I imagine that primary school age children are going back first because they are the most dependent ones, thus freeing up mum or dad to return to work. I haven't seen any scientific or educational evidence to prove that they should be chosen rather than secondary school kids. As many people have pointed out, little ones are the least likely to be capable of social distancing and need the closest attention. Seems to me to be another move to protect the economy, rather than people's lives.
65 educational staff dead so far, including 26 teachers, and that doesn't include anyone over 65 years of age. How many more when the schools open up? Is there scientific evidence that children don't transmit this virus, unlike other infections? If so, what is it? How reliable are the findings? Can we be sure that children aren't, in fact, "super spreaders", carrying it back to their families?
Then there are the risks to the children themselves. As well as the probable link to Kawasaki Syndrome, how much do we know about the long term effects of the virus? In serious cases, it ravages the lungs - in the USA, doctors looking at X-rays of young adults with the disease said they couldn't believe they showed the lungs of young people, the damage was so bad. Are we sure that, even if children don't die, their health won't be seriously damaged?
I love my Year 6 granddaughter very dearly. The government evidently wants to see if it is safe to go back into the water, and small children will be doing the testing.