Scientists did indeed predict the current pandemic as long ago as 2007.

I quote from the article by Cheng, Lau, Woo and Yuen entitled "Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus as an Agent of Emerging and Reemerging Infection" (Clinical Microbiology Reviews, 2007, Vol. 20(4), DOI: 10.1128/CMR.00023-07).

In a section entitled "Should we be ready for the reemergence of SARS?" they said: "Coronaviruses are well known to undergo genetic recombination [references are given in the article], which may lead to new genotypes and outbreaks. The presence of a large reservoir of SARS-CoV-like viruses in horseshoe bats, together with the culture of eating exotic mammals in southern China, is a time bomb.

"The possibility of the reemergence of SARS and other novel viruses from animals or laboratories, and therefore the need for preparedness, should not be ignored."

That was a pretty clear message to politicians and health-care officials at the time, and to those following them. We were not prepared, and we should have been.

The coronavirus has fuelled social divisions it would be very unwise to ignore.

The first is between the young and old. Despite campaigns to explain to the young how at risk they are, the simple fact remains that the mortality rate in that broad age group is almost non-existent.

It increases only gradually until it really hits to the over 75s. Yet the lives, careers and freedoms of the young are being destroyed.

The second is between classes. The affluent and educated, who are often also older, can much more easily ride out the storm than those who live from pay-cheque to pay-cheque. Yet it seems to me the affluent are among the loudest voices calling for total lockdown and damn the economic consequences.

Class war, anyone?

These divisions will deepen, may become ugly, and even terrifying.

Our decision-makers should consider advising (or forcing) those who are most vulnerable to take all possible precautions and provide massive support to help them do so.

We can then free up everyone else and re-open the economy.

So we are all trying to do the right thing as we are told and to self isolate. We were told there was a deadline for everyone to get back into Australia as the greatest risk is from overseas travellers returning.

Now we learn expatriates and tourists are returning at a rate of over 7000 a day and continue to put us all at risk.

Now they will be put into isolation in four or five star hotels at the taxpayers' expense.

These people are people who chose to go and live overseas or who left the country at a time when the dangers were apparent.

Many have been living very well in their new countries. Now, when things get tough, they want to run home from these virus hotspots and put the whole country at risk.

This issue of returning Australians, along with the debacle of letting cruise ships dock without any form of testing or checks, is a massive fail.

All Australians will pay the price.

In testing times like the coronavirus pandemic people seem to object to whatever course of action is taken to prevent its spread.

Some complain the government appears not to be giving "clear and non-negotiable directions" ("Direction is needed", Douglas Mackenzie, Letters, March 30).

Others view the restrictions already put in place as "creating greater havoc than the coronavirus itself" ("Cure worse than disease", Victor Diskordia, Letters, March 30).

Yet another writer laments that effective steps should have been taken weeks ago ("Mixed up confusion", Arthur Hardy, Letters, March 30).

It is a pity no precise details were given of the "effective steps", or the "non-negotiable directions" that our government should've enforced.

Other than preventing entry to Australia by everyone, including thousands of our citizens returning from overseas cruises, what other "effective steps" should have been taken?

A lot of the COVID-19 pandemic spreading here is due to people ignoring directions, congregating in public places and creating petri dish conditions - like what happened on Sydney's Bondi beach a couple of weeks ago.

I'm a 75-year-old male, thus on the list of vulnerable candidates who could die from coronavirus.

I do recall someone commenting our parents and grandparents were asked to go to wars where millions died.

All that most of us are being asked to do is to stay home.

I know what I prefer to be doing!

Australia has long had too many journalists and not enough news. Now there is only one story the situation is truly dire.

The unseemly competition for relevance with yet another angle on a complex, volatile and unpredictable situation is already tiresome. It has degenerated into into a farce of nit picking, point scoring and "gotcha" moments.

I have stopped listening to them and now heed only government announcements of changes and required behaviour. I suspect I am not alone. Some cold showers and a rethink would seem to be in order.

Just as I expected, we got a weak response by Andrew Barr to the two-person rule.

That is to wait and see if there is flagrant abuse and then give police the capacity to impose fines.

This creates the potential for more cases and more deaths. Once that happens we may get serious.

This is a matter of life and death for some.

Most other leaders in the country are taking immediate steps to police the new condition. The ACT should be no exception.

I'm curious about why few people in authority make much of the low death rate in Australia for those infected with COVID-19.

While the number of confirmed cases has risen rapidly, the number of deaths has remained extremely low.

At the moment, if you contract the virus, the risk of death is less than half of 1 per cent.

Are those in charge concerned that drawing attention to this fact will lead to (infectious) complacency.

To me, it's a bit of positive news in an otherwise gloomy tsunami of media reports.

How lucky is Scott Morrison? He won the unwinnable election. He gets to trash his forecast budget surpluses, and then send the public debt level skyrocketing while socialising the economy. How will he sleep at night?

The real winner is Australia. Fiscal policy, in a sizeable way, is swinging into action. It will be a while before an election is fought on whose tax cuts are the biggest.

What if Labor had won the last election? Can you imagine the rancour if similar or even more modest fiscal measures had been adopted? It would not just have been the nutters at Sky; the mainstream media would have piled on as well.

Morrison provided the template with his response to Labor's GFC package. Fortunately we've ducked that bullet.

If I thought there was a god I would recognise that he operates in mysterious ways and employs very cruel punishments. Did he consider the collateral damage?

Penny Moyes (Letters, March 31) is correct. Now is not the time to spend money infilling the lake at West Basin so the public park area can be sold off for more concrete by the lake.

The whole land swap deal between the National Capital Authority and the ACT government is bizarre. Why would anyone want to give away 31.6 hectares of prime land in Curtin for a meagre 2.8 hectare slither of lake floor? It doesn't make sense; but that's what the ACT government has done.

The federal government must not bail out Virgin Australia which, as Alan Joyce predicted, is seeking a $1.4 billion loan that can be converted to equity if repayment of the debt could not be met.

Virgin is 90 per cent controlled by five foreign investors: Etihad Airways, Singapore Airlines, HNA Group and the Nanshan Group.

They each own about 20 per cent. Richard Branson's Virgin Group owns 10 per cent.

The proposal by Virgin Australia, a perennial loss making, foreign owned venture, will almost certainly result in its nationalisation.

This would be severely damaging to Qantas, a successful Australian company.

If many drivers genuinely believe they are allowing 1.5 metres when passing a cyclist at over 60km/h then social distancing for COVID-19 is doomed to fail.

Cartoonist David Pope may be unwell. His cartoon on Thursday, April 2, is the first in almost three months that has not been abrasive or offensive about the Prime Minister. Has he realised some readers want humorous cartoons to lighten their day?

While COVID-19 will deliver some short term environmental benefits it will not reduce the human impact. COVID-19 has so far killed about 50,000 people. In the same period, the global human population increased by over 20 million.

Those policing COVID-19 regulations should check advertisements for "adult services", such as massages. These are still to be found online and even in some newspapers. No 1.5 metre distancing here.

Myfan Jordan's ("Who will protect the ageing in place", April 1, p22) stereotyping of home care workers as often people with "low skills" is an unfortunate put down of a hardworking, skilled and compassionate workforce. An otherwise worthy article on the underpayment of workers and structural issues in home care suffers as a result.

Gloom has set in. It's not fear of the virus. It's not being confined to barracks. It's the prospect of six months of important daily marketing bulletins from the government.

Unfortunately, Len Goodman (Letters, March 31), based on his record as managing director of Tourism Australia, minister for immigration and border control, "loyal" treasurer to Malcolm Turnbull, and on his cavalier attitude to dangerous global heating, some of us will never trust Scott Morrison.

Karen Hardy's piece ("Thinking outside the supermarket", March 31, p18) brought back childhood memories. The grocer delivered every day. One of the two most prized jobs for kids was to work on his delivery truck. The other was delivering prescriptions for the chemist on your pushbike.

Once milk and bread were delivered to your door. Along came Woollies, Coles et al, and this service, and the jobs, disappeared. In this age of the coronavirus why not ban big supermarkets from selling these items and encourage the reestablishment of milk and bread runs. It would be two less things we'd need to go out for.

Whilst one can only feel for those seeking assistance from Centrelink; maybe for the first time; I hope the lesson learnt will result in the term "dole bludger" being obliterated from the lexicon.

Email: letters.editor@canberratimes.com.au. Send from the message field, not as an attachment. Fax: 6280 2282. Mail: Letters to the Editor, The Canberra Times, PO Box 7155, Canberra Mail Centre, ACT 2610.

Keep your letter to 250 or fewer words. References to The Canberra Times reports should include date and page number. Letters may be edited. Provide phone number and full home address (suburb only published).

To send a letter via the online form, click or touch here.