Bridges had valid points Editorial

Any criticism or bellyaching about a leader doing her best in dealing with a catastrophe is going to sound petty and ungrateful. When the leader is as exceptional as Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, the criticism sounds even worse. Carping Opposition politicians find themselves in an impossible position – compounded by the fact that their motives are always under question.

So should someone like National leader Simon Bridges just shut up? Many think he should, and have told him so on Facebook and other social media.

This is unfair. Perhaps everyone should be more questioning and look more carefully at the arguments rather than attack the messenger.

Bridges’ main point is that the decision to extend the lockdown to April 27, an extra five days, was driven not so much by health risks but lack of preparedness. His other point is that level three is so restrictive we might as well stay in level four. He urges a quicker return to normality.

It’s possible he is completely wrong. Another five days could make all the difference in almost eliminating the disease in New Zealand, for the moment anyway, and obviate the need for more lockdowns.

But Bridges was right that the Government’s planning for level three looked shaky on several fronts. An official announcement last week declared that under level three it would be safe for ‘‘Early Learning and Education Centres and schools to open for children up to and including year 10, with appropriate public health measures in place. All young people in years 11-13 will continue to learn at home’’.

That was news to many early childhood centres and schools, which suddenly faced having to do online as well as classroom teaching while at the same time keeping their teachers safe. Education Minister Chris Hipkins has now backtracked by saying keeping numbers at schools to a minimum was still the aim.

Some schools just want to be told what to do and might need to act like adults. However, no-one can blame them or anyone else for wanting clarity.

Bridges also had a case about testing. Staying out of lockdown now the clock has been reset depends on the ability to test and then to trace contacts. New clusters need to be tackled with a combination of case isolation, contact tracing and movement restrictions. Testing has stepped up but a study released last week shows a woeful lack of capability to trace and isolate.

A shortfall in preparedness was also evident in the confusion about which elective surgeries could proceed and how the courts were to reopen under level three. Organisations understandably require considerable lead-in time to resume services and need early clarity.

These are all understandable problems in the circumstances but it doesn’t hurt to point them out or to remind people of the cost of lockdown in terms of confusing rules, despair and unemployment.

Other countries have shown that a less rigid form of lockdown can be as successful as the one in New Zealand while also giving the economy a chance to recover as quickly as possible.

Ardern rightly gets the benefit of our goodwill, co-operation and tolerance for mistakes. But anybody who responsibly suggests she and her team have got it wrong deserves a better hearing than to be shouted down on Facebook or the radio.

Everyone should ... look more carefully at the arguments rather than attack the messenger.