Ramaphosa faces tough decisions on economy, pandemic

‘The whole history of the world is summed up in the fact that, when nations are strong, they are not always just, and when they wish to be just, they are no longer strong.” Winston Churchill, the British Prime Minister, must have been facing the same situation that is confronting President Cyril Ramaphosa now when he said these words in the midst of World War II.

Ramaphosa has done a sterling job in shepherding the country during this unprecedented lockdown. His government’s actions in trying to stem the spread of the coronavirus seem to be bearing fruit, although it is a little bit early to celebrate their success.

The question right now is in maintaining the extended lockdown, does he try to be just (and loosen the restrictions on economic activity) and risk losing the strong position that the country appears to be in against the pandemic, or does he let the economy continue to take the pounding that it’s taking?

Whatever decision is taken to give the economy a boost has to be weighed against the potential damage that it can do to the fight against the pandemic.

The figures don’t lie: billions of rands have been lost through the continued ban on the sales of liquor and cigarettes. The British America Tobacco company on its own contributed R13 billion in taxes in 2019, meaning that the ban, if continued all through April, will cost the country over R1 billion from that company alone.

Factor in the billions of rands lost through the restrictions on alcohol sales and the picture gets grimmer. The restriction on cigarette sales might be justified from a health perspective, but the same cannot be said for the restrictions on the selling of alcohol.

Most people default to the argument that has been advanced by Minister of Police Bheki Cele that “crime has decreased during this lockdown because alcohol is not being sold”. The decrease in crime over this period must be celebrated but to take it beyond that is claiming easy victories.

People need to be reminded that the lockdown was never declared to fight crime but to increase South Africa’s chances in its battle against the devastating Covid-19. To seek to use the lockdown to fight crime is just mischievous.

The decision on whether to relax the ban on alcohol sales must be based on whether it puts people’s lives at more risk than they already are. The lockdown already allows people limited movements to buy food, so surely them buying liquor on a take-away basis cannot put them at more risk than usual. The liquor trading industry has already indicated its willingness to stick to reduced trading hours.

There is enough evidence to suggested that an illicit trade in liquor and cigarettes was created the minute the restrictions were imposed.

Besides the loss of taxes and the wasted police resources trying to keep up with every illegal pop-up tavern, there is the increased risk of people who would normally be in their own homes moving around and thus increasing their chances of contracting Covid-19.

Wouldn’t all that police personnel be more useful ensuring that social distancing is maintained during the sale of legal alcohol that contributes to the country’s coffers?

It would appear that this is a case when the president has to become unjust by allowing certain sectors of the economy to trade, while others are closed so that he can ensure the lockdown (and country) stay strong.

Sydney Majoko.

For more news your way, download The Citizen’s app for iOS and Android.