Who’s responsible for hesitant decisions?

The Cabinet recently decided reducing the prices of diesel after it had decided lifting its subsidies at the beginning of the year to prevent smuggling it abroad. The reduction came after a sudden hike in the prices of various goods and services related to diesel, which was widely criticized and resented by both citizens and expats. Reversing the decision on increasing diesel prices was not the first of its kind and will definitely not be the last. Many ministries have previously reversed and undone many decisions, such as the education ministry’s relative grading system and the decision on allowing the use of emergency lanes on highways. Notably, these decisions were reversed in view of public criticism and their educational and economic impacts on the whole society.

Though I have no idea how the Cabinet and its ministries and subsidiary establishments make their decisions, what I surely know is that decision-making must go through several steps before decisions are reached. The question now is: If those decisions had been carefully studied, probing their possible consequences before making them, why were they cancelled? If they were not studied, why were they made in the first place? I doubt that such decisions are arbitrarily made.

I do understand that some decisions may be revered over long periods of time because mistakes can happen, but not the way we are doing with our recent decisions. Retreat and decision reversal has become a common practice. It is normal that decisions made will never appeal to everybody, especially if they are related to money, because people are used to taking rather than giving. So, relying on citizens’ or residents’ approval will make it impossible to achieve any reform. Reversing decisions upon disapproval will also give very detrimental impressions and may hinder reform for very long, merely for the sake of winning subjects’ satisfaction regardless of the country’s greater good.

Reversing governmental decisions the way we do today will cost the government its prestige and respect. Consequently, it will easy to disobey it and wait for each decision to be altered every now and then. Decisions must be fully and meticulously studied to evaluate all possible results before imposing them on people. Objections to such decisions must be ignored no matter how loud they are. Otherwise, all decisions, including very critical ones, will subjected to public approval and blessings regardless of what is right and what is wrong or what is good and what is bad for this country’s greater good!

—