No one anywhere in the world would deny that the strictures that have had to be intermittently inserted and withdrawn by countries in order to try to stave off the worst effects of COVID-19 have imposed, what in many instances are, unbearable pressures on countries and particularly on their economies and their education systems.
Admittedly, those who are best-positioned to ‘crunch the numbers’ (if indeed there are any numbers available for crunching) might be better positioned to tell us with greater accuracy, just what, in dollar terms, these ‘off and on’ restrictions are costing us. Of course, when it comes to what is now the protracted closure of conventional schools, the cost here cannot be counted in dollars nor can the long-term effects of whatever costs are incurred be measured any time soon.
So that we are faced with the twin pressures associated with doing what we can to stave off the further spread of the virus, on the one hand and on the other, ensuring that the strictures that we put in place are not sufficiently rigid to (for example) bring economic life to a grinding halt. Of course there is also the matter of just how the public responds to the strictures as and when these are applied and, as well, the extent of the effectiveness with which those strictures are enforced. The evidence in both sets of instances here is that, in large measure, we have been weighed and found seriously wanting.
The fact that the decision to push back the boundaries of the restrictions during a ‘peak period’ so to speak, as far as COVID-19 deaths and afflictions are concerned, without (as far as we know) public explanations and assurances, is unacceptable. As has already been mentioned, there is a balance to be struck here and in the final analysis it is those in charge of making the continual assessments that must make the call. However, in the absence of walking us through this particular rolling back of the curfew hours at this particular period, the authorities run the risk to leaving themselves open to charges of recklessness. We feel, for example, that any move to push back the curfew deadlines, should have caused the Minister of Health himself to be pressed into service to think through and offer such assurances as we now seek. Moreover, given the fact that the strictures are being pushed back during this particular period, there was need for a far more generous input by the police, for example, simply to make the point as strongly as possible that the authorities have every intention of rigidly enforcing these adjusted arrangements. We are due an explanation here and it does not appear to be forthcoming.