self-esteem, miss school and complete homework less often.

A better option is for educators to conduct intensive tuition for small groups, before or after the normal school day. These sessions could be targeted at the most disadvantaged and struggling students in groups of two to five students.

Evidence generally shows the smaller the tuition group, the bigger the effects. One-on-one tutoring has the largest effects in most cases, but given it is more expensive, small group tuition could be tried as a first step.

Read more: Trying to homeschool because of coronavirus? Here are 5 tips to help your child learn

Another option is intensive face-to-face academic programs delivered over a few weeks. These could be similar to what Americans call “summer school” programs, but with a stronger academic focus and targeted at struggling students.

In Australia, these could be run in the week prior to schools re-opening, or over the term three or term four holidays. US evidence shows students who attend summer school programs can gain two months of extra learning progress compared to similar students who do not.

The impacts of summer programs are larger when academically focused and delivered intensively with small group tuition by experienced teachers.

Of course, teachers can also do more during regular face-to-face school lessons to help kids catch up, and the current crises may create extra focus on what teaching practices and programs work best. But given the likely size of the challenge, additional catch-up measures will still be needed.

The costs would flow back into economy

The costs of these sorts of catch-up programs are significant, but affordable. For example, we calculate providing small-group tuition for half of the students across Australia would cost about A$900 million. This is based on groups of three students receiving 30 minutes of tuition, five times a week, for two full terms, at a cost of $460 per student.

Conducting a three-week intensive summer school for say 800,000 disadvantaged students across Australia would cost about $800 million, assuming a cost of $1,000 per student based on US and UK experiences.

These are not big sums in the scheme of the economic stimulus and rescue package spending for COVID-19. If new catch-up programs cost, let’s say, between $2-4 billion, that is only 3-6% of the federal government’s stimulus measures announced to date.

Read more: COVID-19: what closing schools and childcare centres would mean for parents and casual staff

And the money for summer schools and small group tuition would flow to extra salaries for teachers, providing financial stimulus at a time when the economy really needs it.

No doubt schools and teachers will do their best to continue student learning while schools are closed. And through this process we will also learn a lot about how to do online learning for large populations, and improve along the way.

But despite best efforts, we should prepare for learning losses and plan for catch-up programs.

– ref. Kids shouldn’t have to repeat a year of school because of coronavirus. There are much better options – https://theconversation.com/kids-shouldnt-have-to-repeat-a-year-of-school-because-of-coronavirus-there-are-much-better-options-134889

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dilan Thampapillai, Senior Lecturer, ANU College of Law, Australian National University

The coronavirus and its attendant emergency measures are set to deliver a profound shock to the residential tenancy market.

How it will work out is anybody’s guess, but it is looking like a crisis.

Banks and governments have acted quickly.

The major banks are deferring mortgage payments for up to six months for customers whose income is hit by the coronavirus.

NSW and Tasmania have introduced bills that will make it difficult for landlords to evict tenants or terminate leases during the crisis.

The rushed laws are designed to prevent a raft of evictions and a spike in homelessness, but they raise almost as many questions as they answer.

Rent postponed rather than forgiven

Both laws put power in the hands of the minister, giving that person the power to make regulations during the coronavirus pandemic. Tasmania’s more closely prescribes what the minister can do.

And both are temporary. The NSW act has effect for six months and the Tasmanian bill for 120 days, although it can be extended by 90 days.

Neither law excuses tenants from their liability to pay rent. They merely prevent evictions during the emergency period.

Read more: Why housing evictions must be suspended to defend us against coronavirus

In effect they say that although tenants can stay, their landlords can later sue them for arrears.

While on paper, this suggests landlords will get their money, in practice they might not, and some will be tempted to issue notices of termination ahead of the minister taking action.

The minister’s regulations would most likely be prospective, meaning landlords would seem to be able to get away with it. But whether a tribunal would enforce the notices is another question.

The Tasmanian bill only permits landlords to apply for terminations where the landlord is in hardship. The NSW law has less detail, but would probably do the same.

Read more: Lessons from the Great Depression: how to prevent evictions in an economic crisis

In any event, most landlords who evicted would want to re-let, and that will prove difficult with inspections prohibited.

Sick tenants are unlikely to be evicted whatever the law. That is in nobody’s interests.

Cooperation in a crisis is desirable, but it is fraught in practice.

The law discourages communication

Representations made by landlords with the best of intentions can become binding under the equitable law of estoppel.

In essence, once landlords make representations they can be estopped (stopped) from going back on those representations.

In an environment where fortunes change quickly, this might become problematic.

Contract law is replete with cases of agreements varied or entered into with the best of intentions that ultimately turn sour.

Read more: The case for a rent holiday for businesses on the coronavirus economic frontline

Given there are tough and uncertain times ahead, a better approach than rushed laws might be a pragmatic one of exhorting both landlords and tenants to take the legitimate interests of each other into account.

If laws are to be made, there ought to be extensive consultation.

Even in the coronavirus pandemic this is doable and a good idea.

– ref. Rushed coronavirus tenancy laws raise as many questions as they answer – https://theconversation.com/rushed-coronavirus-tenancy-laws-raise-as-many-questions-as-they-answer-134781

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Katherine Gibney, NHMRC early career fellow, The Peter Doherty Institute for Infection and Immunity

In three short months, more than half a million cases of the novel coronavirus, COVID-19, have been reported worldwide.

The US now has the highest number of COVID-19 cases worldwide and Italy has reported more than twice as many COVID-19 related deaths as China. Deaths from COVID-19 in Spain have surpassed China in recent days, and it won’t be long before France and the US follow suit. COVID-19 has well and truly taken hold in the West.

While most people are being encouraged (or ordered) to stay at home to reduce the spread of COVID-19, this is not an option for frontline healthcare workers.

Read more: ‘The doctor will Skype you now’: telehealth may limit coronavirus spread, but there’s more we can do to protect health workers

Healthcare workers have been infected at an alarming rate

In countries whose health infrastructure has been overwhelmed by the sheer volume of severe COVID-19 cases, healthcare workers have been infected at an alarming rate.

In Italy, more than 6,000 healthcare workers have been infected, making up 9% of the total COVID infections. In Spain, 17% of female COVID-19 cases are healthcare workers (12% of all COVID-19 cases are healthcare workers). More than 2,000 healthcare workers in China had laboratory confirmed COVID-19, with 88% occurring in the worst affected Hubei province.

In Australia, COVID-19 patients are cared for in single rooms where available. However, soon it will be necessary to care for COVID-19 patients in wards and ICUs alongside other COVID-19 patients – known as “cohorting” – as a patient with COVID-19 cannot catch the same disease from another patient sharing their ward.

COVID-19 is transmitted primarily by virus-containing droplets that are expelled when an infectious person sneezes, coughs or talks, contaminating others in close face-to-face proximity and nearby surfaces. This underlies the general advice to stay more than 1.5 metres away from others, practice good cough etiquette and hand hygiene, and avoid touching your face with your hands.

The number of masks, goggles, gloves and gowns we’ll need is staggering

Healthcare workers use personal protective equipment (PPE) – masks, goggles, gloves and gowns – and clean surfaces to prevent transmission in hospital.

Some procedures that are required when caring for critically ill patients can generate smaller virus-containing particles called aerosols, which can be inhaled.

In circumstances where aerosols could be generated, PPE requirements include use of a respirator mask (also known as a P2 or N95 mask) and a negative room pressure, where a slight vacuum is created to prevent contaminated air escaping the room.

The volume of PPE required to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic is staggering.

The WHO has estimated frontline healthcare workers will require at least 89 million masks, 30 million gowns, 1.6 million goggles, 76 million gloves, and 2.9 million litres of hand sanitiser every month during the global COVID-19 response.

Hoarding and misuse of masks puts healthcare workers at risk

The WHO has also noted panic buying, hoarding and misuse of PPE are putting lives at risk from COVID-19 and other infectious diseases.

Healthcare workers are most at risk if they don’t use appropriate PPE when caring for a COVID-19 patient, such as before the COVID-19 infection has been recognised. This is how a number of unlucky Australian healthcare workers have already been infected with COVID-19 at work, including four from the Werribee Mercy Hospital in Melbourne’s outer west.

Early recognition of potential COVID-19 cases, and instituting precautions including isolation and use of PPE, will protect healthcare workers. Routine use of surgical masks in high-risk clinical settings such as emergency departments, ICUs and COVID-19 screening clinics is now recommended in many places.

PPE supplies in many countries have reportedly been exhausted, forcing healthcare workers to care for COVID-19 patients without adequate protection. Inappropriate and irrational use of PPE, including use of masks in situations where there is no risk of droplet or airborne transmission, accelerate consumption of a finite PPE supply.

The urgent work of securing more PPE

The federal, state and territory governments are working hard to secure enough PPE to prevent this scenario in Australia, including boosting domestic production and manufacturing capacity. Local industry has stepped up with companies previously making other products now making hand hygiene products and masks.

This is urgent work because it’s likely a rapid surge in COVID-19 cases would consume current PPE supplies quickly.

Crisis strategies being employed internationally to deal with mask shortages include prolonged use, re-use by a single healthcare worker, and use beyond the manufacturer designated shelf life, although these are not standard practice. Work is also taking place around sterilisation of masks for re-use by health care workers, which again is not standard practice.

Healthcare workers are also at risk if PPE is used incorrectly, due to inadequate training, inattention, or fatigue. Training healthcare workers in correct use of PPE is a critical part of our emergency response.

Like everyone else, healthcare workers are at risk outside work. In China, outside Hubei, the majority of healthcare workers’ infections could be traced to a confirmed COVID-19 case in the household. As community transmission of COVID-19 becomes more widespread in Australia, more healthcare workers will be infected at home and in the community.

When healthcare workers can’t work

It’s vital the healthcare workforce is maintained for the duration of the pandemic. Perversely, some of the actions taken to prevent COVID-19 transmission might result in healthcare workers’ workplace absenteeism. Often healthcare workers would work through a mild upper respiratory tract infection, but with the current heightened awareness they might not be doing this. All healthcare workers are being encouraged to present for testing if they have fever or acute respiratory symptoms such as sore throat, cough and difficulty breathing. They are usually unable to return to work until a negative COVID-19 test result is received and symptoms have resolved. This can take several days.

If a healthcare worker is exposed to a COVID-19 case when not wearing PPE (meaning they spend more than 15 minutes face-to-face or more than two hours in the same room as a case), they will be classed as a close contact and will be home-quarantined and unable to work for 14 days after they were exposed.

And carer responsibilities – either for someone unwell with COVID-19 or for children unable to attend childcare or school due to closures – will keep many healthcare workers away from work.

In the current climate, healthcare workers have been described as “every country’s most valuable resource.” Governments, employers and the public need to do everything they can to protect and support healthcare workers throughout this pandemic.

Read more: Why coronavirus may forever change the way we care within families

– ref. Supplies needed for coronavirus healthcare workers: 89 million masks, 30 million gowns, 2.9 million litres of hand sanitiser. A month. – https://theconversation.com/supplies-needed-for-coronavirus-healthcare-workers-89-million-masks-30-million-gowns-2-9-million-litres-of-hand-sanitiser-a-month-134786