Eight sets of rules

THE popularity of our closed borders is understandable. However a wider perspective deserves consideration. Just as Australia began a national approach to managing COVID-19, six premiers and two chief ministers began to do their own thing under the advice of eight chief medical officers. Effectiveness depended on the competence and ideology of the weakest link. The second wave shows how eight approaches increased the chance of failure, undermining the best efforts of others.

With a national strategy, the response would have been properly resourced under a consistent set of rules and quarantine managed by defence and police. Had borders stayed open under a national response, economic damage would have been reduced, with fewer suicides from the stress of unemployment and business failure. No-one would die from not being able to access medical procedures. Police resources would be used more efficiently and Australia better placed to deal with global tensions. A policy of suppression became confused with calls for elimination that are impossible. The state approach resulted in confused messaging and rules that were inconsistent or ridiculous. This promoted distrust of authorities and created an environment for the selfish to flout the rules.

No Australian alive will live to see the debt repaid. When the next crisis comes around, a different group of politicians will have forgotten the hard learned lessons. Peter d’Plesse

Rosny