State of disaster extension baffling to medical experts, but economists see silver lining
Experts say the extension makes no medical sense, but economists say it could send a positive signal to foreign investors.
Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs (Cogta), Dr Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma. Picture: Gallo Images/Phill Magakoe
The extension of the 2-year-long state of disaster has left medical experts baffled but according to economists, the decision may not be all bad, as it could actually boost South Africa’s attractiveness to international trade.
Medical experts on Tuesday said the decision to extend the state of disaster appears to be more about control of power, rather than to control Covid-19 infections, going as far as describing Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs (COGTA) Minister Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma’s decision as nonsensical and “dictatorial” decision..
The country is nearing the two-year mark since lockdown restrictions were first introduced back on 23 March 2020. Despite a drastic decline in infections and deaths, however, Dlamini-Zuma announced on Tuesday morning that the national state of disaster would stay in place until 15 April 2022.
Also Read: AfriForum takes government to court for extension of national state of disaster
Dlamini-Zuma explained that this would allow government to find alternative means to manage the pandemic outside of the Disaster Management Act and prepare the legal framework to support that alternative.
Health experts puzzled by extension
According to healthcare experts, however, the decisions made by government regarding the management of Covid-19 seems to have no focus, and their goals and achievements are difficult to understand.
Vaccinology professor at the University of Witswatersrand Shabir Madhi slammed the “poor decisions” made by government.
“It makes no sense and government doesn’t understand what they are trying to achieve,” he said.
“They don’t seem to be goal-driven and they just seem to go from one poor decision-making to another poor decision-making,” he said.
According to Madhi, 70% of the population has already been infected with Covid before the Omicron fourth wave, and prevention should no longer be the focus.
“The regulations that are in the state of disaster are more geared towards trying to prevent infections. We are no longer in the phase of the pandemic where we are trying to prevent infections. We have been spectacularly unsuccessful in preventing infections in South Africa but had we been successful, we wouldn’t have had 70% of the population being infected with the virus before the onset of the Omicron wave and that probably sits at 80% now.”
Professor Shabir Madhi
The current main focus is to maximise protection against severe disease by getting more than 90% of the population aged above 50 vaccinated. But government failed to do this, Madhi said.
“So rather than playing around and pretending that [government is] doing anything, when its only doing more harm than any good to the economy and livelihoods of people, it should focus where focus is really required – and that is to get more than 90% of people aged above 50 vaccinated and stop pretending that we are still able to prevent infections when we fail to do so.”
Stellenbosch University epidemiologist Dr Jo Barnes concurred, saying not only did the extension not make sense, but the reasons behind it are quite murky.
“They keep telling us more and more different reasons every time they do this and the reasons are getting weaker and weaker.”
Dr Jo Barnes
Covid-19 should rather be handled by the National Department of Health, Barnes said, instead of the National Coronavirus Command Council.
And even though she is in favour of the state of disaster being be called off, she believes it s unlikely this would mean people would stop wearing their masks.
Also Read: Dlamini-Zuma to oppose court bid to end national State of Disaster
“There are a large number of people with all sorts of health issues who cannot afford to not wear a mask. Government can transfer the control of this from the Presidency to the Department of Health without dropping a single rule.
“There is a huge amount of secrecy. They have to align the regulations with the department of health. The moment people start being secretive, then people start worrying. The more they spin these reasons, the more those of us in public health and branches of health and people in the economy start yet again distrusting what the government is doing,” Barnes said.
Not a bad idea for the economy
Since the latest extension of the state of disaster simply means that level 1 and the accompanying regulations would be extended, it is unlikely to be too detrimental for the economy as businesses remain opened, said economist at University of Johannesburg Peter Baur.
Not only that, but it could actually make the country look good for international trade and tourism, as it creates the appearance that South Africa is committed to dealing with the pandemic, said Baur.
“What was put in place in the first half of the lockdown were structures which businesses should use to cope. But the extension is good for trade in that it shows the world that we are committed. While other countries and their lockdown levels increase, first thing countries would do is look at what South Africa is doing, and their protocols like at airports for tourism purposes, for example.”
“If we increase the lockdown level, then we must re-talk as there are certain industries which will be impacted. If we increase the number of Covid-19 cases and it becomes unmanageable, then we would have problems economically.”
ANC dictatorial as they vote against amendment of Act
While Dlamini-Zuma gazetted the extension, Parliament’s portfolio committee on Cogta also voted against a motion to amend the Disaster Management Act.
The motion of desirability was proposed as a Private Member’s Bill by Freedom Front Plus leader Pieter Groenewald, to constrain the power of the executive in relation to the length of the state of disaster by affording Parliament, provincial legislatures, and municipal councils the same exclusive power of extension while exercising oversight.
Committee members cited the Helen Suzman Foundation case where the court held that Parliament had properly delegated its power in terms of disaster management to the executive, and that the current mechanisms of accountability and oversight were constitutional and sufficient.
It has been argued, though, that this was exactly the reason why the top brass declared a national disaster rather than a national emergency, as the latter required decision making and oversight by Parliament and the opposition. A state of national disaster gives the Minister, in this case Dlamini-Zuma, control to “tower over” the state, said political analyst Wayne Duvenhage.
“They can get [power] easily and motivate that within the context of cabinet. Basically, cabinet can, according to this legislation, act in a dictatorial way. But when it comes to a state emergency, it’s more problematic because it must go through Parliament and there, you have oppositions when it comes to having to take decisions.”
“It’s all about control and it’s about power and in many cases, when there is power and control, there is always money involved, there is interest and sometimes self-interests,” Duvenhage said.
Confirming Duvenhage’s views, the opposition was indeed against the extension, with the DA raising issue that the decision was made without proper consultation with experts or the President’s Coordination Council.
According to the party’s Cogta shadow minister Cilliers Brink, there was no explanation to the public and zero accountability to Parliament.
“The DA believes that this move from Dlamini-Zuma is nothing but a power grab, in order to continue to give the ANC cronies and comrades easy access to Covid-19 funds, and to trample upon fundamental Constitutional rights,” Brink said.
For more news your way
Download our app and read this and other great stories on the move. Available for Android and iOS.
