Should Sri Lanka open the country at the present level of COVID 19 Control? If so how?
by Sohan Wijesekera
If the decision to reopen the country is taken without an educated analysis and especially without a “Sensitivity” analysis of the situation, then such a decision may not be in the best interest of the nation.
Safe to Reopen
In Sri Lanka, the persons either affected or suspected of COVID-19 are still on the increase. In the last two weeks, the rate of COVID-19 deaths in Sri Lanka has increased alarmingly. Medical doctors point to significant delays in testing and reporting, and they warn the government and the public about the future threats. Most parts of the country have mobility restrictions, Quarantine Curfew had been imposed in several parts of the country. Many including the Taskforce, the Police, the Doctors, the Health Inspectors and Politicians appear on media and request the public to practice “Own Safety”.
Government monitoring units state that the rate of increase of COVID-19 affected persons, are on the decrease. It is stated that using this as a guide, the government has already lifted curfew in some parts of the island. The work in offices are almost at a standstill. Work from home, still appears ineffective. Shops and many types of businesses remain closed because of state instructions. The public complain about the poor delivery of facilities. However, the government has stepped up the provision of support to the needy people. The major distributors of food items and pharmacies have been given the instruction to work and keep open on a roster basis. In general the government has opted for a setting which demonstrates a lesser enforcement than it was during the first wave. The public on the other hand, also do not feel threatened even when the media is loud and clear about the increasing and impending threats.
The Timing
Recent media reports show the President of Sri Lanka, stating that the income of many has got affected due to COVID-19 and the need to live safely while the COVID-19 is still in the air. It appears that though the doctors say that this COVID-19 variant with a European origin is far worse than that was experienced during the first wave, the task force comprising of the nations most competent appear to have guided the President to resort to “Start living with COVID-19”. As members of general public, the question that we must ask ourselves, “Is this the right time ?”, “ Shouldn’t we wait for a week, two or a little more ?” or “Shouldn’t we have opened a week ago ?”.
Most of the public feel that the delay of the government when taking the decision to close Gampaha district had created a much larger impact on the economy than by keeping the district open for a few more weeks. The majority opinion is that this case should be taken as an eye opener to act at the right time when the decision has to be taken to lift the curfew.
Educated Decisions and Public Confidence
Now, the question is who decides the sensitivity of Sri Lankan economy with respect to the day of lifting curfew and enabling work in offices, businesses and then for the public to move freely. Surely the well-paid economists as labelled by His Excellency the President must be the ones giving this advice based on their analytical capabilities. If such a decision is to be taken by His Excellency the President without educated opinion based on an analysis and especially a “Sensitivity” analysis, then it may not be in the best interest of the nation.
When a decision is taken to close or reopen a country for day to day activities it is important to consider the views of the experts but it is also prudent to look at the other nations who have thus far provided good progress combatting COVID-19. Let me not take many examples, but only two countries that had been opted by many Sri Lankans to settle down and also two of the countries that had shown exceptional COVID-19 recovery characteristics. The Australian government allowed restricted movement of public and businesses but enforced rules and fines. New Zealand government did not impose rules and regulations, instead they ensured public trust. In New Zealand, it is said that the public on their own resorted to ethical behaviours and became their own guardians. As a common factor, both governments kept the public aware by officially appearing to address the public. It is common knowledge that the political leader and the health director could be seen by the public on a regular basis to keep them aware of the situation, its gravity and informing them about progress made by the government.
Though many a times, through my articles and posts I have stated about the value of such a method for the winning of public trust, confidence and discipline, they appear to have fallen on deaf ears. In our country, the media is reporting and we do not know which media enterprise to be trusted. This is an open secret. The hilarious factor is that our taskforce members and the leaders are addressing the media and than the media is allowing the public to hear such discussions with them. Those who are labelled as responsible, are holding press conferences and not public announcements. It is time the so-called nation with a high literacy rate, to become literate.
Complacency and Benefit of the Doubt
Considering the pros and cons of the situation, the government must take a decision to either reopen the country or keep the country closed. What is important is to be aware of the importance of an educated decision backed by transparency. If the decision is not taken wisely, then by looking at the Gampaha example, one thing has to be considered seriously. The nation must not be exposed to the danger of losing both the health of the public, and the remaining health of our ailing economy. Now as the media telecasted and broadcasted, it appears that the country will soon be open for day to day activities. I am certain that there will be either rules for behaviour, efforts to responsibly enhance public awareness and confidence or both. However, each of us must understand the importance of self-quarantine, if we feel that we are a threat. COVID-19 or otherwise, our nation must focus on health and safety, just like the communities in the countries I mentioned. We must also understand that our rulers and us, both were complacent and then we realised that second wave was not on our doorstep but in our bedroom. Regarding the reopening, let us give the benefit of the doubt to His Excellency the President and assume that all important factors have been considered prudently. However, we should understand that it is our safety consciousness also matters a lot.
Composition of the Team Matters
Well, that sums up the core message for our leaders and the brainy. However, now that the presidential taskforce has been in the arena since the beginning of this year, it is time that there is transparency with regards to its composition. Such an act would lead to public confidence with respect to the decisions taken by the head of government. It is time that the public is made aware of the leaders in various areas of expertise, who are members of the taskforce as the heads of respective thinktanks. For reader awareness, let me mention the fundamental specialisations from which the expert advisors must be chosen for a Presidential Taskforce handling COVID-19. They are, Health and Medicine, Enforcement, Economy, Private Sector, Public Sector, Politicians as direct public representatives, Education including Higher, Vocational, Skill Development, Public Transport, Private Transport, Water, Electricity, Finance, Legal and Administrative Services. It is my fervent hope that we have many thinktanks dedicated to provide these services to our President.
The Author, Professor N.T.S Wijesekera is a Chartered Civil Engineer and the present Chairman of the Construction Industry Development Authority, Sri Lanka.
Post a Comment