Government must now move with speed to lift Covid state of disaster
In light of SA’s sharp decline in Covid-19 infection levels, together with reduced pandemic-related mortality, it is not surprising that the government has come under increasing pressure to lift the national state of disaster — initially imposed to deal with a once-in-a-generation pandemic that has claimed tens of thousands of lives in SA and millions globally. While the government was lauded for its swift response early in the pandemic, the course of the disease suggests that a review of our approach is called for, and arguably overdue.
It would, however, be irresponsible for the government to throw caution to the wind on the assumption that we are out of the Covid-19 woods. As the statistics show, the virus is still very much with us, as dangerous as ever, and capable of a resurgence. It poses a great threat to vulnerable members of the population in particular.
It has long been accepted that fighting the virus is a balancing act between protecting lives while ensuring people’s livelihoods are not destroyed. The same dictum must apply as the government seeks ways in which SA, along with the rest of the world, can live with the virus while responsibly opening up many of life’s economic and social activities.
The state of disaster undoubtedly played a crucial role in combating the pandemic in its early stages but it is, given the trajectory of the virus and the need to return to greater normalcy, now necessary to adapt our strategy, whose returns have diminished over time. This is something the government seems to have accepted. In parliament this week, and in his state of the nation address last month, President Cyril Ramaphosa committed to repealing the state of disaster.
This week, Ramaphosa said revised regulations, to come into effect after consultations with various stakeholder groups, would “enable everyone to feel safe”. Indeed, public safety should be a priority in any choices we make as a nation.
The question is why the government has taken so long to free the country from the draconian, yet inappropriate, stranglehold of disaster regulations. The tardiness suggests a lack of urgency in removing the remaining hindrances to economic activity, despite the dire situation our economy is in.
The government only this week published the draft regulations aimed at enabling the transfer of the relevant disaster regulations to the National Health Act, ostensibly to enable the country to abolish the state of disaster. Surely the authorities knew all along that the disaster regulations could not continue indefinitely? They should have prepared proactively to restore society to normality at the earliest opportunity — thus averting yet another blanket extension of the disaster regulations regime, as happened this week.
Apart from the deleterious effect of constraining economic and other activities, the government’s conduct runs the added risk of undermining the public’s respect for the law as reasonable and fair. How, for instance, does the government explain restricting crowd sizes at outdoor venues such as funerals and sporting events, but not in crowded, enclosed shopping centres?
The reality is that for most South Africans, who routinely violate the regulations either through restriction fatigue or simply because of the need to earn a living, the state of disaster has become of academic interest only.
It is important that when the statistics are pointing to a decline in infections and the severity of the pandemic, the government is seen to be acting with urgency to assist economic recovery, especially in some of the most affected sectors — such as sports, tourism and hospitality. The government must now move with speed to lift the state of disaster. If the authorities are concerned about a possible uncontrolled resurgence of Covid-19, they can always reimpose the disaster regulations, as appropriate.
To retain confidence, and win public support for whatever measures it takes to fight the pandemic, the government must act transparently, and ensure that its decisions are reasonable, fair and consistent. And are seen to be so.
For most, the state of disaster has become of academic interest only