Contradictory announcements one after another confuse public
A spate of contradictory announcements and reversals of earlier decisions have marred the Government’s efforts to counter the country’s COVID-19 outbreak.
The contradictions started at the very top. During a meeting of the COVID-19 Task Force at the Presidential Secretariat on March 17, President Gotabaya Rajapaksa insisted that there was no need to totally lockdown the country. He pointed out that this was not done even during the 30-year war.
On March 19, the President’s Office announced a ‘ Work from Home Week’ for both the public and private sector from March 20 to 27. Yet just over 24 hours later, the same office announced an island-wide curfew with effect from 6 p.m. on March 20. Many parts of the country have been under some form of curfew since that date.
There have also been different pronouncements by various authorities regarding the health and social distancing guidelines put in effect to minimise the spread of the disease. In the initial stage of the outbreak, health officials, including Director General of Health Services, Dr Anil Jasinghe stated that there was still no need for the general public to wear face masks. Yet police on the ground acted differently, tu around their faces in place of masks. On April 10, it was announced that wearing masks is mandatory for those travelling on the road. This week however, police seemed to acknowledge people could not be legally prosecuted for not wearing masks.
In his address to the nation on March 17, President Rajapaksa announced that he had ordered shops to sell 1kg of dhal at Rs 65 and a tin of canned fish for Rs 100 as part of measures to bring relief to the people. The Consumer Affairs Authority (CAA) then issued a gazette notification setting the maximum retail price for the two items, while the Government agreed to subsidize retailers for the cost of selling the products at the newly established control price
There were widespread reports of shortage of dhal and canned fish after the price controls were imposed, with consumers complaining that stocks were unavailable even in the Government’s own Sathosa outlets.
On April 10, Cabinet decided to remove the control price on dhal and canned fish, giving the subsidy only to Government owned Lak Sathosa and Co- operative shops, prompting other retailers to revise their prices upwards.
There was further confusion regarding the closure of liquor shops. Though they had remained shut for weeks, the Excise Department allowed liquor shops to open on April 20 in districts where curfew had been lifted, only for the President’s Media Division to announce a day later that all liquor shops in the country would remain closed until further notice. The about-turn came after long queues formed outside liquor shops as soon as they opened, with many customers completely disregarding health and social distancing guidelines in their haste to purchase liquor.
The Government scheme of providing a Rs 5000 one-time only allowance to those financially affected by the COVID19 outbreak has also been marked by contradictory statements and decisions. At one point last month, Grama Niladharis, Economic Development Officers and Agricultural Officers involved in selecting eligible families for assistance withdraw from duties related to distributing the allowance.
They cited contradictory circulars issued by different ministries and departments as a reason for the decision. The officers only agreed to return to those duties after the Government assured them that henceforth, all circulars related to the distribution of the Rs 5000 onetime allowance will be issued only by the Prime Minister’s Office.
Contradictory statements have also been made regarding when the country can open and how “safe” the situation has to be for that to happen. Deputy Inspector General (DIG) Ajith Rohana earlier said in an interview that in order to fully reopen the country, there should be a period of 28 days with no reported cases. The DG of Health Services though, said this week that they cannot expect there to be zero cases to open, but that restrictions can be relaxed once the number of cases become significantly less.
Meanwhile, the Government’s press releases regarding the imposition and lifting of curfew as well as the relaxing of regulations has confused many. The President’s Office issued a release on April 25 laying out a new system of movement for people based on the last digit of their National Identity Card (NIC) number. The scheme was to apply in districts where curfew was lifted during the day. It was stated that people can go out for essential supplies on a particular day of the week that was marked on a schedule, with those who possess NICs ending with numbers 1 or 2 allowed out on Mondays, and so on.
The system immediately confused many. Some asked if this applied to those travelling to work in the districts or whether it also applied to those providing various services. DIG Rohana was again forced to issue a clarification, noting that the NIC number system did not apply to those going to work and only to people leaving home to purchase goods.
The latest release issued by the President’s Office issued on Friday (1) has also raised eyebrows over confusing content. It noted that resumption of civilian life and state and private sector activities can begin from May 11 even in the districts of Colombo, Gampaha, Kalutara and Puttalam, where a curfew is in effect.
The statement further said that buses belonging to the Sri Lanka Transport Board (SLTB) as well as trains will only transport employees who are reporting for work. There was no clarification as to how this rule would be enforced and how checks will be carried out to ensure that only those going to work can get on trains and SLTB buses.
Though the President’s Office said that members of the public, other than those going to work, can only leave to purchase essential food items and medicines, it was again unclear as to how this would be enforced.
Though the latest release had drawn criticism over social media, the President’s Office has so far not taken steps to clarify matters.
There have also been different pronouncements by various authorities regarding the health and social distancing guidelines put in effect to minimise the spread of the disease.