A Cabinet report from April 9 has now been released, detailing the technology options that were considered for contact tracing, managing self-isolation, and monitoring population movements/disease spread, mostly based on a smartphone app: https://covid19.govt.nz/assets/resources/proactive-release-2020-july/HR2-Technology-Options-to-Improve-Contact-Tracing.pdf

Officials were driven by four considerations:
- Public health efficacy
- Respect for privacy
- Freedom of movement
- Technical feasibility

An app was expected to be available "within the next two weeks" (so would have been around April 23 - the app ultimately came out May 20).

NCMC used anonymised cellphone location data to monitor population movements and understand the effectiveness of lockdown at a population level, along with Google data. Data Ventures has a system that shows movement data between suburbs on an hourly basis.

The report also covers "rapid sentiment analysis of the social media discussion" about technological options for contact tracing, noting concerns about data security, snooping and overreach.

"We are focusing first on smartphone options that are effective, maintain social licence, respect user’s privacy and security, comply with existing laws, and can be practically deployed soon."

Initiative 1 was an app that would allow people to give their up-to-date contact details to MOH, with zero-rated data, and then voluntarily record the location of the person in the app using the phone's location data (mobile network, GPS, and Wi-Fi).

Initiative 2 was Bluetooth, at that stage based on the Singaporean approach (Apple/Google was not announced yet at that point). Insufficient uptake in Singapore was noted.

Giving away smartphones with Bluetooth to people who don't have them, and "Bluetooth enabled tags" (i.e. a wearable device) for others like children was also considered.

Initiative 3 was to then use the apps for symptom check-ins and monitor the disease spread.

"Ideally, use of the app should be voluntary." "Uptake is high when [users] feel that there is some benefit to them from using the [app]."

The report also mentions engaging with Sam Morgan on developing a Whatsapp channel.

Do we have any data about the effectiveness of this system? How many people actually engaged with it? Why did it disappear from public view within a week after launch?

Govt also considered the further use of mobile phone network location data at an individual level for contact tracing. I'd like to tell you more about it, but unfortunately:

A table of potential technology solutions to different parts of pandemic management:

Key risks identified were around social licence and technology risks. "A loss of social licence can put pandemic management at risk and this needs to be managed carefully."

After raising the risk around social license, the next paragraph talks about consultation. Instead of talking to the people who will be affected by these decisions, only govt agencies and a few academics were consulted in the lead-up to this paper (which to be fair was early on)

"The Ministry of Health strongly recommends that the use of any application or other technological solution is a personal choice." A mandatory or opt-out scenario "would have serious consequences in terms of public buy in and social licence once the COVID-19 response is exited"

Onto the next doc from June 5: a Health Report about COVID-19 contact tracing. Basically, they increased capacity a lot and now have ready, surge, and extended capacity to make 10-20k phone calls a day. https://covid19.govt.nz/assets/resources/proactive-release-2020-july/HR16-Health-Report-COVID-19-Contact-Tracing-5-June-2020.pdf

For those of us keen on technological solutions, we have to remember that in NZ this is underpinned by the manual system, and so we have to make sure technology helps, not overwhelms, the manual system. 10-20k calls a day is quite a lot of capacity though.

This report from June 8 talks reviews coming out of Level 2: https://covid19.govt.nz/assets/resources/proactive-release-2020-july/AL2-Minute-and-Paper-CAB-20-MIN-0270-Review-of-COVID-19-Alert-Level-2-8-June-2020.PDF

At this point, govt was already noting "declining levels of concern about COVID-19 and falling perceptions of compliance with the rules".

Mandatory display of QR codes was considered, but the relevant legal orders could not be in place until June 23 at the earliest, and there were concerns about the generation of posters and the capacity of the technical systems, as well as enforcement of poster display.

They ultimately recommended voluntary display of codes, "accompanied by guidance and proactive promotion and public messaging with key sectors". Churches, banks, all schools and ECE centres, gyms and fitness clubs got the posters sent out (I assume as high-risk places).

So at some point (probably another month from now) we'll see the outcome of DG Bloomfield reporting back on the voluntary approach to using QR codes...

We have to remember that we view these documents differently now with hindsight, the context is different to what it was back in April or June when they were written.

But also it is frustrating to see how we were all left in the dark over some of these activities - it turns out that a lot of the things we thought should be happening, were happening, but kept out of the public without consultation or development of social licence.

The point isn't that we should just assume things are happening and let govt get on with it (because that is a poor assumption that gets proven wrong regularly) - it's that the govt needs to include the People in these discussions so that we are all part of the same conversation.