Guyana has recorded its fourth coronavirus related death; nineteen confirmed cases and is projected to see fourteen hundred cases. With the growing numbers, it was hoped that persons would begin placing some respect on the virus’s name and put necessary precautions in place so as to protect themselves, families and workers. However, the public seems still largely dismissive of the threat we face. This is not only due to the minimalistic approach state agents have taken towards our building public health crisis, but also due to the inability of many to go a day without work.
While our chances of successfully containing it was always slim given our underfunded healthcare system, had the state taken the initiative to learn from readily available examples, there would have been much more effectiveness in monitoring and minimizing its impacts on our population. Simple but effective factors that have aided in the successful slowing of the virus’s spread are; acknowledgement of the threat of the virus early on and the sharing of coordinated data and information by the state on the importance of social distancing. Countries that have downplayed the threat of the virus and have been wishy-washy with information, such as the USA, have fared far worse than those that have recognized and addressed the virus as a threat early on, began public education and implemented support systems for the most vulnerable. In uncertain times, people require strong leadership, access to relevant information and resources for survival. This slovenly pace has made us lose very valuable time in effectively preparing for and containing the virus’s spread.
The state seems keen to follow the path of downplaying the virus’s seriousness and limiting information on it. A lot of the measures taken lately seem played by ear rather than grounded in any real understanding of how a virus operates. An example of this unpreparedness is seen in the group housing of several Guyanese returning from travel abroad, that could have easily seen the entire group becoming infected had even one person had it. At this point, a lockdown of the country except for essential services should be pursued as our reluctance to do so will prolong and propel the spread of the virus. Several CARICOM countries such as Trinidad, Barbados and Antigua have already implemented various curfews, lockdowns and public aid support systems to help those most affected by COVID-19, such as single parents and unemployed persons. Guyana’s response however has been disjointed with the establishment of several non-collaborating task forces and non-uniform regional action to contain the spread. With our political impasse, the coalition might be sensitive to the optics of a countrywide lockdown, as it will most likely strengthen claims of autocratic rule. But in dragging their feet in instituting proper responses to the virus, they are setting the people up for a prolonged tragedy in the face of inaction.
Several Indigenous communities have already announced that they have instituted restrictions on entering or leaving in order to limit their chance of contraction. This is necessary given how outside infections brought in by travelers have decimated Indigenous populations worldwide. Regions six and ten so far have already implemented partial lockdown measures while region four; the main hub for human activity and the spread of the virus is being said to be too important to close. This is very reckless. The numbers are much higher than they appear and leaders should not at this time balance the scales against lives.
In understanding and supporting the need for a mandatory lockdown of our country, I recognize how this will enable the state and its agents with even more power over the people and those who are its usual victims. Increased police power in the place of a lockdown is something of concern given the nature of the Guyana Police Force and their limitations when it comes to rationality and empathy. So should a countrywide lockdown be instituted, I can only hope that that does not equate to increased police monitoring and power over the people. Criminalization should not be the way to go, as that would just further disenfranchise those who have no option but to break social distancing rules as a day without work can mean a day without food. Focus should be placed on enhanced public education as Trinidad has done, as there was the recognition of the dangers inherent in increased criminalization during a time of heightened emotions and uncertainty. Lockdowns will also increase the suffering of many women and children who will be/are trapped at home with their abusers and will now have no relief or access to support services. One can only hope the slow and lacklustre response to the virus is due to comprehensive plans and support services being thought through for implementation.
As we face severe shortages to battle this crisis, it must be understood that these shortages are not necessarily inaccessibility to money and resources. The state is not the only one that should play a part in helping to curb the virus’s spread. Corporations and private businesses also have a role in contributing to the fight against it. It is disconcerting for me to listen to rich private business interests offer solutions to the crisis at hand without once considering to contribute some of their wealth towards the fight. Businesses exist and thrive due to the labour and earnings of the people and must work in conjunction with the government to provide necessities and various forms of relief.
