In late 2019 government officials in New Zealand began to prepare for the arrival of the COVID-19 virus. The National Security System was activated on January 27, 2020, and the National Health Coordination Centre shortly thereafter. The first case of the virus was detected in the country on February 28 2020. The Ardern government of the day elected to pursue an elimination strategy, limiting the movement of people both across the border and within the country under a number of different ‘lockdown’ periods. The NZDF became a significant asset in assisting in the country’s overall COVID-19 response. Although staffing Managed Isolation Quarantine facilities (MIQ) was the main tasking, other important activities included logistical assistance, support to police-led roadblocks, military flights for vaccine delivery, and surveillance. These efforts ran from 2020 into 2022. The NZDF’s role in pandemic response was viewed positively by the public, but had some negative impacts upon the institution itself

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

New Zealand

  • Bethan Greener,
  • Steven MacBeth

摘要

In late 2019 government officials in New Zealand began to prepare for the arrival of the COVID-19 virus. The National Security System was activated on January 27, 2020, and the National Health Coordination Centre shortly thereafter. The first case of the virus was detected in the country on February 28 2020. The Ardern government of the day elected to pursue an elimination strategy, limiting the movement of people both across the border and within the country under a number of different ‘lockdown’ periods. The NZDF became a significant asset in assisting in the country’s overall COVID-19 response. Although staffing Managed Isolation Quarantine facilities (MIQ) was the main tasking, other important activities included logistical assistance, support to police-led roadblocks, military flights for vaccine delivery, and surveillance. These efforts ran from 2020 into 2022. The NZDF’s role in pandemic response was viewed positively by the public, but had some negative impacts upon the institution itself