An abundance of caution thrown to the winds when it comes to opening schools

For a government that appears to be dragging its feet, for reasons ideological or otherwise, in easing the draconian curbs on South Africans’ constitutionally enshrined liberties, the move to reopen schools is being approached with uncharacteristic vigour and energy. As the economy languishes, and ministers are divided over the pace of easing the lockdown, basic education minister Angie Motshekga is blazing a reopening trail. What is curious about the decision to reopen grades 7 and 12 is that the self-appointed guardians of our health who want to protect us (or so we are led to believe) from (legal) booze and cigarettes have been conspicuously silent in raising their voices about the Covid-19 risk that will be faced by pupils, teachers and parents and guardians in the coming weeks.

With many of our township and rural schools way below par when it comes to basic amenities (pit toilets and mud-hut classrooms) in spite of 26 years of an ANC government that claims to care about this stuff, the health risk is surely more obvious and prominent than the risk posed by cigarettes and alcohol.

Yet from the ministers who are most vocal about protecting the nation’s health there is not a peep, at least not publicly. No Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma bustling into meetings of the National Coronavirus Command Council with piles of papers to “prove” the health hazards of a return to school, as she reportedly did in respect of the tobacco issue this week, notwithstanding that she is not the minister of health, and over the apparent objections of the minister of health, Zweli Mkhize.

Perhaps she honestly doesn’t regard a highly risky return to school as posing much of a danger.

And once again, for a government that likes to claim it’s listened to “representations” and made decisions on that basis, it is apparent that certain voices are given more credence than others.

Big economic interests are overlooked for dubious health gains, all on the pretext that the government is merely following public representations. It’s a convenient system.

So why, one wonders, are teacher unions, parents and a host of other interested parties disregarded in their pleas for more time to get schools ready, but a faceless and nameless anti-tobacco lobby is able to have the word of the president reversed?

“Life must go on,” Motshekga breezily tells us, in an address to the nation this week. People must be safe, she said, “but I do not want to commit myself and say I guarantee that no-one will die, but we will try by all means to make sure that people are safe because there is no need for people to find themselves in danger. We are not planning to put people in danger.”

As a newspaper we have been urging the government to get moving on easing the lockdown, all the while bearing in mind that the hard lockdown that is strangling our economy was designed precisely so that the state and business could prepare for an expected surge in Covid-19 cases. That includes schools, whose duty to get ready is even more pronounced given that they assume responsibility for our greatest gift, our kids.

It is concerning to hear of provinces not yet being ready, and of teacher unions across the board warning against being overhasty. Their concerns are not to be taken lightly.

Motshekga is right, though, in saying life must go on. But provincial education authorities must get their act together, and fast. No parent or guardian who feels their child cannot go to school this year must face recriminations.

We wish schools the best of luck as matrics return, and they must know all eyes will be on them. Meanwhile, we are left to wonder at the silence from the ministerial chorus who would continue with the lockdown whatever the cost — for our own good health.

Perhaps they do not have children at school, especially a state school.

Why, one wonders, are teacher unions and parents disregarded?