Testing, tracing, and other public health materials

Whakamātautau, whaiwahi, me ētahi atu rauemi hauora

Topics raised

Summary of views

Negative commentary about the use of testing and tracing tools and public health materials (like masks) in the COVID-19 response most often included assertions that such measures are ineffective, or that the mandating of these tools encouraged discrimination and division. People discussed a range of negative impacts of masks in particular, including poor treatment of mask-exempt people, physical discomfort or difficulties with wearing a mask, and impacts on children's social development from being unable to see faces. People also frequently criticised rules around masking as nonsensical or inconsistent. Testing and tracing methods were additionally viewed as violating privacy.

In other submissions, people expressed support for these measures, especially the free access to Rapid Antigen Tests (RATs) and masks which were viewed as having helped to prevent viral spread. However, issues with slow procurement and rollout were raised as areas for improvement in future. The COVID-19 tracer app was praised for its user-friendliness and swift development. Some people pointed out the necessity of public cooperation for these tools to be effective, often suggesting better education and product quality to encourage buy-in before a future outbreak.

Testing, tracing, other public health materials: what went well

Whakamātautau, whaiwahi, me ētahi atu rauemi hauora: ngā mea i angitu

Testing | Whakamātautau

Support for the implementation and rollout of testing products

I had a sore throat one day and went to the local testing facility (we didn't have RATs at that stage). Again, that was efficient and easy. I was clear. I've done RATs since and I like that they were free because it encouraged people to test. 
65–74-year-old Pākehā male, Auckland

Having RATs available for free was a huge equity aspect, enabling all New Zealanders to take personal responsibility, and to manage individual risk as well as family and community risk. 
35–44-year-old Pākehā female, Wellington

People often reflected favourably upon the implementation of testing. More often than not, comments were made in regard to RATs rather than Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) tests, although many discussed testing (or testing stations) in general. Most commonly, people praised the decision to make RATs free and the speed at which they were rolled out, citing benefits to accessibility and equity. Some people also attributed these benefits to RATs being more comfortable and straightforward to use than PCRs. Praise was often paired with a description of the direct positive impact testing had on people's pandemic experiences, or the impact they believed it had on containing the virus. The accessibility of RATs gave people a sense of safety and reassurance, as well as confidence in managing their health and protecting others from contracting COVID-19.

Rapid Antigen Tests (RATs) became more prominent in 2022 as the Government adapted to Omicron's spread. While there was criticism about the delay in making RATs widely available, the Government's cautious approach aimed to ensure quality control and avoid reliance on less effective tools. 
45–54-year-old Pākehā female, Wellington

People who  praised PCR tests told us they were necessary to the elimination strategy, as they were more accurate than RATs. While some people identified RATs as being less accurate, they still emphasised the importance of RATs as the pandemic went on. Comments of this nature were different from those that offered praise only for RATs, in that they viewed the test types as different but complementary.

I think RAT tests should continue to be free and people should be strongly encouraged to stay at home while they are contagious with COVID-19. And it would be good if the Government made it easy and free for thoughtful people to test and isolate. 
35–44-year-old Pākehā female, Auckland

Submitters frequently mentioned their support for free or subsidised RATs, and  expressing concern that cost now prohibiting people from testing, resulting in sickness being treated with less caution than COVID-19. Some people told us that they still employ RATs when unwell, reasoning that COVID-19 is still present and causing harm. A smaller proportion of people expressed concern that RATs are no longer free this shows a lack of consideration for immunocompromised or lower income people.

Provision of free RATs was essential and wastewater testing was invaluable especially as the pandemic was waning and people were less likely to test themselves. 
65–74-year-old female, West Coast

Less often, people commended wastewater testing, identifying it as an unexpected but useful method of tracking the spread of COVID-19. In some submissions, people expressed that testing was the only aspect of the pandemic response that they agreed with.

General support for testing

Comments about testing were often simple statements that testing saved lives, was important, or otherwise helped in the pandemic response. Some people gave brief expressions of their pride in or gratitude for the way the Government implemented testing, describing this as great, effective, fantastic, efficient, excellent, and valuable. Others were generally supportive of testing but less enthused, stating that it was 'not a problem', 'made sense', that they were 'happy with the testing', or found it 'okay'.

The RAT TEST etc. seemed to be quite reliable and robust. 
55–64-year-old Pākehā female, Otago

Positive assessments of testing stations, availability, and results

Some people spoke to the value of testing as a public health tool and saw where efficiencies could have enhanced experiences. Most commonly, people told us that they had insufficient or inconsistent access to free RATs. A small portion of people noted that high demand for RATs led to price gouging by pharmacies and other businesses. Some people also made the point that there could have been more accessible pick-up locations for RATs; such as supermarkets, libraries, and other community hubs.

RATs were great, but many people didn't know they were free, and they were not as readily available in small towns, where local shops were charging quite a lot for them. 
35–44-year-old Pākehā female, Manawatū-Whanganui

PCR tests were similarly regarded by some submitters as a necessary inconvenience. People often identified wait times as problematic; both for the actual testing stations and for receiving results. Accessibility of PCR tests for rural communities and people without private vehicles was of particular concern. Complaints about PCR testing were often paired with expressions of gratitude for RATs.

RATS were easy to get but you couldn't get enough. Sometimes I was given one packet of five tests for a family of four, sometimes they would give me four boxes. We should have been able to take what we needed, there was enough stock. 
35–44-year-old Pākehā female, Wellington

In the early stages, the lines for testing were significant. I recall waiting up to 2.5 hours in a car for a test, we were lucky not to have children as I believe this would add a significant stress factor. Home testing earlier would have been ideal, but I recognise it was a changing situation where it took time to understand the landscape and what was going to be required. 
25–34-year-old Pākehā female, Waikato

The RAT tests were good if you could get them, access was difficult with not many testing stations especially around Auckland where waiting times were terrible. So instant tests were helpful, providing people were honest, in some cases they weren't. 
35–44-year-old Pākehā female, Auckland

 

 
Support for a faster rollout of test or increased ability to import RATs

My friend had a business that was an essential business. He bought 1,000 RATs testing kits from Australia. However they were confiscated by customs, and all he was trying to do was keep his workers safe. 
65–74-year-old Pākehā male, Manawatū-Whanganui

A number of people who supported testing as a public health tool felt that RATs could have been available earlier. People often linked this delay with various stages of the approval, procurement, and rollout process. Occasionally, people recounted paying excessive prices for 'illicit' RATs or bringing them back from overseas holidays prior to the Government rollout. Some also expressed disappointment that RATs imported privately were seized at the border, suggesting that tests approved for use in other countries were good enough to be used in New Zealand, and proactivity in securing RATs should have been encouraged rather than hampered or even punished. Submitters questioned whether an earlier rollout of RATs could have changed how the pandemic played out; in terms of restrictions being lifted and other Government decisions.
 

RAT TESTS STOLEN: I agreed with the concept well before it was accepted, to the point of doing the training online from Australia and purchasing RAT tests for my staff pre the introduction by the New Zealand Government. My second order was "commandeered" by the Government as the supplier told us they were for healthcare workers only initially, yet our industry was officially under healthcare status as a compulsory profession. There was no one to talk to about this and we had to wait a full two months to get our back order, and other funeral companies just broke the law as they simply could not get the supply, yet were not allowed to enter rest homes and other care facilities if they had not tested. It wasn't till much later that they had supply to test us. 
55–64-year-old Pākehā male, Wellington

 

 
Private sector involvement

The Government's slow uptake on utilising rapid antigen tests was very damaging. So many businesses could have operated safely if they were utilised. 
No demographic information provided

In some comments made about the rollout of RATs being slow, people described the impact this had on businesses and discussed how the private sector could have sped up the process. Some people told us that lack of RATs kept businesses from opening, and that the private sector should have been involved somehow in order to manage demand better. Less frequently people described personal experiences of their business being affected by poor RATs supply, or instances where their company could have been utilised in procuring, supplying, or administering tests.

[My company] had the capacity and staffing to assist the public with doing saliva testing and for whatever reason despite this being offered to the Government this wasn't taken advantage of, this was a huge opportunity missed and could have assisted the wider community. 
45–54-year-old Pākehā female, Auckland

Conditional support for testing

Some people were generally supportive of testing but had reservations. Most commonly, people had doubts about the degree to which RATs were accurate but still saw value in their use. People also told us that they felt a 'sense of dread' around testing because they would have to isolate if they tested positive. Some people expressed concern that others were not testing specifically to avoid having to isolate. Discomfort associated with nasal swabbing was also discussed by people who were otherwise generally supportive of testing; many of whom thought that children should not have been subject to PCRs or RATs. Others said they would have preferred saliva testing or another alternative means of diagnosis. In lesser numbers, people voiced concern about RATs being misused or underutilised.

RATs I think were not used correctly at home a lot of the time. However, they were effective in diagnosing COVID-19, and being free was amazing. 
No demographic information provided

RAT tests I don't have particularly strong opinions on, as I was not in an industry where this was required at the time. My rough understanding is that the technology suffers from relatively high rates of both false positives and false negatives, meaning plenty of people would have been excluded from work or other areas incorrectly, or been potentially infectious while thinking they were in the clear. However, as no testing is perfect, I think they likely had their place. 
45–54-year-old person, Auckland

Masks | Kōpare

General support for masks

Masks were frequently praised as an effective public health tool used to reduce the spread of COVID-19. Words used to describe masks included essential, important, practical, vital, sensible, and 'amazing'. While some people gave brief statements of support for masks specifically, others mentioned them in lists of pandemic measures they deemed worthwhile or in broad expressions of support for all measures taken.

Masks are a no brainer, the evidence of benefit is undisputable. 
35–44-year-old female, Auckland

We were very happy to wear masks in our family and did not feel it was onerous for the benefits to us and others. Would happily utilise masks again. 
45–54-year-old Māori/Pākehā female, Wellington

When declaring support for masks, especially alongside other public health tools, people often credited them with saving lives. This was spoken to both in the wider context of the pandemic, but also on a personal level where some people recounted experiences where they felt they avoided contracting COVID-19 or passing it on because of masks. People often told us that wearing masks made them feel safe and that they felt proud they were protecting others – particularly immunocompromised people. While some people acknowledged that mask wearing was not always an enjoyable experience, especially for prolonged periods, this was always paired with acceptance that sacrificing comfort was preferable to contracting or spreading COVID-19.

Masks have been proven to have reduced the spread. They took some getting used to. In the hospital we wore them for 12 hours at a time. Sometimes it was hot and uncomfortable, but it never affected our oxygen levels. Having COVID-19 certainly would have. 
55–64-year-old Pākehā female, Auckland

Less often, people supported the use of masks by using examples of countries where masking when unwell was common before the pandemic, with this sometimes being linked to the selflessness or community-mindedness of a population/culture. In smaller numbers, people praised Government communications about masks, using words such as clear, accessible, scientific, and excellent.

If the science is still being worked on precautions have to be taken. Masks were a good idea as older people and those with compromised immune systems, children and babies. They were common practice in Asian countries with large populations living and travelling in close proximity to each other. 
75–84-year-old Pākehā female, Otago

We had an excellent masking campaign, which emphasised protecting each other not just ourselves. Given that masking was extremely effective relative to price, it was a great tool used throughout the pandemic. 
35–44-year-old Chinese male, Auckland

Of those who supported mask use, many expressed support for the ongoing use of masks when unwell or in situations that may pose a heightened risk of contracting illness, such as healthcare settings or crowded places. People either told us they appreciated mask use being normalised during the pandemic, or that they wished it was more socially acceptable to still wear masks when logical to do so. Many people described circumstances under which they or somebody they knew wore masks, or in which they felt mask use should be actively encouraged. Disappointment in decreased mask usage over time was also conveyed by some submitters.

Masks are also such a simple, yet effective, means of protecting oneself – I work within a hospital and wear a mask each day, yet they are not enforced and so barely anyone else does. I have caught COVID-19 this year for the FIRST TIME, thanks to the fact that no one cares about masks or protecting anyone. It kept me down for over a week and I now have long-term health effects. If other people had also kept up with safety protocols, I would be a lot healthier. There are many people in this country at far higher risk than I am, and mask protocols still need to be in place to protect everyone. 
25–34-year-old female, Wellington

I love that the masks have stuck around, and that they are available in medical facilities. Some still use them when they have a cold to protect others and I admire that. It should've continued to be normalised. 
25–34-year-old Pākehā female, Canterbury

Support for earlier use of masks

People who supported mask use sometimes suggested that masks could have been introduced earlier in the pandemic. Some acknowledged that at the time, mask efficacy against COVID-19 was still being assessed while others felt that public acceptance of mask science was the cause of delayed mask uptake.

I cannot understand why masks were only recommended quite late. 
65–74-year-old Pākehā female, Nelson-Tasman

The requirement for mask wearing could have helped if it was introduced earlier however the transmission path through the air and the effectiveness of masks was not known until later. 
65–74-year-old Pākehā male, Wellington

Positive assessments of mask procurement and availability

Some people told us that they found masks to be in good supply throughout the pandemic and expressed gratitude for there being no cost attached. While some worried that cost was now a barrier to continued mask use, most people were simply grateful that ease of access during the pandemic contributed to reducing the spread of COVID-19.

Support for mask mandates

People who were in favour of the use of mask mandates described them as good, important, effective, reasonable, appropriate, excellent, and critical. People often expressed gratitude for mask wearing being mandated; saying that they felt safe, protected, and that their health was prioritised by the Government. Mask mandates were characterised as 'another tool to keep our hospitals from overflowing', with many people affirming the efficacy of masks and often stating that mandates contributed to reducing the spread of COVID-19 and possible deaths from the virus. Less frequently, submitters reasoned that mandating masks was necessary because people were not wearing masks of their own accord. Commentary concerning mask exemptions was split between people who felt exemptions were too easy to obtain, and those who felt that they were policed appropriately.

Difficulties with enforcement and noncompliance

In some submissions, people who supported the use of masks discussed the difficulty of enforcing mask use. Some people were not happy that others avoided, incorrectly used, or simply did not comply with mask rules. Often, non-compliance was attributed to misinformation about masks, and people expressed frustration that others valued their personal freedom over the health of their community.

Submitters often described those who were not exempt but who refused to wear masks as selfish. Non-compliance with mask mandates was a cause of stress and anxiety, especially for people working in public-facing roles during the pandemic, and those who were vulnerable to COVID-19 or who interacted with immunocompromised people. People said that 'policing' mask wearing was pointless as anyone could claim to have an exemption.

Less frequently, people described the difficulty of getting their children or older family members to wear a mask; teachers also mentioned having difficulty getting preschool or school students to wear masks.

Issues with procurement and distribution of masks

Some people who supported mask use discussed issues with the procurement and distribution of masks. The most frequently made point was that the Government was slow to approve, procure, and distribute masks. Also common was concern that certain at-risk communities (healthcare workers, teachers, immunocompromised people) were not prioritised in the distribution of masks. Mask quality was another key consideration; some people told us that N95/KN95/KF94 masks should have been the baseline, or at least more widely available. Some submitters had difficulty securing surgical masks and felt that these should have been available for free in a wider variety of places. A smaller number of people criticised the Government for not accepting help from the private sector to manufacture, procure, or distribute masks more efficiently.

Conditional support for masks

Some of those who supported masks had some limits or conditions to their support. The most frequent caveat was that people supported the use of high-quality respirator masks only but not surgical masks due to doubts about their efficacy. Other issues with masks raised by people who generally supported mask use were specific to individuals (for example, with various health conditions), communities (especially hearing-impaired people), and occupations.
 

Having free masks available was also important for equity and to promote mask wearing in general. 
35–44-year-old Pākehā female, Wellington

The supply of masks and RATs was so effective that they were always free in our Otago community. No one was out of pocket for those items. 
35–44-year-old Pākehā female, Otago

Making mask wearing compulsory although a pain to wear definitely saved lives. And kept infection at bay. There was no confusion which made it easier for patients and staff to adhere too. 
55–64-year-old Pākehā male, Northland

I think wearing masks and mandating that was really useful to help prevent spread. I have an autoimmune disease and have still caught COVID-19 which has affected my condition – I can't imagine how bad it would have been, or how many times I would have caught it if these measures hadn't been in place. 
35–44-year-old female, Otago

Many people appeared to disregard the preventative measures (wearing masks etc.) and put others at risk. One family member refused to wear a mask when entering a hospital to visit a relative who had recently been operated on. Staff at the hospital were overworked and could not be expected to police everyone. 
65–74-year-old Pākehā male, Wellington

Face masks – All research has indicated that ANY TYPE OF FACE MASK was better than nothing. Models showed that 100 percent adherence to mask wearing, even with low-effectiveness masks such as cloth or surgical, could have eliminated widespread COVID-19 infection at any time. However, people with other agendas were now emboldened by widespread misinformation to claim that mask-wearing somehow infringed their rights. 
45–54-year-old Pākehā male, Canterbury

Would have perhaps liked to see more distribution of masks of different types to facilitate better disease control on an individual basis but also acknowledge that may have produced unnecessary plastic wastage. Sometimes felt a bit low on masks. 
25–34-year-old female

The pressure to buy or find masks or tests was awful and a panic situation. These should have been free, so businesses could open more quickly. They were expensive to buy. 
45–54-year-old Pākehā female, Auckland

Masks were excellent for slowing the spread of sickness; terrible to teach in, but we were all so healthy while wearing them! We have a huge English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) population at our school and without clear mouth movement and facial expressions communication was much more difficult and teaching phonics without a visible mouth is not easy. 
25–34-year-old Pākehā female, Nelson-Tasman

In retrospect they should have been KN95 at least face masks not surgical masks that doesn't really protect from another airborne virus. I do think having masks available also encouraged mask wearing generally, as a COVID-19 conscious person who still masks I think attitudes towards mask wearing would be different if people had access to respirators and more education was shared around how airborne viruses travel. 
25–34-year-old Cook Islander/Māori female, Auckland

 
Contact tracing | Te whaiwahi whakapā

General support for contact tracing

The COVID-19 tracer app was another valuable tool, allowing for quick and efficient contact tracing in the earlier stages of the pandemic. 
25–34-year-old Māori/Pākehā female, Auckland

Contact tracing was often singled out as a beneficial public health tool and was also listed alongside other public health measures that were appreciated. People frequently emphasised how essential they believed contact tracing to be in reducing the spread of COVID-19, with many claiming that tracing had saved lives. In addition to the health benefits, some people told us that the tracing app benefitted their mental health, giving them reassurance and contributing to their sense of safety. The user-friendly nature of the tracing app was praised, and those who felt that contact tracing was time-consuming or otherwise bothersome made it clear that it was a very small sacrifice in comparison to the personal and community benefit reaped.

Being able to trace and warn close contacts was essential in keeping the infection rates low. Any contacts would have been able to monitor their health and pre-emptively break the transmission chain. 
25–34-year-old female, Auckland

Impacts and positive experiences of contact tracing

Comments made in support of contact tracing often included firsthand evidence of its positive impacts. People recounted being notified that they had been exposed to COVID-19, and that this enabled them to take appropriate precautions. Often, people mentioned that the tracing app empowered them to make necessary outings (such as for groceries) that they otherwise would not have. Immunocompromised and older people in particular told us that contact tracing contributed to them feeling safer.

The tracer app was sensational in my opinion. I had a couple of alerts and when they pinged that I had been in close contact with an infected person, I was sent home from work. They helped people be aware of their risk when locations were released and to take appropriate self-isolation precautions in the early days when the original strain was rampant. 
No demographic information provided

I greatly appreciate the peace of mind the contact tracing provided it made me more confident in leaving the house and doing things around town. If contact tracing was not available, I think I would have avoided going out for longer. I think we should take the approach of other countries and require people to participate. 
18–24-year-old Pākehā female, Wellington

Support for the development, implementation, and rollout of contact tracing

Comments were made in support of contact tracing which specifically referenced the development, implementation, and rollout of such measures. Some commended the speed at which contact tracing, in particular the tracing app, was rolled out to the public. Particular praise was given to how simple the tracing app was to use, yet how effective it was as a public health tool. Comparisons were often made to other countries where contact tracing was not implemented as well as in New Zealand. Some people also noted that they felt confident their privacy was not being compromised by the app or contact tracing as a whole.

Commentary specific to the development process was less common and was typically made by people who identified themselves as having software development knowledge. The most common aspect of development praised was that data storage for the tracing app was decentralised; meaning it was stored on users' devices. As with comments relating to implementation and rollout, some people compared the tracing app development in New Zealand with other countries, saying that the tracing app rolled out was superior, or that it 'outperformed many'.

The COVID-19 tracer app was easy to use and made a huge difference during the times we needed to contact trace. We were so lucky to have something so user-friendly available so quickly. 
45–54-year-old Pākehā female, Auckland

I could not believe how well the public health software – like the tracer app, like the personal recording of your vaccine – worked immediately after release.
65–74-year-old Pākehā male, Canterbury

I reserve particular praise for the tracking app. As a person who is interested in and concerned with privacy, this app was fantastic. It was fairly cheap to develop, it respected privacy, and was simple and easy to use for people without the latest phones. It was even developed in a non-exclusive way so that competing products could be used. I cannot overemphasise how excellent this application was. 
45–54-year-old Pākehā male, Wellington

Open sourcing the code for the COVID-19 Tracer app was great, I was able to personally review the code and was able to better ensure to my circles that the app was only storing the appropriate data on the phone, and the risks/lack thereof involved in using the app. This should be encouraged more when dealing with public health and privacy risky applications. 
25–34-year-old Pākehā male, Waikato

 

 

The contact tracing system worked well for those who used it, but it was harder to make our teenagers use it. 
35–44-year-old Pākehā female, Waikato

I also understand why we scanned in, and shared locations publicly when an infected person had visited them. I think the Government read the room and stopped this when it was no longer necessary. I can understand this would have been stressful for the people whose locations were shared, and I remember being paranoid I would test positive, and my location would be shared. A public campaign around not shaming people, blame the virus, not the person etc. could have lessened this. 
25–34-year-old Pākehā female, Auckland

Conditional support for contact tracing

Some people who supported contact tracing were hesitant to give their full support. The most common reason for hesitancy was that contact tracing was only as effective as public buy-in for the measure; and people were often concerned that others did not sign or scan in, especially as the pandemic advanced. Sometimes, these comments overlapped with those who felt that engaging in contact tracing should have been compulsory or enforced more strictly. People indicated that privacy concerns were cause for limited public buy-in and suggested that better public communications around how data was handled could have helped. In much smaller numbers, people expressed concern that those worried about privacy were not accessing the services they needed, such as addiction services. Other less common reasons given for not wholeheartedly supporting contact tracing were that some people did not have the technology, or the technological skills, to use the tracing app; and that on some occasions people were not informed (or were informed too late) of possible exposure events.

Other public health matters | Ētahi atu take hauora tūmatanui

Support for social distancing

I was also grateful the Government had the courage to continue with social distancing tools after the initial national lockdown, in the face of increasing pressure from ignorant politically driven resistance. 
65–74-year-old Pākehā male, Nelson-Tasman

People who voiced support for social distancing most often made brief remarks; either saying they understood the rationale behind it, or that they felt that it was beneficial or effective in reducing the spread of COVID-19. Sometimes people shared experiences in which social distancing was, or was not, well adhered to. Less commonly, people acknowledged the efficacy of social distancing but expressed concern about the social impact it had on people, especially children.

We appreciated strict controls as to crowd management at our supermarket. 
75–84-year-old Pākehā male, Gisborne

Support for self-isolation

People who supported self-isolation as a public health measure were appreciative that isolating after contracting the virus was a legal requirement and that people complied. For the most part, comments were short statements in support for isolating when unwell, although some people also expressed gratitude that dedicated COVID-19 sick leave made this financially viable. Occasionally people voiced concern that COVID-19 sick leave was no longer available to employees. Less often, people discussed their experiences with self-isolation; praising the support offered to them.

Staying home when sick and infectious is one of the most powerful strategies to keep transmission under control. So many lives were saved because people took responsible steps to protect their community from harm. 
45–54-year-old Pākehā female, Wellington

The rules for isolating after a positive test were appropriate to reduce infections of contacts. 
65–74-year-old Pākehā male, Wellington

Support for sanitisation

Some people mentioned sanitising surfaces and hands to reduce the spread of COVID-19 was useful and most often listed this public health measure alongside others they deemed effective and worthwhile. In some comments, people mentioned places where they felt sanitising was or was not sufficient. Some people felt that hand sanitiser should have been available to the public free of charge.

Sanitisers were available in all health-related places, and supermarkets etc. also were generally good with providing them. 
45–54-year-old Indian male, Auckland

Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) procurement and distribution

Comments made in support of PPE were most often shared by people who worked in the health sector. People frequently shared positive experiences either obtaining PPE or that its use meant they avoided contracting COVID-19. Other comments relating to PPE were more general offerings of support, typically brief statements relating to procurement and access; though in other cases PPE was listed as one of many public health measures that contributed positively to reducing the spread of COVID-19.

On the other hand, some people supported the use of PPE but expressed frustration at the lack of PPE available, particularly in medical facilities.

I resisted the infection, wiping door handles etc. and experience with contagious diseases no doubt helped. We have both noticed that we have not been getting as many (or maybe any) sore throats during or after COVID-19. 
75–84-year-old Pākehā female, Auckland

It was an anxious time being a healthcare worker, but with adequate PPE and support I never caught COVID-19 from work. 
35–44-year-old Pākehā female, Bay of Plenty

Despite assurances we had already sourced sufficient supplies, that was not the case in reality. Our ability to access PPE and other supplies was thwarted, as we had transited over time to importing all of these supplies. Equipment stored for such an event was insufficient and close to expiry. 
55–64-year-old Pākehā female, Canterbury

 

Testing, tracing, other public health materials: what could be improved

Whakamātautau, whaiwahi, me ētahi atu rauemi hauora: ngā mea hei whakapai ake

Criticisms of masks | Whakatakē mō ngā kōpare

General opposition to masks and mask mandates

As for wearing masks that is very ineffective as the supposed virus can easily pass through a mask fabric as easily as a mosquito through a chain link fence.
65–74-year-old Pākehā male, Canterbury

Masks are ridiculous. They don't stop paint chemicals, let alone something the size of a virus. Anyone with half a brain knows this.
No demographic information provided

 
Masks were discussed extensively by people who were generally opposed to their use as a public health measure. Most often, people told us that they thought masks were ineffective. It was frequently claimed that COVID-19 virus particles are smaller than the gaps in the weave of masks. People used a wide variety of adjectives and analogies to convey their opinion. Masks were frequently dismissed as 'a joke' and were also said to be a waste of time, a fallacy, a farce, arbitrary, silly, useless, bizarre, senseless, outrageous, and pointless. In some comments, people who deemed masks ineffective justified their claim by citing a review of masks conducted by the Cochrane Institute.

Sometimes, people insinuated that various health officials and organisations were aware that masks were ineffective but mandated them regardless. Some people told us that they object to being forced to do something, and the mask mandate violated their human rights. Less often, people said that the mandate was illegitimate, not actually a legal requirement, and was unenforceable by law. Some words used to describe mask mandates included authoritarian, inhumane, disgusting, oppressive, ridiculous, and insane.

Mask mandates ignored effectiveness, practical realities and individual circumstances. The financial burden of these measures, coupled with the erosion of personal freedoms, has left scars. 
55–64-year-old Pākehā male, Canterbury

Despite [Sir Ashley] Bloomfield originally suggesting they were ineffective, mask mandates soon become a large part of the response. They were required in shops, workplaces, even schools. We were told they'd stop the virus, but the science is far from clear-cut. The 2023 Cochrane Review, for example, found no solid proof that masks made a big difference in stopping viruses like COVID-19 in everyday settings. Yet, the Government pushed them hard without being upfront about the doubts, making it seem like masks were a magic fix. 
35–44-year-old Pākehā person

Mask mandates were inappropriate, people should have been given a choice. 
45–54-year-old male, Auckland

In some cases, people were opposed to the mask mandate because they believed the Government were using the pandemic response to exert control. A common belief was that the mask mandate was put in place to fearmonger and remind people that they were supposed to be scared of COVID-19. Masks were sometimes referred to as muzzles or gags, with people theorising that they were mandated to enforce silence, test compliance, subjugate, and create division by making people wary of each other.

Then there was the mask rule, another absolutely stupid rule. If they worked so well then why did it matter if I wasn't wearing one, the other people wearing one would be protected by wearing theirs. I believe it was all about controlling people. 
45–54-year-old female, Auckland

There is no strong evidence that masks significantly mitigated the spread of COVID-19. Instead, mask mandates created widespread fear and division, turning neighbours, friends, and strangers into enforcers of Government directives rather than supporters of each other. 
35–44-year-old Māori/Pākehā female, Southland

Occasionally, people who were generally opposed to masks and/or the mask mandate also told us that they had refused to wear a mask throughout the pandemic. These statements were sometimes bolstered by claims that people who wore masks caught COVID-19 while they did not.

When the mask mandates came out, we as much as we could avoided wearing them. My wife being a theatre nurse was horrified knowing full well from her training that masks would not do anything to prevent transmission. 
45–54-year-old Pākehā male, Wellington

Negative experiences of mask wearing

People who were opposed to masks or mask mandates frequently described the various impacts mask wearing had on them, people known to them, or society in general. These typically fell into the categories of social impacts including mask exemptions, physical impacts, and impacts on children.

The social impacts of mask wearing and the mask mandate were most often discussed by people who personally experienced judgment for not wearing a mask. Many of these comments were made by people who stated that they had a mask exemption, some of whom specified that it was for an invisible condition. People either recounted specific experiences or spoke more generally of feeling discriminated against, humiliated, abused, shunned, judged, shamed, or excluded. Specific experiences included people being refused service or asked to leave places of business, loss of employment due to mask mandates, and many unique instances of confrontation. Less often, people with mask exemptions described their difficulty obtaining an exemption or having their exemption recognised.

My husband was humiliated in front of a long queue at the Countdown supermarket because he wasn't wearing a mask (he was exempt), but the person at the door wouldn't let him in to pick up our already paid groceries. It was awful. 
35–44-year-old female, Bay of Plenty

I constantly experienced hate and anger for not wearing a mask. 
No demographic information provided

People sometimes speculated that social division resulted from Government messaging that made people fearful of those who did not comply with mandated public health measures. When people spoke more generally about the social impacts of mask wearing, they often expressed concern about the sense of disconnection or distrust created by not seeing people's faces during the pandemic. Some people worried that this has had ongoing impacts on people's mental state, because they continue to see others wearing masks in situations where it is not necessary. Other concerns included that people were empowered to behave badly during the pandemic because they could hide behind a mask and not be held accountable for their behaviour.

Many people who disagreed with mask use or the mandate discussed the physical impacts of mask wearing, although it was framed in different ways. Most often, people expressed concern that mask wearing caused harm to the wearer by restricting their oxygen intake. Sometimes people said that this lack of oxygen, or excess of carbon dioxide, caused headaches, nausea, claustrophobia, or dizziness. Other common concerns were that masks were a breeding ground for bacteria which the wearer was inhaling, and that mask wearers were inhaling microplastics. Less often, people told us they developed a rash or acne from wearing a mask.

In some cases, people identified themselves as having a pre-existing condition that was triggered or exacerbated by mask wearing. Often, commentary of this nature did not contain discussion of mask efficacy but did include discussion of the negative physical impacts of mask wearing, which sometimes included negative commentary about the mask mandate. Pre-existing conditions impacted by mask wearing were frequently respiratory conditions such as asthma, bronchiectasis, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), and emphysema. People with anxiety or Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) also discussed the physical impacts of mask wearing on their condition; one person made the following statement about masks:

While I understood their purpose, wearing a mask triggered sensory memories of being smothered or silenced, a common experience for survivors of physical abuse. The mandate to mask in public spaces, enforced through legal penalties and social shaming, felt like another layer of control, dictating how I presented myself to the world. The Inquiry's review of public health materials must consider how these measures, while epidemiologically sound, disregarded the sensory and psychological needs of trauma survivors. The Government's failure to offer trauma-informed guidance—such as exemptions for those with sensory triggers—reinforced a pattern of prioritising compliance over compassion. 
45–54-year-old male, Nelson-Tasman

Some people with hearing and speech impairments, or those speaking on behalf of those with impairments told us that widespread mask wearing made communication difficult.

Children and young people were also the focus of comments from those who were concerned about masks. They worried that masks could hinder young children's social and emotional development, particularly their ability to read facial expressions and learn language through visual cues. Others expressed concern about the psychological impact of seeing adults in masks, often suggesting that it had caused irreversible harm to children which would be an ongoing issue for the younger generation. Less often, people worried about masks reducing children's oxygen intake. In some cases, teachers, parents, and grandparents shared stories of children they said were affected by mask use, though it was more common for people to speak generally about perceived impacts of mask use on children.

The use of masks and having to use a mask exemption card was the pits. I should have been able to say I don't agree with the science, so I won't wear one. But no if you said that you wouldn't be allowed into anything and may even be arrested on the spot by people calling police on you. I did feel that I knew a little of what it was like to be Jewish in Germany in WWII. 
55–64-year-old Pākehā female, Auckland

The mandatory use of masks in all public spaces contributed to lasting psychological impacts. Personally, I have developed heightened anxiety related to mask-wearing—an issue I never had before. The messaging around masks made it feel like they were essential at all times, yet now they are largely disregarded, demonstrating a stark contrast to the intense fear they once represented. 
45–54-year-old Pākehā female, Northland

They instil more fear in the community as things appear abnormal with everyone wearing masks and facial expressions are hidden. Those refusing to wear masks were reprimanded by others. People even drive in cars by themselves or run, walk or bike in the healthy fresh air with masks, they have been so brainwashed by the propaganda. 
45–54-year-old Pākehā male, Otago

Masks themselves cause carbon monoxide poisoning to the brain and do not stop a virus, so I refrained from wearing one. 
65–74-year-old Pākehā female, Auckland

Masks also have been proven to not just be ineffective and unnecessary, but harmful. They reduce people's oxygen intake, increase people's carbon dioxide intake to unnatural dangerous levels, as well as cause skin conditions due to continued contact with contaminated material in directly against the skin. 
No demographic information provided

I have a grand daughter who now has speech problems and believe this is due to mask mandates where a child cannot see words pronounced or formed by another person's mouth. 
55–64-year-old female, Hawke's Bay

Young children 0-12 years old were forced to wear masks and this is not good for their psychological development. Children need to breathe oxygen, and they need to see facial expressions. Some children may still be behind education if you compare them with children who were not wearing masks in other countries. 
35–44-year-old Pākehā male, Bay of Plenty

 

Reports of mask rules as inconsistent or nonsensical

So many ridiculous, illogical, nonsensical rules; stand up, masked at the cafe and the virus will get you, sit down, mask off and it won't... sanity had gone out the window. 
35–44-year-old Pākehā male, Wellington

Wearing masks in an enclosed space – restaurants, planes etc. is foolish and a false security as after five minutes or so, everyone is breathing the same air. The bizarre rules of taking the mask off to eat and then back on again when walking around the restaurant then off to eat etc. was/is surely madness? 
55–64-year-old Pākehā male, Otago

People who opposed masks or the mask mandate often criticised various aspects of the way that these public health measures were implemented. These comments were made by people who disagreed with mask use or mandates, and a common sentiment was that their implementation did not make sense in one way or another. Most often people disapproved of mask rules in hospitality settings, questioning why masks had to be worn when standing or waiting, but could be taken off to sit down and eat. The same critique was applied to taking flights, with people describing masks being compulsory but allowed to be removed for eating as a joke, a farce, silly, pointless, and stupid.

Another aspect of masks that people considered confusing or inconsistent was Government messaging. It was apparent within commentary that the Government changing its official position on masks early in the pandemic had a lasting impact on some people's confidence in both communications and mask efficacy. In addition to criticising the Government reversing its position on mask use, people felt that official advice on mask types was inconsistent.

Masks is another complete nonsense that is still clearly having a lasting detrimental effect on ordinary New Zealanders. At the start of the 'pandemic' we were told that they weren't any use, then later we were told we should wear them, without being given any adequate explanation as to why the advice changed. 
35–44-year-old Pākehā male, Canterbury

Some people who made comments opposing mask use or mandates justified their position by pointing out that masks were often not used in line with best practice, so were not a worthwhile measure. This included how people wore, handled, and disposed of masks; as well as how often disposable masks were replaced.

Cloth masks are USELESS and were identified as such until the 'science' changed suddenly and then everyone had to use them, so it was like putting up a wire fence to keep out mosquitoes. USELESS. 
55–64-year-old Māori/Pākehā male, Auckland

I also couldn't understand the mask wearing, there was no way these were keeping anybody healthy – worn in all manner of ways and then stuffed into pockets and handbags, only to be worn again later. 
45–54-year-old Pākehā female, Northland

Testing | Whakamātautau

General opposition to testing

People who told us they were opposed to testing as a public health measure often made sweeping statements. Some people simply opposed testing without explaining why but most people justified their stance in some way. The most common explanations were that testing was inaccurate, unreliable, or unnecessary. Testing was also frequently characterised as a waste of time, money, or resources. Most often, people referred to testing in general, although some specified whether their criticism was of RATs or PCRs. Some people who opposed tests told us that they refused to test throughout the pandemic, reasoning that it was enough to stay home when feeling unwell, or that tests were inaccurate anyway. Inaccuracy of RATs was illustrated with examples of the different substances people tested which derived positive results. Less often, people told us that they or somebody they knew used this method to acquire a positive RAT in order to avoid work, school, or another commitment.

Testing was a joke, waste of time and money. The sick needed to stay home that is all, like we have been doing for centuries. It gave people a reason not to work and get paid over and over again, money again not well spent from my taxes that I couldn't go into my buildings to earn then pay you to send my workers home on a fake photo they downloaded from the internet of a positive RAT test. Great system! 
45–54-year-old Pākehā male, Auckland

RAT and PCR tests are unreliable and inaccurate, there is no such thing as false positives, false negatives, and asymptomatic you either have something, or you don't, these ridiculous oxymorons are all made up as part of the propaganda campaign to cover up the fact that the tests don't work! 
45–54-year-old Māori/Pākehā female, Auckland

Negative assessments of testing administration and implementation

People who opposed testing as a public health measure sometimes told us about negative experiences they had being tested (mainly PCRs but also RATs). Receiving a test was described as distressing, particularly for children and older people, as well as uncomfortable, violating, painful, invasive, and horrendous. In some cases, people told us they had nose bleeds, headaches, and other problems after being tested, some of which have been ongoing.

She pushed the test stick too deep into my sinuses and I felt a lot of pain; I shrieked and pushed her hand away… My sinuses have never been the same.
55–64-year-old, Auckland

Some people noted that they were made to test in order to travel, for medical treatment, or work. Concern was expressed about how qualified testing staff were, with some reports of negative interactions with staff.

Other issues that people who did not support testing raised with its implementation were varied and less common. Among this commentary, the most common criticism was that money was wasted on RATs being excessively ordered and expiring. Similarly, but less frequently, some people were concerned about PCR testing supplies going to waste when we swapped to RATs. In smaller numbers, people expressed doubts about privacy.

Test development and processing

People who were opposed to testing as a public health measure often discussed the development of PCRs and RATs. The most common point made was that both test types were not fit for purpose, with people often saying that the inventors of the tests had confirmed as such. This was especially prevalent in the case of PCR testing – people sometimes told us in a variety of ways that the inventor had said it was ineffective for diagnostic purposes when tests were processed at a higher cycle threshold (with varying assertions of how many cycles was too many). It was sometimes theorised that tests were known to return a high proportion of false positive results and that this was intentional to create or maintain the illusion of a pandemic.

Concerns that testing was unsafe

A small proportion of people who disagreed with testing did so on the grounds that the swabs were harmful but where they personally did not have an experience in which they were harmed. Some told us tests were poisonous, barbaric, toxic, and dangerous; and named a variety of different substances they believed to be present on swabs. Concern was also frequently expressed about the 'blood-brain barrier' being encroached upon. In some comments, people told us they were suspicious that PCR tests were used to collect DNA without consent.

I never tested once as I could see that it was not normal practice to test thousands of well people. Claiming there were so many 'cases' in NZ made the public scared, but in fact it was manufactured by testing with a false test. I learned from experts all around the world (who were being censored) that the PCR test was not fit for purpose. They had turned the threshold up so high that anything could be detected easily. 
55–64-year-old Pākehā female, Auckland

Testing swabs are sterilised with toxic substances that cause harm. 
65–74-year-old Pākehā female, Manawatū

Touching the brain/blood barrier is incredibly dangerous, and I'm pleased that I was very resistant to this testing. 
55–64-year-old Pākehā female, Auckland

 

Tracing | Whaiwhai

General opposition to tracing

COVID-19 tracer app: I did not subscribe to this as I believe it was not necessary to track people's movements during COVID-19. 
55–64-year-old Pākehā male, Auckland

Many people stated general opposition to digital contact tracing and the technologies used to track people's movements. Tracing often was not discussed at length, instead it tended to be included in lists of measures people opposed or didn't 'subscribe' to, or were supplementary to broader opposition to the response.

One of the two key issues raised was the lack of privacy associated with the tracing app, and the implications of location tracking and how this data may be used. People often described this as an invasion and conveyed a degree of suspicion towards the Government for monitoring their movements. In line with broader criticisms, some people also felt the measure signified Government overreach, or control, or a transition towards authoritarianism.

Further, I had no trust in the COVID-19 app that forced us to track our movements. I have no trust in the security of databases of this kind and found it very authoritarian and scary to have my every move tracked. 
25–34-year-old Pākehā male, Otago

The other main criticism was that the tracing measures, including the app, were unnecessary, ineffective at preventing transmission, and overall, a 'waste of time and money'. Criticism was often directed at the resource investment, with submitters concluding that the relatively few benefits were not worth the cost. At times, this point was based on the view that testing does not work.

Some negative experiences and impacts of the implementation of tracing systems

The tracer app was plain stupid. All I did was wave my phone at the door with a QR code app so it did the right beep, not the tracer app. It made no sense. 
55–64-year-old Pākehā female, Auckland

People sometimes suggested the tracing app was confusing and excluded people who were not technologically savvy, and that this added stress to everyday activities. These people often elaborated that the subsequent misuse of the app was commonplace, which rendered the tracing data inaccurate.

Those who had issues with the implementation of tracing technologies also felt it caused unnecessary stress to have to scan/sign in everywhere they went. Many people suggested the requirement to scan in was a form of overreach. Others mentioned that pens were available for those who did not want to scan in using the app, but these pens were not sanitised between uses. They argued that this could have led to the spreading of germs and was counter-intuitive to the intensive public health response that the Government implemented. Some stated that the tracing technology generally did not work.

The tracing app was not working at all as it never gave any notification about COVID-19 in any shop. It was again money down the drain. 
No demographic information provided

Private sector involvement

There were a few comments in which people referenced the absence of the private sector in developing the technology for contact tracing. These were mainly suggestions that partnerships with private innovators would have helped develop the app faster and with better functionality.

I share the view that as a country we were too slow off the mark with vaccine adoption, masking, testing and tracing technologies. We did not give sufficient respect or credibility to solutions adopted by overseas countries, or those suggested by the private sector, which would have made our response more effective and more expeditious. 
65–74-year-old Pākehā male, Auckland

Other public health materials | Ētahi atu take hauora tūmatanui

General opposition to social distancing

The six-foot distancing was a random figure given by [Dr. Anthony] Fauci as he thought it sounded good – not based on science. 
55–64-year-old Pākehā male, Wellington

Social distancing was discussed extensively by people who objected to its application as a public health measure. Most often, people stated that two metres / six feet was an unscientific distance implemented without sufficient evidence of its efficacy in COVID-19 transmission prevention. The implementation of this specific distance was frequently linked to sources outside of New Zealand, such as Dr. Antony Fauci and the World Health Organization (WHO); with people arguing that the Government should not have been influenced by foreign actors.

The social distancing made us keep away from each other and distrust the person in front or behind you and I feel that common courtesy has been damaged because of that. 
65–74-year-old Pākehā female, Gisborne

Sometimes, people mentioned that such an arbitrary measure could only have been implemented to control people and incite fear. Less often, people speculated on the method by which the two-metre distance was decided upon.

Being two metres apart from someone else at the supermarket, yet all items on the shelves were there for everyone to touch. The virus was airborne, so how was social distancing supposed to mitigate the risk 
45–54-year-old Pākehā female, Manawatū

Some reported first-hand negative experiences of social distancing being enforced, saying that such occurrences made them feel like "a leper" or an outcast, additionally they described social distancing as barbaric, draconian, madness, and a joke. Some submitters expressed concern that social distancing had a lasting impact on people's mental health and trust in others.

Occasionally, people made observations about places or situations in which they felt social distancing was impractical or rendered ineffective.

Environmental impacts of public health measures

Masks DO NOT stop transmission of viruses. This has been proven. They are now polluting our waterways and harming our wildlife from people discarding them everywhere and anywhere. 
45–54-year-old Pākehā female, Auckland

Some people expressed concern about the environmental impact of public health measures. Most referred to masks, although RATs and PPE were also mentioned as medical waste with an environmental impact. More often than not, comments criticising the environmental impact of masks, RATs, and PPE were made by people who did not agree with their use as a public health measure.

General opposition to sanitisation

Some people told us they thought hand sanitisers and cleaning sprays were overused during the pandemic. Most comments were in reference to hand sanitiser, which people claimed was toxic or otherwise harmful. Less often, people stated that hand sanitiser was ineffective in preventing the transmission of COVID-19.

General opposition to self-isolation

Infrequently, people made negative comments about self-isolation. These submitters mostly criticised people having to isolate even when asymptomatic or complained that isolating was disruptive or pointless. Less often, annoyance was expressed about sick leave entitlements and that some were paid when not appearing ill while others were ill and received no payment.

Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) | Ngā taputapu tiaki tangata

If a resident became even slightly unwell, before entering their room we had to put on full PPE and dispose of before leaving the room. The residents who were used to having regular family visits were already distressed with no visitors allowed due to lockdowns, so when they became unwell, they became extremely isolated as staff weren't going to put on full PPE gear just to take in a cup of tea or their laundry. 
55–64-year-old Pākehā female, Bay of Plenty

Of those who disagreed with the public health materials implemented by the Government, there were some who critiqued the use of PPE. This tended to be personal accounts of visiting older loved ones in care facilities/hospitals where the loved one did not recognise their relative because of excessive protective wear. This was especially prominent in reference to family members that had dementia. It was also mentioned in terms of staff wearing PPE and a lack of social contact with residents in care homes.

Other people discussed the necessity to wear PPE while working, stating this was physically uncomfortable. Additionally, some people mentioned the inconsistent use of PPE – that it was required for certain jobs and not others (for example, support workers) despite the role requiring contact with a variety of people.

The heat made working in gloves, gowns and masks pretty unbearable on some days. It's very hard to work with sweat getting in your eyes in patients homes along with the extra time it took to gown up to see our patients. 
65–74-year-old Māori/Pākehā female, Waikato

Testing, tracing, and other public health materials: suggestions for the future

Whakamātautau, whaiwahi, me ētahi atu rauemi hauora: Whakaaranga mō āpōpō

Note: People who were broadly critical of the COVID-19 response were more likely to reject entirely the use of testing, tracing and masks than to offer suggestions for improvement on these aspects. Therefore, the majority of the following are from people who held a broadly supportive or mixed view of the response.

Public health materials suggestions | Ngā whakaaranga rauemi hauora tūmatanui

• Ensure equitable access (for example, making access free) and priority access for the most at-risk.
• Public health measures, tools, and clear instructions on their use should be introduced earlier and normalised before an outbreak happens.
• Ensure effective management of stock to prevent expiration of supplies, panic buying and price gouging.
• Upgrade and invest in new technology and better product quality.
• Allow the private sector to import materials or manufacture supplies domestically.
• Consider the environment by prioritising biodegradable materials and having accessible disposal facilities.
   

 
Mask and Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) suggestions
Ngā whakaaranga kōpare me ngā taputapu tiaki tangata
 

Mask wearing should be promoted as a norm to wear when sick, like Asian countries do. 
55–64-year-old Pākehā female, Canterbury

• Make masks free and available at key points such as pharmacies, with priority access to PPE for frontline and primary care practitioners (including community health care workers).
• Respirator masks, such as N95s, KN95s, or FFP2s, should be made available (over surgical masks).
• Masking should be mandatory in health and aged care settings and on public transport.
• Provide clearer information about mask effectiveness and offer guidance for people who experience breathing difficulties or who have speech impairments.
   

Testing suggestions | Ngā whakaaranga whakamātautau
 

Testing was slow to be made available. In future, this service should be made available immediately to the working people and school children including childcare facilities, then rolled out to everyone. 
55–64-year-old Pākehā female, Auckland

• Make RATs tests free and distribute them to every household and workplace.
• Provide non-invasive testing options, such as saliva-based PCR tests, and tests that check for multiple viruses (for example, COVID-19, flu, Respiratory Syncytial Virus/RSV, etc.).
• Provide clear guidance around correct usage, testing timing and variables affecting the reliability of tests.

 

 
Tracing suggestions | Ngā whakaaranga whaiwhai
 

I used My Health Record but wish health data could be entered in one place like Manage My Health and automatically shared when necessary. 
65–74-year-old Pākehā female, Northland

• Offer opt-out options to protect privacy for people who wish to have their data removed.
• Barriers to the tracer app's uptake should be addressed by developing community-focused strategies (for example, use of citizen committees); increasing education on the science behind tracing technology; offering alternatives to QR codes for scanning in; ensuring compatibility with older smartphones; and providing smartphones to people who do not have one.
• Improve tracing coverage by utilising Bluetooth, GPS, and geofencing technologies; enabling options for linking family or household contacts; and storing data in a centralised database.
• Provide better analogue options and clearer guidance to staff in public-facing premises.
   

Testing and tracing and centralised databases could have been done more efficiently. There were too many QR code apps, not enough functionality in the provided app, and too many varying websites. The QR code app should have itself had links to testing, to news updates, to vaccine centres, enabled you to opt in to link in your vaccine status and profile. A points of interest map with red locations highlighted as part of an all-encompassing app. Options to enable and disable that feature. And…a web based and analogue option for those with less access to devices. Nightly points of interest maps on local news channels for example for the elderly. 
35–44-year-old female, Wellington

Other public health measure suggestions
Ngā whakaaranga e pā ana ki ētahi atu āhuatanga
 

• Introduce general health promotion to strengthen baseline immunity and keep people out of hospital (for example, encouraging healthy eating and exercise; taxing sugar, alcohol and tobacco; addressing poverty and poor housing; and removing hazardous chemicals from the environment).
• Legislation should be introduced to regulate air quality and ventilation standards in all hospitals, public transport, and public buildings such as schools, libraries and shopping malls (for example, High Efficiency Particulate Air/HEPA filters, CO2 monitors, Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning/HVAC and Ultraviolet germicidal irradiation/UVGI systems) to reduce the spread of airborne illnesses.
• Promote and enable hygiene practices such as handwashing and sanitising, and create a culture change around sick leave entitlement and work-from-home provisions to encourage more people to stay home when unwell.
   

It's time we started looking at preventative health instead of being the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff. 
Pākehā female, Otago

At work (a kindergarten) in 2020 when everyone stayed home when they showed the slightest sign of symptoms, we found that even those children who always had runny noses and 'allergies' were miraculously clear for that whole year. When people and their relatives have the support to take the time they need (for example, sick leave) it benefits everyone's health. 
45–54-year-old Māori/Pākehā female, Waikato