Government surveillance through wearables
Tracking people's private behavior was a focus of the pandemic response by governments around the world, in NZ it led to trials of wearables.
A prominent feature of the pandemic response by governments around the world was not only labelling anything they didn’t like as misinformation to be suppressed, but a concerted effort to monitor people’s private behavior for compliance with Covid restrictions.
Putting aside the examples China “pioneered” according to a 2020 Stuff article, in the States the CDC bought access to track cellphones to see if Americans followed lockdown orders (and included non-Covid reasons to keep using the data).
In New Zealand Data Ventures, the commercial arm of government agency Statistics New Zealand, received hourly cell phone data from Spark and Vodafone to monitor people’s movement for the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (DPMC) and the Ministry of Health. While both the CDC in the States and Data Ventures here said tracking data was pre-anonymised, when it’s hourly data it may not be possible to ensure it stays anonymised.
But the most visible attempts at surveillance were through contact tracing apps, surveys and social media listening - and we also had a push for wearable surveillance.
I’ve already done a post on the biggest wearables trial during the pandemic - the failed CovidCard for contact tracing. If implemented this Bluetooth enabled card would have cost over $100 million, and need the entire population to register their details to their card and wear the card around their neck in public to record interactions. All of that didn’t deter a community based trial which found the card wouldn’t work with systems that contact tracers used, and whose feedback said the card would overwhelm them with data and slow down the contact tracing process if used.
A November 2020 briefing to then Covid-19 Minister Chris Hipkins noted that the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) who oversaw MIQ, had been working with the Department of Internal Affairs and Ministry of Health to, “…understand how…technology may assist with rapid and accurate contact-tracing should there be a need.”
Despite stating they would “leverage” from the CovidCard trial - they instead learned nothing and did their own trial to use the CovidCard within MIQ facilities.
Yes, after the 1st trial failed.
They did a 2nd trial.
The trial’s purpose was to see if the Bluetooth card could, “provide quality assurance for operating procedures” within MIQ and improve the speed and accuracy of contact tracing if a positive case is found.
Why would people who were confined to hotel rooms for 14 days with rostered staff and sign outs for the daily allowed walk - need Bluetooth enabled CovidCards for contact tracing?
Well the 2nd trial was run between MBIE and the University of Otago - who had, with the Ministry of Health, run the failed CovidCard trial.
Which is possibly the reason the 2nd trial was conducted.
A group of self-called public health experts from Otago University were constantly trying to steer the pandemic response through their membership on Covid advisory committees, their media appearances and from their boldly named Public Health Expert blog, since rebranded to Public Health Communications Center.
It was these public health experts who were the ones pushing to also consider an MIQ trial due to how the, “…CovidCard data would provide an immediate trail back to the source of infection through digitally captured contact histories. Rather than trowelling through hours of CCTV footage, work roster histories and other forms of documentation.”
Their blog post also suggested that it was important to look into other digital tools which, “…include electronic bracelets for guests” and that MIQ facilities should be housed on military bases.
And this is where I have to pause and suggest - these are unhinged lobbyists.
When I covered how 12 to 15 year old’s vaccination was approved in mere hours - it happened to coincide with their public criticism that it wasn’t approved yet.
When I covered masking in schools - they were writing posts that children should mask, not for themselves but for adults and justified it in case they suffered trauma if they killed their teachers.
They were also the main drivers of mandated masking, frequently posting on their blog and advocating for it in the media, often based on referencing studies.
But the included references to their blog posts were largely small observational studies on influenza and health-care worker mask use. Do people read links and references? Because my favorite reference they used in support of masking was a specific Sars-Cov-2 study of just 4 patients - which came to the opposite conclusion on masks than what the blog post claimed and wait for it. It was retracted!
And now here we have them making statements that a government should consider imprisoning citizens returning to their country in military bases with electronic surveillance that we associate with criminal punishment.
Unhinged.
The CovidCard trial in MIQ
The voluntary MIQ trial ran for 2 weeks in December 2020 at the MIQ facility Bay Plaza Hotel in Wellington. The trial had low uptake to put it kindly - they attempted to bump it up by including “Prezzy card” prize draws for participating, but still only 58% of staff took part and 12% of MIQ returnees.
Of the 63 actual participants, “…data was lost for 22 of them, 14 due to weak internet connection at the point of upload, and 8 had unexplained data loss.”
The report noted there were “numerous issues” with the card and of the 11 people who completed a survey, “…the key concerns were the high level of tracking and holding of personal information.“
The briefing memo from MBIE to Minister Hipkins also noted:
This was raised in the findings in the 1st CovidCard trial and by the Privacy Commissioner too.
Usage of CCTV also showed that 80% of interactions in MIQ were for less than 2 minutes in the facility but the card was configured to exclude such brief interactions. MBIE concluded to then Minister Hipkins they had, “…no plans to progress similar technologies at this stage” and suggested if technology was reviewed again, it should be, “…removing the human element as much as feasible.”
MBIE also reviewed further uses of technology at MIQ including adding more CCTV in facilities to track people (which was installed) and “educating” people who went through MIQ on using the Covid Tracer app once they were released.
In March 2021 Minister Hipkins announced that the Bluetooth cards were “impractical”.
I haven’t come across how much the cost of this trial nor any specific research documents from the University of Otago - unlike the CovidCard trial there wasn’t much documentation to easily find. But surely a 2nd trial that found similar issues as the 1st trial wasn’t necessary and probably an afternoon workshop with a white board would have sorted the idea.
While CovidCard might have died a drawn out death, tracking people was still being actively pursued - re-enter the Ministry of Health.
The Ministry of Health & the border worker trial
The elarm trial came about from a company, Datamine approaching the Ministry of Health on wearables to detect Covid before people knew they had it.
Designed optimistically to trial with 500 border workers, elarm was an app that connects to a wearable smart device like a fitbit or Apple watch and users get regular updates on some basic health information during the day, so they can monitor if they start to become unwell.
The Ministry of Health press release on the trial in April 2021 stated, “If the elarm app lives up to its potential, it might provide early notification to our critical border workforce if they're becoming unwell. That means they can take appropriate action such as self-isolating and being tested for COVID-19.”
To recruit participants the Ministry of Health created an opt-in questionnaire for border workers to register interest, and posters were put up in Auckland MIQ facilities to advertise the trial.
While the trial was initially a month long starting on the 16th of May 2021, it ended up being extended to July to recruit more participants. Both the Civil Aviation Authority and Auckland Airport tried to encourage people to join, along with pushing it in MIQ newsletters.
Yet out of the 500 participants they planned on for the trial, only 46 people actually took part by registering their own wearable or the supplied fitbit (8 people used their own - the rest scored a free fitbit) and 31 people completed the exit survey. The people who completed the survey gave overall positive feedback.
Datamine provided a light touch final report in August 2021, summing it up as, “Using elarm drives the right behaviour changes, which would reduce transmission in the case of a possible outbreak at the border to benefit the public and the New Zealand government. A wider rollout would therefore have a positive impact and enable the protection of boarder workers and New Zealand.”
Would it just.
Datamine concluded it was simply great, despite what ever issues they found that meant it didn’t actually work - they didn’t even reflect on why with capacity for 500 trial participants - only 46 wanted to take part.
Any dangers of health surveillance from employers or on workers was not addressed, nor were any privacy elements or the effect of constantly monitoring your health during the day.
But more importantly, there’s no mention it actually allowed any border worker to detect Covid like symptoms. Which is understandable in such a short trial with a small cohort - but I don’t grasp how it could prove what they set out to prove in the 1st place without that?
This trial cost $50,000 to run excluding the time involved of Ministry of Health staff.
Both these trials and the previous CovidCard trial, and even the self-isolation trial show the...deep desires…of government to monitor people.
When elimination was the only strategy people had to be constantly monitored for it to work. But it was also a strategy which was so fragile it couldn’t even accomodate questioning of it. Visible surveillance like wearables or the ubiquitous Covid Tracer app QR posters conveniently also served the dual function of reminding people of risk and social pressure to conform in public.
These posts are a useful reminder that we must never allow any government to behave this way again. Passive resistance being the preferred option should they try.
Love your descriptor "unhinged". As I watched a certain epidemiologist buy into his TV persona of expert on masking and the accompanying body language, I was delighted that recently he was being interviewed on the subject and the contrast between his defensive stance and that of earlier confidence and hubris was marked.