A new level of freedom, confusion
We went from lockdown level to takeaway level and we’re about to reach haircut level. As we head back towards normality, descending from alert level four to, eventually, level one or even zero, the choices increase and the rules become murkier.
Of course, that’s inevitable. The Covid-19 crisis is an evolving situation. Experts learn new things every day.
On one hand, those who complain that the rules are starting to seem fluid and vague might as well complain that water is wet. On the other hand, announcing a new set of guidelines and rules that may be introduced in full, or only in part, at some unspecified time, but probably in the next fortnight, risks creating public confusion.
That was the situation when the prime minister described the next setting, level two, on Thursday, while we were still adjusting to the new dimensions of level three.
It was clear the new, looser rules do not apply yet, but there is a psychological effect for some. Just as the roads immediately seemed busier when level three was announced, before it was even introduced, there was a new sense of lightness and possibility that came from only hearing about the new rules. It reflects a degree of restlessness that has set in, along with an element of complacency.
It is also possible to see the level two announcement as intended to inspire confidence, and not just in the wider public, but in the industries that have been hit hardest by the lockdown – tourism and hospitality. People in the tourism industry ‘‘were literally jumping for joy’’ on Thursday, according to Tourism Industry Aotearoa. The revival of domestic tourism in level two, as well as the more speculative notion of open borders with Australia, is a boost to an industry that is looking at catastrophic losses and layoffs in 2020. However, this revival of domestic tourism appears threatened by Air New Zealand’s axing of many domestic flights across May and June.
The new rules for cafes and restaurants will also have teething problems. Allowing up to 100 people to socialise indoors is a risky step after the confinements of levels four and three. The ‘‘three S’’ that Jacinda Ardern introduced is a nice bit of public health communication – people must be seated, there must be separation between people and tables, and each table must have a single server – but it’s easy to imagine that the rules will not be observed or enforced in busy cafes. Already marginal businesses may find it tough to survive if they try.
The advice on masks is also unclear. Some experts swear by them. Others see fewer benefits. The official New Zealand position seems fairly inconclusive. Director general of health Dr Ashley Bloomfield doesn’t believe the evidence supports making mask-wearing compulsory but if people want to wear them, ‘‘go ahead’’.
The level two announcement contrasted greatly with the original lockdown, which was decisive and clear. Rather than being told what to do, we have reached a new phase. Far from being a nanny state or big sister, as some say, the Government at level two assumes New Zealanders are able to take responsibility for their actions, behave sensibly and exercise judgment. Let’s hope they are not mistaken.