Coronavirus - New Zealand
-
@l_n_p said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@dogmeat said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
As I said I appreciate the above is not true for everyone and there are really sad cases of families being unable to reunite etc - many of which have been shared here. I genuinely feel for these people, but what's the alternative? NZ are not in a position to open the borders (yet) to everyone because our health system won't cope.
MIQ is only a thing because that's the REAL scandal no one seems to be calling out imho ... healthcare. Presumably decades of cutting and under-investment?
Returnees are victims of the root cause.
I don't think having MIQ is unfair, I don't think capacity limits or issues are unfair. But not putting up a roadmap is unfair.
I'm an adult, just tell me reality so I can deal with it and plan accordingly. That's what adults do.
Totally agree about the healthcare. I mentioned earlier in the thread that I would like to see focus on an even stronger drive to vaccinate and getting the health system ready.
As for the other, I see your frustration but there is a roadmap. Currently it reads 'we have limited spaces so good luck getting a spot'. You can plan around that for now. I don't see that will change except due to parameters you have no control over anyway so again, no way of 'planning'.
I'd also prefer a priority system, but if I made it 'coming back for a family BBQ' (no insult intended) would be well down the list. -
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@l_n_p said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@dogmeat said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
As I said I appreciate the above is not true for everyone and there are really sad cases of families being unable to reunite etc - many of which have been shared here. I genuinely feel for these people, but what's the alternative? NZ are not in a position to open the borders (yet) to everyone because our health system won't cope.
MIQ is only a thing because that's the REAL scandal no one seems to be calling out imho ... healthcare. Presumably decades of cutting and under-investment?
Returnees are victims of the root cause.
I don't think having MIQ is unfair, I don't think capacity limits or issues are unfair. But not putting up a roadmap is unfair.
I'm an adult, just tell me reality so I can deal with it and plan accordingly. That's what adults do.
As for the other, I see your frustration but there is a roadmap. Currently it reads 'we have limited spaces so good luck getting a spot'. You can plan around that for now. I don't see that will change except due to parameters you have no control over anyway so again, no way of 'planning'.
That's not a roadmap. Well it isn't a roadmap that any successful enterprise would use.
That is a point of time report not a map.
-
@crucial That's not a roadmap ...
You do know it's okay for a Government to put up a high-level roadmap with dates and some phases and say it's all subject to change because Covid situations are fluid? ... that's normal big-organization stuff let alone government. State their key assumptions and constraints and controls locally and on MIQ/imported infections that NZ can handle/ cannot handle. Reference healthcare capacity in the constraints etc. Talk surge capacity. 10 slides, max.
Anyway would nice to have something that can inform me when MIQ might be dropped (or if it ever will be?)
-
Shaun Hendy on presser giving latest modelling
Vax alone won't give herd immunity at 90% of over 5's
However if you add in
Masks
Rapid Tests
Social Distancing
Contact Tracing
Limited border controlsyou can make it no worse than seasonal flu without lockdowns
However if we achieve only 80% of 5+ and relied only on vax modeling says 60K cases and 7K deaths p.a. so we would need to retain lockdowns
-
@dogmeat said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
However if we achieve only 80% of 5+ and relied only on vax modeling says 60K cases and 7K deaths p.a. so we would need to retain lockdowns
IF the models are correct, then that's the discussion we have. There are tradeoffs - and you better align the cost of 7,000 deaths with the spend on Pharmac, road safety, etc. Ideally we pick the 'best' option.
again, IF the modelling is correct. The track record hasn't been super flash. Useful, but not definitive.
-
@dogmeat said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
Shaun Hendy on presser giving latest modelling
Vax alone won't give herd immunity at 90% of over 5's
However if you add in
> Masks
Rapid Tests
Social Distancing
Contact Tracing
Limited border controlsyou can make it no worse than seasonal flu without lockdowns
However if we achieve only 80% of 5+ and relied only on vax modeling says 60K cases and 7K deaths p.a. so we would need to retain lockdowns
I'm more interested in how many people would die at 90% if we don't all live as anti-social hermits in perpetuity.
-
@nzzp although most of the modelling is around 'worst case' scenarios aren't they, which seems to be what they share with the public, assume at higher level they do other modelling too.
We know lockdowns aren't sustainable and won't keep it out, we won't get to 90% vaccination...so what's next option
-
@l_n_p said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial That's not a roadmap ...
You do know it's okay for a Government to put up a high-level roadmap with dates and some phases and say it's all subject to change because Covid situations are fluid? ... that's normal big-organization stuff let alone government. State their key assumptions and constraints and controls locally and on MIQ/imported infections that NZ can handle/ cannot handle. Reference healthcare capacity in the constraints etc. Talk surge capacity. 10 slides, max.
Anyway would nice to have something that can inform me when MIQ might be dropped (or if it ever will be?)
I don't get your logic. Let's say that the govt laid out a plan that had 90% vaccination rates complete by end of January at which time MIQ would drop to 5 days for vaccinated travellers, freeing up many rooms with higher turnover.
Then you start planning a trip for next March. Save your pennies, book a flight, tell everyone, get leave organised etc
We don't reach the target so it's pushed back a month as per the stated roadmap meaning that your MIQ booking has now been lost and you have to replan.
Then we get an outbreak via a vaccinated traveller etc etc etcWhere has this stated roadmap got you? A better place?
This is a constantly changing situation and moves forward get made step by step as and when an opening to do so arises, not when planned months ago.
I'm sorry if I seem harsh but I used to have to deal with similar situations daily from expats in situations overseas. The reality is that if you live away from family in another country you can't always have things work out. I myself missed two funerals, one for my grandmother and that was simply due to the logistics of me getting back holding things up for everyone else. Just this year my son and partner were stuck in the UK having decided to ride out the first lockdown there where at least they had income but their visas then didn't have much longer to run. It was three weeks of 24hr monitoring of the booking site to land a spot that was then 6 weeks away.
You live in another country to your loved ones and you simply have to take it on the chin.It's shit but shit happens. There are always those worse off.
-
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@l_n_p said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial That's not a roadmap ...
You do know it's okay for a Government to put up a high-level roadmap with dates and some phases and say it's all subject to change because Covid situations are fluid? ... that's normal big-organization stuff let alone government. State their key assumptions and constraints and controls locally and on MIQ/imported infections that NZ can handle/ cannot handle. Reference healthcare capacity in the constraints etc. Talk surge capacity. 10 slides, max.
Anyway would nice to have something that can inform me when MIQ might be dropped (or if it ever will be?)
I don't get your logic. Let's say that the govt laid out a plan that had 90% vaccination rates complete by end of January at which time MIQ would drop to 5 days for vaccinated travellers, freeing up many rooms with higher turnover.
Then you start planning a trip for next March. Save your pennies, book a flight, tell everyone, get leave organised etc
We don't reach the target so it's pushed back a month as per the stated roadmap meaning that your MIQ booking has now been lost and you have to replan.
Then we get an outbreak via a vaccinated traveller etc etc etcWhere has this stated roadmap got you? A better place?
This is a constantly changing situation and moves forward get made step by step as and when an opening to do so arises, not when planned months ago.
I'm sorry if I seem harsh but I used to have to deal with similar situations daily from expats in situations overseas. The reality is that if you live away from family in another country you can't always have things work out. I myself missed two funerals, one for my grandmother and that was simply due to the logistics of me getting back holding things up for everyone else. Just this year my son and partner were stuck in the UK having decided to ride out the first lockdown there where at least they had income but their visas then didn't have much longer to run. It was three weeks of 24hr monitoring of the booking site to land a spot that was then 6 weeks away.
You live in another country to your loved ones and you simply have to take it on the chin.It's shit but shit happens. There are always those worse off.
What a wet and weak reposnse.
Nothing wrong with actually providing what they see as a roadmap so that everyone internally and externally, economically and individually, can plan/budget on. We all know things can change but have a map of how they see it now.
Not it sucks but deal with it. That's not leading that is just weakness.
-
@hooroo what's the point of planning and budgeting on something that has a slim chance of going to plan? You'd then have everyone bitching and moaning about how they had spent money, arranged functions etc etc and it changed on them.
Giving false hope isn't good leadership either.
I do think that there may be a bit more of a plan soon though hence the modelling being done on vaccination rates etc. There is a need to create a carrot instead of just pointing to the stick.
I wouldn't be making plans on it though. Way too much can happen. -
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@hooroo what's the point of planning and budgeting on something that has a slim chance of going to plan? You'd then have everyone bitching and moaning about how they had spent money, arranged functions etc etc and it changed on them.
Giving false hope isn't good leadership either.
I do think that there may be a bit more of a plan soon though hence the modelling being done on vaccination rates etc. There is a need to create a carrot instead of just pointing to the stick.
I wouldn't be making plans on it though. Way too much can happen.A plan isn't false hope. It's a plan. A plan can have what is deemed as bad outcomes as well as good. That's what planning is.
-
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@taniwharugby said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@l_n_p yep, they are always comparing, so will be aiming to exceed anything anyone else does, so the legacy will be Cindy/NZ handled the pandemic better than any other country.
I know my wife would love to see her mum and dad, especially with the latter not in great health, but she is just like plenty of others on both sides of this.
I think I read something like 20,000 people tried to get into MIQ around the Christmas period with 2,000 spots available? Plus I wonder how many didnt both trying, knowing it would be a wasted effort.
They really need a prioritised system. They have had plenty of time to work out criteria and requirements.
I do get the feeling that some of the problem is caused by people who need to see the reality of the situation. I think Hipkins said this a while back and got flamed for it so they have steered clear.
Can't believe the number of people bitching and moaning that they can't get a place because they 'want to come back and see their newly born cousin/nephew etc' FFS, the kid won't know!
I get that family is big for some people but when when something like that clogs up the system for people trying a possible last visit for their parent with cancer or someone trying to return home for good once an overseas job has finished. Even businesses that, I'm sure might be able to do better with in person meetings, aren't going down if they don't.
It just seems like car drivers complaining about the congestion on the road when they are part of the cause.
Even if 50% of the places were put aside for a priority queue it would help those that truly have to get back and not just want to.They didn't make a system like that because it's a massive piece of work, would cost a huge amount to run it because it would require a large number of staff and work per application (because people lie, so applications would require documents as proof of meeting the criteria, and verification of documents), and most of the last 18 months has largely seen supply = demand, so it wouldn't have achieved anything.
-
@hooroo said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@hooroo what's the point of planning and budgeting on something that has a slim chance of going to plan? You'd then have everyone bitching and moaning about how they had spent money, arranged functions etc etc and it changed on them.
Giving false hope isn't good leadership either.
I do think that there may be a bit more of a plan soon though hence the modelling being done on vaccination rates etc. There is a need to create a carrot instead of just pointing to the stick.
I wouldn't be making plans on it though. Way too much can happen.A plan isn't false hope. It's a plan. A plan can have what is deemed as bad outcomes as well as good. That's what planning is.
Has to have a point though. I still don't see what the type of plan we are talking about achieves apart from a waste of time.
There is a roadmap being formulated by the looks of things, based around vaccination rates which is a massive unknown being down to human choice. Anything set out after that is then variable based on something that we can't control short of rounding dips hits up with cattle prods.
-
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@hooroo said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@hooroo what's the point of planning and budgeting on something that has a slim chance of going to plan? You'd then have everyone bitching and moaning about how they had spent money, arranged functions etc etc and it changed on them.
Giving false hope isn't good leadership either.
I do think that there may be a bit more of a plan soon though hence the modelling being done on vaccination rates etc. There is a need to create a carrot instead of just pointing to the stick.
I wouldn't be making plans on it though. Way too much can happen.A plan isn't false hope. It's a plan. A plan can have what is deemed as bad outcomes as well as good. That's what planning is.
Has to have a point though. I still don't see what the type of plan we are talking about achieves apart from a waste of time.
There is a roadmap being formulated by the looks of things, based around vaccination rates which is a massive unknown being down to human choice. Anything set out after that is then variable based on something that we can't control short of rounding dips hits up with cattle prods.
Wow you would be awesome in business. Only living in the right now, no planning because future is uncertain, purely reactive.
Fair enough though, it kind of explains a lot.
-
@godder said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@taniwharugby said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@l_n_p yep, they are always comparing, so will be aiming to exceed anything anyone else does, so the legacy will be Cindy/NZ handled the pandemic better than any other country.
I know my wife would love to see her mum and dad, especially with the latter not in great health, but she is just like plenty of others on both sides of this.
I think I read something like 20,000 people tried to get into MIQ around the Christmas period with 2,000 spots available? Plus I wonder how many didnt both trying, knowing it would be a wasted effort.
They really need a prioritised system. They have had plenty of time to work out criteria and requirements.
I do get the feeling that some of the problem is caused by people who need to see the reality of the situation. I think Hipkins said this a while back and got flamed for it so they have steered clear.
Can't believe the number of people bitching and moaning that they can't get a place because they 'want to come back and see their newly born cousin/nephew etc' FFS, the kid won't know!
I get that family is big for some people but when when something like that clogs up the system for people trying a possible last visit for their parent with cancer or someone trying to return home for good once an overseas job has finished. Even businesses that, I'm sure might be able to do better with in person meetings, aren't going down if they don't.
It just seems like car drivers complaining about the congestion on the road when they are part of the cause.
Even if 50% of the places were put aside for a priority queue it would help those that truly have to get back and not just want to.They didn't make a system like that because it's a massive piece of work, would cost a huge amount to run it because it would require a large number of staff and work per application (because people lie, so applications would require documents as proof of meeting the criteria, and verification of documents), and most of the last 18 months has largely seen supply = demand, so it wouldn't have achieved anything.
Yep. Said as much 6 months ago. The need for something was becoming evident back then though as actual need increased. The easy assessments (i.e. letter from a doctor that your parent was about to die) weren't enough.
I maintain that they have had time to add to the system. Visa dates are easy to prove. We already check if people are coming back to stay or if they have recently left etc. Some wide ranging groups can at least categorise people.
Half the spots based on priority categories would help IMO. -
@hooroo said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@hooroo said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@hooroo what's the point of planning and budgeting on something that has a slim chance of going to plan? You'd then have everyone bitching and moaning about how they had spent money, arranged functions etc etc and it changed on them.
Giving false hope isn't good leadership either.
I do think that there may be a bit more of a plan soon though hence the modelling being done on vaccination rates etc. There is a need to create a carrot instead of just pointing to the stick.
I wouldn't be making plans on it though. Way too much can happen.A plan isn't false hope. It's a plan. A plan can have what is deemed as bad outcomes as well as good. That's what planning is.
Has to have a point though. I still don't see what the type of plan we are talking about achieves apart from a waste of time.
There is a roadmap being formulated by the looks of things, based around vaccination rates which is a massive unknown being down to human choice. Anything set out after that is then variable based on something that we can't control short of rounding dips hits up with cattle prods.
Wow you would be awesome in business. Only living in the right now, no planning because future is uncertain, purely reactive.
Fair enough though, it kind of explains a lot.
That's a bit smart arse isn't it? What does it explain exactly?
Funnily enough I am actually a planner by career but also ones that sees no value in setting up measures and goals that experience shows cannot have a certain degree of certainty. I'm sure you are aware of the phases things go through and how plans remain fluid while working toward a goal until they reach levels of known achievability.
One of the biggest business delivery failings is trying to nail stuff down to early. Ever notice why so many projects go over the original investment case. Because everyone wanted a 'roadmap' quantified before planning was complete. I understand that some business cultures (an example I was given was a Japanese one) don't accept overruns because they invest in planning before promises. I digress.
I haven't said that the govt shouldn't plan. Far from it. I think they need to constantly re-plan based on what's happening and have underlying aims that they can be agile in achieving. Planning AND reacting are key. -
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@hooroo said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@hooroo said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@hooroo what's the point of planning and budgeting on something that has a slim chance of going to plan? You'd then have everyone bitching and moaning about how they had spent money, arranged functions etc etc and it changed on them.
Giving false hope isn't good leadership either.
I do think that there may be a bit more of a plan soon though hence the modelling being done on vaccination rates etc. There is a need to create a carrot instead of just pointing to the stick.
I wouldn't be making plans on it though. Way too much can happen.A plan isn't false hope. It's a plan. A plan can have what is deemed as bad outcomes as well as good. That's what planning is.
Has to have a point though. I still don't see what the type of plan we are talking about achieves apart from a waste of time.
There is a roadmap being formulated by the looks of things, based around vaccination rates which is a massive unknown being down to human choice. Anything set out after that is then variable based on something that we can't control short of rounding dips hits up with cattle prods.
Wow you would be awesome in business. Only living in the right now, no planning because future is uncertain, purely reactive.
Fair enough though, it kind of explains a lot.
That's a bit smart arse isn't it? What does it explain exactly?
Funnily enough I am actually a planner by career but also ones that sees no value in setting up measures and goals that experience shows cannot have a certain degree of certainty. I'm sure you are aware of the phases things go through and how plans remain fluid while working toward a goal until they reach levels of known achievability.
One of the biggest business delivery failings is trying to nail stuff down to early. Ever notice why so many projects go over the original investment case. Because everyone wanted a 'roadmap' quantified before planning was complete. I understand that some business cultures (an example I was given was a Japanese one) don't accept overruns because they invest in planning before promises. I digress.
I haven't said that the govt shouldn't plan. Far from it. I think they need to constantly re-plan based on what's happening and have underlying aims that they can be agile in achieving. Planning AND reacting are key.I read this shaking my head knowing not to carry on. Only plan if there is a certain degree of certainty. Good grief.
I don't believe for a second, based on your responses that you are a planner, but there you go.
-
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@hooroo said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@hooroo said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@crucial said in Coronavirus - New Zealand:
@hooroo what's the point of planning and budgeting on something that has a slim chance of going to plan? You'd then have everyone bitching and moaning about how they had spent money, arranged functions etc etc and it changed on them.
Giving false hope isn't good leadership either.
I do think that there may be a bit more of a plan soon though hence the modelling being done on vaccination rates etc. There is a need to create a carrot instead of just pointing to the stick.
I wouldn't be making plans on it though. Way too much can happen.A plan isn't false hope. It's a plan. A plan can have what is deemed as bad outcomes as well as good. That's what planning is.
Has to have a point though. I still don't see what the type of plan we are talking about achieves apart from a waste of time.
There is a roadmap being formulated by the looks of things, based around vaccination rates which is a massive unknown being down to human choice. Anything set out after that is then variable based on something that we can't control short of rounding dips hits up with cattle prods.
Wow you would be awesome in business. Only living in the right now, no planning because future is uncertain, purely reactive.
Fair enough though, it kind of explains a lot.
That's a bit smart arse isn't it? What does it explain exactly?
Funnily enough I am actually a planner by career but also ones that sees no value in setting up measures and goals that experience shows cannot have a certain degree of certainty. I'm sure you are aware of the phases things go through and how plans remain fluid while working toward a goal until they reach levels of known achievability.
One of the biggest business delivery failings is trying to nail stuff down to early. Ever notice why so many projects go over the original investment case. Because everyone wanted a 'roadmap' quantified before planning was complete. I understand that some business cultures (an example I was given was a Japanese one) don't accept overruns because they invest in planning before promises. I digress.
I haven't said that the govt shouldn't plan. Far from it. I think they need to constantly re-plan based on what's happening and have underlying aims that they can be agile in achieving. Planning AND reacting are key.Well countering that I now manage large scale enterprise projects for a living, and I don't recognise at all your take on planning.
In my world if you are leading people through a complex change you lay out your assumptions, risks, constraints, resources and costs, deliverables and milestones, then set out what your intentions are based on that. Then you adapt as needed. And you do it all openly and honestly. The moment you start obfuscating you lose the trust of your stakeholders. It is the height of arrogance to decide on their behalf that there are things too complex for them to know, or that they don't have the brains to interpret what you are telling them. If someone else is picking up the tab they deserve to know everything you know, especially what options are available to them.
I have no idea why running projects or initiatives is different in the public sector, but if it is it might explain why they are so useless at delivery.