Health experts said Victoria was taking a “very conservative” approach to relaxing coronavirus restrictions, after the state reported just one case of community transmission on Sunday.

“[It’s] a very conservative approach, very, very safe steps, but at the same time they’ve said it is not just about the numbers,” she said.
“You can look at the case numbers in three weeks, but the case numbers for the next three weeks will then trail the next two weeks – again – because we are working with a 14-day average.”
Professor Tony Blakely, of the University of Melbourne, said the dropping of the curfew from midnight Sunday was “sensible” given there was no health reason to support it.
“There was probably not of lot epidemiological reasons for it, and it was just eroding public trust.”
He said he thought the announcement was “excellent” and the new modelling on the easing of restrictions was “consistent with what I’d expect”.
“I don’t think they could have done much more. I think it was good day for Victoria and we will see where we go in three weeks time.”
Premier Andrews conceded the steps were “not what all Victorians want” but said he hoped to further ease restrictions from October 19.
“There are a whole lot of things we could have done but that would have compromised the entire strategy,” Mr Andrews said.
Deputy chief health officer Allen Cheng revealed new modelling that indicated if all restrictions were lifted now there would be a 41 per cent chance of 100 cases in four weeks.
Dr Cheng also said the target the state had set before all restrictions would be lifted – a rolling average of five cases – was not rigid and would take into account the location and profile of cases.
Professor Bennett said the opening of schools to all primary aged children was a significant step.
“I do think they have been very judicious in what they have decided to relax the 5km rule is still in place though it can be extended if you have a work permit.
“They just want to get keep people back from work. They don’t want everyone moving around.”
Professor Bennett said the first wave of restrictions imposed on May 12 “were much more down to people’s discretion”.
“Now we have moved into these very specific rules. The second wave has been less about engagement and more about enforcement.”
She said there were some “clear inconsistencies when one thing is considered safe and the next thing isn’t”.
“Every industry will have a different set of rules, some which arguably have the same history of risk have different rules.”