Page 1258 - Week 05 - Thursday, 4 June 2020
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Mr Coe asked us to provide some further information about what factors were considered in relation to that. I refer him to my ministerial statement that I gave this morning. I also made similar points when we announced the easing of restrictions in radio interviews. This is about assessing cumulative risk. Dr Coleman has been really clear about that.
As I said this morning, the cumulative risks that need to be assessed when we are looking at easing the restrictions include the size of gatherings; the interaction of social networks where a crossover between multiple social networks creates a larger risk than interaction within a single social network; indoor versus outdoor environments; the number of contact surfaces and the likelihood of many people sharing equipment or touching the same surface; compliance with isolation and quarantine for cases and contacts, which people have of course been really, really good at complying with; the risks associated with increased travel and people movement; the readiness of businesses and undertakings to operate in a COVID-safe manner, which of course I also commend ACT businesses for being really sincere about and for working very hard in that regard; and the disease-balanced epidemiology and modelling. We have actually been clear about how you assess this cumulative risk, and it is cumulatively a risk that has to be assessed.
I have not spoken to the New South Wales health minister; so I am working on the basis of how this health advice works. New South Wales has gone further than the AHPPC framework in relation to hospitality venues. That is probably why they have not gone as far on other matters such as indoor sport, tattoo parlours and massage parlours, community centres, which still cannot open except under very limited circumstances, such as, as Mr Barr said, people being able to visit one another in their own homes, because actually it is all about cumulative risk. We made a very deliberate decision, a decision tailored to this community, that we would in fact go with the rule of 20 and that we would go with that across a range of sectors, including gyms and indoor sport.
Mr Coe made the assertion that it has all been confusing, that there has not been enough advice and that everyone is confused. I would say that the main people sowing confusion are, in fact, those opposite. I commend the health protection service and Access Canberra for the really hard work that they have done in continuing to provide advice, in responding to questions as quickly as possible.
I refer Mr Coe to the now updated definition of an indoor space, which is on the FAQs on the COVID-19 website. Almost as soon as these were announced, there was a definition of indoor space on the FAQs. Mr Coe could have looked it up. He probably did not bother. An indoor space means “an area, room, or premises that is or are substantially enclosed by a roof and walls, regardless of whether the roof or walls, or any part of them, are permanent or temporary or open or closed”. That has now been clarified to add, “substantially enclosed by a roof and walls of solid construction and stretching from floor to ceiling”. That did have to be clarified because some people have interpreted walls as curtains. I would not interpret a curtain as a wall. But some people have. That has now been clarified.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video