Firstly thanks to all who visited my blog for the Toastmasters project, especially those who left comments. More are still welcome.
Most useful are the evaluations of which I have received 2. Thank you very much Romana and Cassie.
Both agreed that the blog was clear, well written, engaging, and frequent. There were comments about the variety. Both would have liked to see more, particularly personal opinions.
Romana would have liked to get an email when I replied to her comment, as this helps the conversation. It is possible to set this up in WordPress, but there are problems with security and privacy, so I have left it off. It does add to the feeling that I expressed in my speech that blogging provides a lot less feedback than speaking.
At least with a blog, people can read at their own pace, and I don’t have to worry about whether I speak too fast and forget to pause.
8 blog articles in a month is quite a lot, which was commented on by both reviewers. Romana thought they could have been shorter. Cassie suggested using categories and adding a “time for reading” note. I thought this was a good idea and I have added it.
I enjoyed writing the blog articles, but it is hard to think of enough topics. I think people who blog regularly blog often on the same topic and provide news and commentary. It is common for this project to blog about the toastmasters club as a means of attracting new members.
Cassie wants me to survey members to see if more people have accessed the blog after my speech.
So it might be some time before I add more to this blog, but who knows!
I take more interest in politics than is good for me, but generally I keep it to myself. I like the theatre, and I listen to the debates with frustration. I have always enjoyed going to the polling place on the day of the election and casting my vote, and then settling in on the evening and watching the results roll in. We are lucky in New Zealand that elections are well run, and the number of voters is small enough that there are usually few hiccups.
I thought I would put this out before the results are available (but after the polls close).
I voted early this year, because it is advisable to avoid queues and mass gatherings. The precautions with hand-sanitiser, individual pens etc are likely to reduce the risk but gathering in places with lots of strangers makes me nervous. At alert level 1 it seems safe, but if more covid cases pop up then voting could have got more fraught.
This year is different for 2 reasons:
Covid has added a lot of noise, but also made the outcome more significant. We know that the outlook for NZ and the world is going to be very uncertain, and we need to have people in charge that can be trusted to act decisively and take measures based on the evidence, but also not cause more distress.
The world is getting to be a much darker place. We have been fortunate that most of the world has been moderately well run, and tolerance has generally been increasing. Lately we have seen an increase in intolerance, and a retreat into a dog-eat-dog mindset. The rise in anti-immigrant sentiment, authoritarian governments throughout the world, the ravages wrought by Trump on the US, BREXIT, withdrawal from international agreements etc all make me pessimistic for the continuation of the peaceful, benign atmosphere that we have perceived in NZ. We need a government that will keep us neutral, but be a voice for moderation and tolerance.
We have 2 referenda to vote on. i will not go into detail but briefly explain my votes.
I voted for the end of life bill. I hear the arguments against it, and think some of them are valid. On the whole the safeguards in the bill make it unlikely that the most extreme negative consequences are real. On the other hand I think that if I satisfied the criteria to qualify for end of life assistance (a terminal illness, intolerable suffering and sufficient mental awareness to make a decision) then I would like the opportunity.
I voted for cannabis legalisation. There is no difficulty obtaining cannabis at the moment, but to do so a consumer has to break the law, and support criminals. There are lots of people who are harmed by interactions with the police and the justice system. I don’t want people to smoke marijuana or tobacco. Both are harmful. Making cannabis legal and treating it as a health issue like tobacco seems the sanest way to deal with the issue.
For the party vote – I voted Green
I like Jacinda Ardern as Prime Minister.
The thought of Collins and Brownee being in charge of the country in February/March scares me. As we prepared for and reacted to the arrival of Covid-19 I think the decisive and calming statements made the situation much easier for us all. The wrecking ball approach that a National government would have most likely have followed would have been disastrous.
I don’t think the current government has achieved very much otherwise.
Dealing with Crises is important, and there Jacinda Ardern has been exemplary. The Christchurch massacre opened up many wounds, but with “they are us” Ardern found the right message to bring people together. After the White Island eruption, her version of calming and caring was exactly right. During the slow train wreck that has been the world’s response to Covid-19 Ardern has been at her best. It is no coincidence that NZ is universally acclaimed for our success, and that we are enjoying freedoms unheard of in many other places.
However there are slow moving crises that do not respond to reactive measures. They require analysis and planning. They require fearless actions to change people’s fundamental way of living. Such crises include
Housing shortage / unaffordability
Economic stagnation / slow productivity growth
Mental health / suicide
Inequity and inequality
Environmental degradation / biodiversity loss / water quality
To be fair, NZ is not alone in facing these problems, and no previous government has had a solution. That might mean that it is unreasonable to expect the next government to solve them either. However there is a definition of “insanity” – “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result”. If we are to address these problems then we need change.
I don’t expect any party to suddenly fix them. We have tried low taxes and wages and the promised improvement hasn’t occurred. The parties with the policies most likely to effect positive change are TOP and the Greens. TOP is not likely to get enough support to make any contribution, so I have voted Green. The best likely government is to have the Labour party in charge, but with the Greens there to make sure they do actually achieve some change for the environment, and for the least well off.
So here’s to positive change over the next 3 years.
An historic win for Labour – The first time a party has achieved an absolute majority of seats under MMP. It is not clear how many the final majority (currently 64 from 120 seats) will be as special votes are still to be counted. Even some of the deepest blue seats now have Labour party vote majorities. This has been a very high turnout – estimated at 82% or 2,877,117 votes.
There were some interesting electorate contests, including Chloe Swarbrick winning in Auckland Central for the Greens, and the Maori Party’s Rawiri Waititi winning in Waiariki.
It also saw the end of NZ First’s representation in parliament. Will that be the last for Winston Peters?
On 10th June the Department of Conservations opened booking for some of the great walks for the summer season. This season would be different. No-one from overseas. Would they be able to open? Would they be able to fill all the bunks? (at the time we were still in alert level 2). Would the huts take longer to book out?
My previous DOC booking at Easter had been cancelled due to alert level 4. Was I game to hope that Christmas would be better?
The Paparoa track is new. Last season it was only partly open. This season all 3 huts are available and it can be walked (or cycled) end to end. The side-trip to Pike river (Pike29 memorial track) is still closed until the current exploration there is finished. I have walked (or paddled) all the other great walks and also walked the Queen Charlotte and Hump Ridge tracks, so I thought I would give it a go.
I was lucky enough to book from 29 December to 31 December – leaving the track on 1st January 2021 (a new better year we hope). The track was sold out within hours of bookings opening.
So now I need to book the rest of the holiday. This is the part I hate.
Across the strait by ferry and back. The ferry crossings book-end the holiday. I need to start sometime between Christmas day & the 28th, and come back before Sunday 10th January. Altogether nearly 2 weeks.
Then I book accommodation and transport. Do I stay in Blackball overnight on 28th or Punakaiki. How do I arrange transport to the track (Smoke-ho car park) on 29th. Then accommodation at Punakaiki on 1st January.
After that there is some days before 28th to fill and a week after to spend on the West coast. Also I need to book a night in Picton (or nearby) at the start and end of the trip.
For the rest of the trip I need to know where I will be every day so I can book accommodation. I will choose some nights in the bush. It sort of works out, and so far with this sort of holiday I have not been caught out by weather or other misadventure. Because it is holidays it is hard to expect to just turn up and find somewhere to stay.
Holidays are good, but I miss the spontaneity to just go and see what happens. I hate booking. How do other people do it?
During lockdown the world was different for most of us.
The daily commute disappeared
Shopping shrank to the essentials
We baked and cooked for ourselves
We cleaned places in our houses that had been unmolested for years
We walked and cycled in our local areas for exercise
The air became cleaner and we experienced silence (and wildlife) in our cities
We connected online with friends that we had neglected
As a community, our interests and hopes aligned
We learned what it is to be kind
The positives might not have been quite so universal and for some people lockdown amplified the things that were wrong with their lives. Also we know that the costs of lockdown have been huge and we will be paying them back for years. Over time, health outcomes are likely to suffer as there is less to spend on hospitals. Incomes have suffered for many and the demand on foodbanks is much greater.
So how do we get the benefits of lockdown (a simpler life) without the negative effects (loss of income/development)? or do we go back to life as it was before as fast as possible? Would we vote for a truly transformational party if they were standing for election?
Both major parties have policies that will not bring about any real change. One likes roads and punishment (and has a shaky relationship with the truth). The other talks about reducing poverty and inequality but has policies that will not make any difference to either.
Some people have tried to imagine what could be on offer. Here is a selection from recent articles in the spinoff:
Most people try to reduce the amount of tax they pay, and it is really hard for a party to get elected promising to increase peoples’ taxes. However a US style tax system doesn’t pay for scandinavian-style government services. ACT and others will try to make out that we in NZ are paying a lot of tax, but on a world scale our tax rates are very low. The problem is not high taxes, but low wages and high housing costs. People who complain about paying taxes are often the first to complain when they can’t get access to health services.
Inequality and poverty are a plague in NZ. We have some of the worst rates of diseases of poverty (like rheumatic fever) and winter pneumonia from cold houses and overcrowding. Children are going to school hungry and we wonder why their educational achievement is lagging behind. There are measures to help, like food in schools and requirements to improve the standard of rental housing. They are, however, just tinkering at the edges. The real problem is that people do not have enough to live on. Benefit levels are too low, and minimum incomes are not enough to live on with dignity. There are subsidies for landlords and employers and charity provides foodbanks and emergency housing, but these shouldn’t be necessary for so many.
From the last of the links above we see a list of the things that people need:
Somewhere to live: It needs to be the norm that everyone has healthy housing.
Someone to love: It needs to be the norm that all whānau enjoy wellbeing.
Something to do: It needs to be the norm that everyone has good work.
Something to hope for: There needs to be justice. Everyone has to have a fair go.
Does any party really offer to create en environment where they get them?
Today (Sunday) National had its (virtual) campaign launch. This, the day after the election was due to take place. It also took place in the wake of an embarrassing error in its economic plan announced yesterday. They also have a completely different leadership than what was in place when the original election date was announced. To be fair to National this year has not been kind to anyone in NZ, but they seem to have been hit particularly hard.
It is in exceptional circumstances that people can get caught out. David Clark would probably have expected to still be Minister of Health and would have looked forward to implementing the recommendations of the Health and Disability System Review. In all probability he would have been remembered as a very good minister. However, he was not equipped for the circumstances of the pandemic, and had to resign to be replaced by a better communicator. So Labour has also changed in response to the crisis.
The news media also got found out somewhat. They expected to cover the different points of view, and hold the authorities to account. What the majority of people wanted though was them to be a channel for sharing information. People didn’t want to be confused by questions, and muddying the water. Up until this year covering politics had become a game, and politicians were praised for clever politics, whether it was good for the country or not. It changed this year as people no longer wanted politics, they wanted to be part of a team.
The referenda (End of life choice & Cannabis) were set to be a big part of the election. For some people they were more important than who would form the government. Both questions are complicated and there are good arguments for and against, but there would be a danger of misinformation dominating the debates. This has got lost in all the conspiracy theories about the virus, 5G, Qanon etc. Even parties like Advance NZ and the New Conservatives who can be expected to be concerned with euthanasia, are getting involved in lockdown protests.
When the election date (yesterday) was announced in January the virus had not yet been given its name, and was something that affected people elsewhere. We had just started to see an effect on tourist numbers, but it looked like the election would be about economics and competence. The government was vulnerable due its failure to build as many affordable (kiwi build) houses as it had promised. On the other hand the National party leader (Simon Bridges) had failed to build any popularity.
By February it was clear that the virus effects were going to be more significant, and the government restricted inbound travel and started offering support to affected businesses. So covid-19 and the government response became the focus for politics. The general concern for health and approval of the lockdown process has carried over to popularity for the government. Ardern’s open style, her passion for kindness and her calm demeanour have helped to align people for the health response, and also to attract voters to the party.
Polls gave the government an unheard of lead. Where the election was looking close in January, by May it was looking anything but. The smaller parties were struggling for oxygen and everybody was rushing to find something different to make them stand out.
National found it hard to find the right message. When they had seemed hard on the government they had been punished. In the end (after 2 changes of leadership) they have settled on that they would do the same only better. New Zealand First have distanced themselves from the government saying that they disagreed with many decisions, and have been a handbrake on (what they deem to be ) bad decisions. The Greens have tried to pitch themselves as more progressive than Labour (without actually saying that Labour have been ineffective). The only smaller party that is looking to have gained is ACT which can openly criticise the government without actually offering anything.
With the second outbreak in August, and alert level 2/3 controls, campaigning became difficult. Delaying the election seemed prudent. The government might have had to pass legislation to help the health response, and needed parliament to be sitting a bit longer. So we still have 4 weeks to go. Many people will be voting based on the government’s response so far, but the next government will be in charge for 3 years. There is still more to come from the virus, and we can’t go back to normal, but increasingly the focus needs to be on what comes next.
Both major parties seem to be too keen to get things back to what they were before. The opportunity for real change seems to be missing. What do we really want NZ to look like in the future. When travel is freed up, do we really need to do so much of it? We know it is unsustainable. We have low productivity in NZ because a large portion of our economy is devoted to tourism and hospitality, which are bedevilled by low pay. We need a lot of seasonal workers from overseas to help with agricultural workloads. Nobody is talking about solving these problems and making the future better.
So if you come across politicians out campaigning, make sure you ask them the hard questions. If they say they can do things better ask them to prove it. Ask them to show why their vision of the future for NZ is the right one.
No I am not going to speak professionally. That would take a lot of promotion and time. It would be good for my ego, but that is not how I see myself. But this was a fun speech. I pretended to be a party leader, firing up the membership to go out and get us votes for the election.
The speech had 5 parts with times as planned
3 minutes: Welcome and thanks. Who are we? what is our schedule? I got some members to stand up and take bows for their work: Duncan for putting up the billboards, and Cassie for making the TV ad.
5 minutes: policy platform number 1. The Great Leap Backwards. This is borrowed from the McGillcuddy Serious Party. The idea is that the peak of civilisation was reached at the beginning of the 19th century at the time when European settlers arrived in NZ. It has been all downhill (a blind alley of progress) ever since. We should go back to a simpler time without burning fossil fuels and forcing people to slave over a computer all day. More people will work on the land and craftsmen will support them by making tools and bread etc. Entertainment can be provided by minstrels and story-tellers, and people can rediscover community.
5 minutes: policy platform number 2. Happyness. It would be everyone’s right to be happy. In fact everyone would be obliged to be happy. We wouldn’t copy the Americans and enshrine the pursuit of happiness in the constitution, which doesn’t seem to lead to much happiness itself. We would change the Bill of Rights to add the right to be happy, and any laws that make people unhappy would have to be changed. We would make it a crime to not be happy, but instead of punishing unhappiness people would get treatment. This would have the effect of emptying our prisons and stopping the use of psychoactive drugs as crime and dependency stem from unhappiness.
5 minutes: policy platform number 3. Abolish money. The use of money encourages the accumulation of wealth, which causes the vast mal-distribution of resources that causes deprivation and misery. Without money people will only produce what they need and what they can trade with their neighbours. Where wider trade is necessary we would go back to using pounamu (greenstone). This has the advantage that it would be very hard to hoard and can be made into jewelry even if it is not needed for tools.
3 minutes: summary. What do we still have to do before the election? How do we go out and sell the party and the platform? Why is it our time? How we are going to double our support every day?
How did it go?
I lost my train of thought a couple of times, and missed out on some material, so the times ended up being a little short (17:55). In general it went well. Nobody fell asleep. Some found it amusing. There was some audience engagement. Maybe I should have asked the audience some questions, or got them to repeat the slogans.
Rana did the evaluation. he was quite complementary. He recommended I use a cheat sheet so that I don’t forget what I was going to say. Useful, but if I prepare properly I shouldn’t forget. His challenge was to use more time, as this is the point of the project.
The timekeeper (Mitch) also commented that I could have added a little more detail to eke out a little more time from the speech.
So I learned a lot from the exercise. I would have to do more work if I was to speak professionally, but can have confidence to give longer speeches. I look forward to hearing other members attempting the project.
We all know where to get the best information about the pandemic: from the government, Ministry of Health, and the World Health Organisation. But what about when that seems to contradict our own experience, or when our friends on Facebook are telling us something else, or when we simply don’t like what we are hearing?
Throughout the course of the pandemic the (almost) daily 1 o’clock briefings with the prime minister (PM) and director general of health (DG) have been compelling viewing. When we were stuck at home they provided us with an update in case numbers, a view of how successful we were as a country, and simple instructions for behaving and coping with the extraordinary situation. On the days when Jacinda Ardern or Ashley Bloomfield were unavailable, or when no briefing was given, we felt like we were missing something. The message was calming, but also stressing the importance of us all playing our part. We all felt part of “the team of 5 million”. They gave NZ (and the world) the concept of a “bubble” of people we could freely associate with without risking aggravating the outbreak.
The briefings have been incredibly open and honest. After the news and message, the reporters have been able to ask questions. The opposition was also given a forum for questioning ministers, officials, business people and anyone else affected by the fight against the virus. They held the government to account, and questioned the veracity of some of the statements. To most people listening it seems that the PM and DG were being badgered, and disrespected. Some of the reporters received abusive messages. The opposition had to change leader. people really wanted to believe what we were being told.
So why do we have large lockdown protests? Why did someone ignore the requirement to self-isolate, sparking the latest sub-sub-cluster and probably extending restrictions another week or more?
One concern is when what people are hearing doesn’t match their personal experience.
During level 4 Bloomfield would often say that there was plenty of masks, testing supplies and flu vaccines in NZ even though they were in short supply all over the world. However GPs and aged care workers were finding it difficult to get enough. It wasn’t like New York, where intensive care nurses were using rubbish bags, and re-using masks, but it also wasn’t good enough. The poblem arises because the Ministry of Health is not a doing organisation, it is a policy organisation. GPs get their supplies from the DHBs. One DHB found that their stock of masks was unusable, another had different policies for who should get masks. People didn’t hear the reasons, or even how complicated it is, they just heard that the information they were given is not completely honest.
Official recommendations have changed over the course of the pandemic. This does not mean that the MoH & WHO are incompetent. It is they are working with very incomplete information, and as time goes on the science becomes clearer. Initially they were not recommending general use of masks, because it was not clear whether there was a net benefit (and masks were needed for medical workers). It was thought that transmission was mostly by contact. After a while the evidence came in that the virus was transmitted through the air and so mask use could be helpful. Some people felt that the changed advice made the MoH look incompetent.
Most people didn’t know any body who had the virus. This is a reflection on how successful we were in eliminating it, but it meant that people didn’t experience its seriousness. On the other hand people did experience the difficulties associated with the counter-virus measures. Some people lost their jobs. Some couldn’t get medical or dental treatment. Concerts were cancelled. Restaurant meals were unavailable. Over time the balance became hard to appreciate.
Politicians from non-government parties (even NZ First) wanted to disparage the government response. News media wanted to increase their readership and show their independence. That meant that stories where things didn’t go perfectly became highlighted.
There were an endless series of stories from people complaining about conditions in Managed Isolation facilities. Some stories would say that things were too severe, some not strict enough. National party MPs leaked stories to the media, even to the point of releasing a list of names & addresses.
In general, scientific opinion was very strongly in favour of NZ’s response, but there will always be contrarian scientists. A group of academics and business people started a campaign (plan B) pushing for a different response where we allow people to get infected, but protect the elderly and vulnerable. It is based on very questionable science and dodgy statistics, but got a lot of airtime every so often.
To some these had an effect. Any loss of confidence in the competence of the government response had the effect of reducing compliance.
There are people in NZ who do not trust the government (any government). Some with good reason. Campaigns against things such as child uplifts by Oranga Tamariki, unjust convictions, over aggressive policing, 5G, 1080 poison, vaccination, etc have significant and vocal (if small in number) support. This is not to mention the anti-immigrant, anti-muslim “great replacement” groups.
Material about these are often broadcast on social media. If people see an article shared by someone they know and trust, then they are more inclined to take it seriously. Some people no longer believe anything they see on TV news, or read in the newspaper, because it is at variance from the information that they are reading on Facebook. People who get paid for clicks are incentivised to create material that gets shared like that, so it gets more and more outrageous.
Then the focus shifted to the origin of the virus. Many slick videos pointed to an engineered virus. Some claimed it was China, some the US “deep state”. Others claimed it was a trick by Bill Gates to get us all vaccinated so that he could control us.
In NZ the practical upshot of this is that some of the people infected in the latest outbreak did not believe the official narrative. There was a reluctance to get tested and a reluctance to isolate properly. Because of this there have been more infections and it has taken longer to control the spread. Probably this will delay our return to level 1 throughout NZ.
There are a number of actions which are scientifically known to control the spread of the virus. Hand washing, masks on public transport, distancing, avoiding unventilated indoor spaces are all known to reduce the chances of getting infected. Testing, contact tracing and self-isolation are effective at controlling the spread. In combination these can reduce the reproductive rate below 1 so that an outbreak will die out.
There are some measures that are applied even though they seem to have little or no effect. These include temperature measurement, “deep cleaning” where an infected person has been, wearing masks outdoors. These (very public) measures are often a case of being seen to do something. It may be that they are necessary to reinforce the messages about the effective interventions.
If I wear a mask while walking down the street, I may not be changing the odds of my catching or spreading the virus, but I am helping to normalise mask wearing, and reminding people who see me that we still are in the middle of a pandemic. In our last period at level 1 we seemed to forget.
By the end of March lockdown had become inevitable. There were multiple clusters of virus from Auckland to Bluff. Our health system was not in a state to cope with large numbers of patients. There were questions about supplies of PPE and reagents and laboratory space for testing. Our public health systems and contact tracing were woefully short of capability.
We knew what lockdown looked like from Wuhan and Northern Italy. The two experiences were quite different. They showed that people could survive and that essential supplies could be maintained. They differed in the degree of control of people’s movements. In Wuhan some residential buildings barricaded all doors leaving only one entry/exit and people had only short times they were allowed out for shopping.
The NZ lockdown was going to be a bit kinder. We were to be allowed out for unlimited local exercise. The definition of “local” was fluid, and some pushed the boundaries (including the Health Minister). Generally people understood the conditions and behaved well. The number of people walking and cycling in cities increased dramatically. DOC closed all tramping tracks, including cancelling my booking for a hut over Easter.
It was quiet. Car traffic dropped away and the air was cleaner. Cycling was more pleasant. ACC claims dropped to 20% of normal and over Easter nobody died on the roads. Overall people were healthier and safer (and some even happier) while locked down.
We discovered who were essential workers. Cleaners and supermarket workers gained in status and some even got paid extra. They were the people that were out risking infection to make sure that the rest of us could survive. Many of us could work from home and were largely unaffected, but a number of people were unable to work. The government became very generous, giving subsidies to companies to pay workers when they had no revenue. There has been some abuse, but overall it has avoided some company collapses and large unemployment. The bill is still to be paid.
Initially the lockdown was set for 4 weeks. Then the tail of some of the clusters kept producing cases and level 4 was extended for a bit. When level 3 started everyone held their breath to see if the number of cases would rise again. Luckily they continued to decline and we soon dropped down through the levels to 2.5, 2 and then 1 about 12 weeks after we had first gone to level 2 in March.
At level 1 we had freedom. The only restrictions were on international travel. Nobody can enter the country without quarantine (managed isolation) for 2 weeks. Professional rugby played in front of crowds in the tens of thousands. The NZSO gave a free concert at the Michael Fowler centre. We were the envy of the world. Toastmasters went back to in-person meetings. We had no active cases in NZ, being one of the largest countries in the world to say that.
But it was a nervous time too, and (perhaps inevitably) it didn’t last. In June we had 2 more cases. People had come from the UK and had been given leave to exit quarantine early to drive from Auckland to Lower Hutt to support their father after their mother died. After arriving at Lower Hutt they tested positive. Everyone was surprised that they were allowed out without testing. A new testing regime was instituted in quarantine. The testing picked up more cases which may have been partly because the countries where people were coming from were getting worse. Luckily the 2 cases didn’t seem to infect anyone else, so we could breathe again.
Complacency kicked in again, and the number of people presenting for testing dropped to very low levels. People didn’t use the app much. The health minister started trying to talk up testing. The evidence around the world was showing that wearing masks had real benefit, and could reduce the need for movement restrictions. Changing the message is always difficult, and the parliamentary opposition started intimating that there was something sinister behind it.
Then on August 11th the first community case was found again in Auckland. The family was tested and 4 were positive. Auckland went back to level 3 and the rest of the country to level 2. It turned out that the first case had left work sick 9 days earlier. It is not clear why they weren’t tested at the time, but complacency probably led to it. By the time they were detected they had infected 2 work places and several people on buses. Members of a church also got infected. Genomic analysis linked all the cases together even when there was no direct link found.
So now we are at level 2 (level 2.5 in Auckland). When will we get back to level 1? Do we have confidence in our health systems to cope with another outbreak? How do we get to where travel is more available? When do we get back to normal? What is “normal” anyway?
I think I should have revived this blog at the beginning of the year or last year to have documented the course of the pandemic. It is an exceptional event (some say the most significant event worldwide since World Wide II). There are examples of personal diaries that incidentally documented world events. The diary of Samuel Pepys is interesting as it was written in London over the period of plague and fire as well as political change. The best example so far from this pandemic is Fang Fang’s diary from Wuhan (here in chinese – or available as a book in English).
Let me try to reconstruct it. It will exclude lot of personal stuff, but also miss some interesting things which look trivial in hindsight. It is hard to remember when the world ran out of masks, hand sanitiser and toilet paper.
2 December 2019: I decided to ride to work every day in Summer. I used my old (very old) road bike. It was slow (lots of people passed me), but I managed to get to work with all the showering gear and clothes I needed. As the days went on I got better at it but the limitations of my old bike became apparent. I broke a lot of spokes in my back wheel. I repaired it enough to get home.
24 December: Christmas eve – I left work early. In Petone I ran into the back of a car and broke a brake cable. I don’t know whether the cable broke causing me to hit the car, or broke after hitting the car. I bought a new cable and fixed it, but it really is time to get a new bike.
30 December: After coming back from holiday in Palmerston North. I ordered a new bike. of course I would not get it immediately due to holidays. Australian bush fires are starting to affect NZ. The air smells of smoke.
1 January 2020: I read a report that SARS was back in China. Someone (later named as Li Wenliang) posted a message on Wechat, and was admonished for spreading rumours. An outbreak of unexplained pneumonia was reported to WHO. Smoke from bush files more noticeable.
3 January: A lovely still day – I paddled down the river and across to Matiu/Soames Island. No camera to take a photo to prove it. Tension overseas as the US murder an Iranian leader in Iraq.
6 January: Back to work (on my son’s mountain bike). Not many people around town as a lot of people don’t start again until 13th. Lots of cafes and lunch places still closed. Generally I get my lunches from the New World supermarket.
8 January: My new bike arrived. I had to buy pedals and shoes, so it was not until the 10th that I could ride to work. It was much more enjoyable to ride, and I was much faster. I also ordered some more gear (lights, clothes bag etc) from Aliexpress in China.
16 January: Japan reported its first case of the virus. Suddenly it looks closer to my son, studying in Kobe.
20 January: the fish and chip shop across the road from work has a note saying that they have come back from China (Guangzhou), but will stay closed for another week as they didn’t want to risk spreading the virus – as cases had been reported in Guangzhou.
23 January: the world watched in amazement as China locked down Wuhan, and restricted travel elsewhere.
28 January: New Zealand banned travel from China (against the advice of WHO). WHO didn’t appreciate how poorly prepared NZ was for such a disease. My bike accessories are going to take longer to arrive from China.
3 February: Share prices down in NZ due to worries about tourism and education markets.
4 February: Mercy flight bringing 158 New Zealanders from Wuhan arrived. The passengers go to quarantine in Whangaparaoa for 2 weeks.
25 February: Big drop in share price all over the world as Chinese production dries up and recession looks inevitable.
28 February: first confirmed case of the virus in NZ in a woman who traveled from Iran.
2 March: Travelers from Northern Italy and South Korea are required to self-isolate for 2 week.
16 March: I bought a freezer to stock up on meat. Who knows what is going to happen, but NZ is not immune to what is happening overseas. Time to start hoarding flour, rice, canned food etc.
18 March: the government warns NZers overseas to come home while they still can.
21 March: The PM announces the 4 level alert system and says that NZ will immediately go to level 2.
23 March: With confirmed infections growing the PM announces that NZ will move to level 3 and that level 4 will start in 2 days time for 4 weeks. I go home early to get my home office set up.
24 March: I return to the office (by bike) to pick up some more possessions, and to reset my password in anticipation that it might be difficult from home. Lots of people were taking chairs desks, screens etc home so that they could set up. Nobody knew how long before we could return.
26 March: Working from home: At lunchtime I went out for a bike ride around the Hutt valley. There were almost no cars. It was quiet, and the smells had gone. I could enjoy lockdown I think.
The toastmaster’s project “Write a compelling blog”.
The project requires me to write a minimum of 8 blog posts in a month. That means that I will be adding a post every 2-3 days to this blog during September. I will probably write about the things that occupy my thoughts:
I might also throw in something else just to confuse people.
So lots have happened since I last picked up my pen keyboard. In response to the pandemic, NZ has settled on a strategy of elimination and we experienced 5 weeks of stringent lockdown, followed by slowly freeing up until we had 2 months of almost normality. Now that we are in the second phase of a second wave it might be another 2 weeks of level 2 before we can breathe again.
So yesterday, I decided I needed to go back to the office and toastmasters. It was great to get back on the bike, and as a bonus the days have lengthened to the point that it was light at 7am when I left home. Traffic seemed as heavy as ever, and my legs seemed sluggish after days of inactivity.
The office was mostly empty with only 3 others on my part of the floor. It was nice to visit a cafe for lunch and have some real conversations. Work meetings were online and I could have done everything from home just as easily. This is our new normal – we are allowed to go to the office but no more than half of us can be there at once. No more than 2 people in a lift at a time, and the stairs are marked, one set for up and the other for down. Most people are happy to stay at home.
Toastmasters at level 2 is much the same without the handshakes. We space the chairs out and probably our capacity is not much more than 10.
More people are scanning the QR codes, but still not enough. The only way we can avoid lockdowns is to know quickly who we are in contact with so tracing is quick. We will continue to get outbreaks. People and goods are coming and going and although we make the odds of infection form each interaction low, over time it adds up. NZ’s situation of many weeks of level 1 freedom interspersed with 2-4 weeks of restrictions when some gets through, is probably the best we can get. It would be nice to think we can share travel bubbles with the islands (without putting them at risk) or other countries (without putting us at risk), but that seems far off.
I wrote a speech (below) 3 years ago about voting and the election. I pondered how the chosen government would react to a war, a recession or earthquake. I didn’t think about a terrorist attack, a volcano or a pandemic, but I am happy with our choice, as I think the leadership we have experienced has been exemplary.
…and just as I write this, I learn that someone has died from covid-19 in Middlemore. It seems he has been in ICU on a ventilator for some time. It is very sad, and underlines how much we need to control the virus until we have effective medicines and/or a vaccine.