The Minister for Environment Udaya Gammanpila was insistent that this country cannot shut down due to Covid-19. He said the system cannot take it, as there was no significant growth in any area of the domestic economy when the former regime was in power. As a result, he said, the economy is yet to recover fully and in this shape, a lockdown was not feasible.
As it happens, the video of his comments to the media went public and almost viral soon after the clip was aired on public television. Here was a responsible frontline Minister of Government effectively saying a lockdown cannot work, and basically arguing against the type of comprehensive closures that went on for months in the initial days of Covid-19 management in 2020.
What happened next? The lockdown happened. It seemed that Udaya Gammanpila, if he was sincere in his views, was simply ignored. Or he was totally overruled.
However, the Government’s mixed messaging did not go unnoticed. On public television, Prof. Ranjith Bandara, Government National List MP, seemed to echo the sentiments of Udaya Gammanpila at a recent political talk show. However, Bandara seemed to be saying that Covid-19 eventually necessitated the shutdown, and the Government found a workaround to mitigate the loss by encouraging the export sector even within the controlled conditions of the current travel restrictions.
It’s a fact that the Government is encouraging exports even as the current restrictions take hold. Export sector executives have been given special passes, and these include those in auxiliary trades such as freight etc. The rationale is that the economy is sustained principally through the export sector, which would then mean that though the country is shut down, essentially the functioning export sector economy would keep the harm done to a minimum. Ranjith Bandara claimed as much in his segment on the programme that was aired.
So this boils down to control within control. There are Covid-19 controls and essentially a set of rules to restrict public sector and private sector activity in the country, impacting business and enterprise. But within these, there are a set of other controls which allow movement for some at the exclusion of others, and the Government hopes that this regime of controlling the control, would eventually save the economy.
This harks back to a different era in which a Government micromanaged all aspects of foreign trading, through exchange control regulations. This was during the Sirimavo Bandaranaike Government of the 70s. Self-sufficiency was the mantra then, but it was also hoped that the few export sector industries at that time would be the saving grace when control was the dominant aspect of the economy of that era.
However, there was no pandemic then. The Bandaranaike Government did not feel forced to enact the measures it did — this was the choice of policy at that time.
That is not the case now. However, despite the exigencies of the pandemic, the Government is free to choose its response when it comes to deciding economic policy. The mixed messaging apart, the policy making decision makers in the inner-sanctum seem to have been forced into a lockdown which in their hearts of hearts, such policy czars don’t believe in.
Their recourse was to rely on a piecemeal approach and to make sure that the shutdowns did not impede the export economy — the one sector identified as being vital to good economic performance. How reasonable is the Government’s calculus in this regard?
It relies a great deal on trickle down, and basically hopes for the best in the short term for the ordinary folk who are not the direct beneficiaries of the export economy, which is being helped to stay afloat amid the restrictions. This approach of ‘policy within a policy’ smacks of controlled economics. It is true that this is not by choice, and that the policy framework has been forced on policymakers due to an exigency. But does micro-control work? Does it do any good in any circumstances, particularly these circumstances?
On the one hand the beneficiaries are the exporters. Of course nobody would argue that by keeping exports alive, there would be an inflow of vital foreign currency that would hopefully keep the system in good trim despite the bad situation. This is essentially the definition of survival economics. The primary goal is to keep the ship of state afloat, but just barely.
It wouldn’t help in terms of avoiding the essential crippling of the domestic sectors of industry and commerce. People-to-people economic interaction would for all intents and purposes cease.
That’s an issue that has to be borne by householders essentially — individual exigencies that the ‘god of small things’ would take care of. However, if the domestic economy crashes, the economy crashes with it.
The fond hope that temporary survival through a continued infusion of foreign exchange through the export sector would keep the system from breakdown is at best a fond wish. Gammanpila may have been right. We essentially cannot afford to do this.
The refrain is that human lives come first. This has been repeated especially by opposition politicians from every rooftop. But crashing the economy also comes at a high cost in terms of livelihoods, and lost employment for instance could lead to more deaths than at the hands of Covid-19. There are other attendant risks to people’s lives, such as the neglect of other diseases brought on by a multiplicity of factors, which could be caused by variables such as the inability to find money for effective treatments within the required timeframes.
A controlled economy is a controlled economy, and there is really no such thing as a controlled free market. Trade protectionism in limited ways could be the only exception to this rule. The Government’s export sector experiment would be a good survival gambit at best that would keep the policymakers happy — keeping alive some sense of hope that there would be a better tomorrow.
What the policymakers could do is to control Covid-19 and not attempt to artificially control the economy. The domestic economy could for all intents and purposes be kept open, if there could be strict control protocols that could be introduced for the conduct of business.
Business spaces could be kept regulated by a bolstered health sector task force, perhaps empowered by the military. The same kind of isolation regimens that now impose local curfews could be replicated in some way in office environments as well. As much business as possible could be conducted in open air environs, and such alternate office space could be facilitated with State sector assistance, supported by the various federations of business that could contribute to the funding aspect.
Of course the Government is bound to be criticised by various loose cannon opposition types no matter which policy is implemented. The criticism has to be contended with, but nothing speaks better than delivery.
Countries controlling the outbreak effectively, adopted the best economic strategies too, according to One World Data. The data in fact doesn’t bear out that there is a tradeoff between good economic management and Covid-19 control. The opposite is true.
Nations such as Lithuania and Taiwan were able to both manage their economies and control Covid-19. Taiwan hardly ever shut down, except in a few cases in which local lockdowns of sorts were implemented. The country concentrated on what is called the R number — which is a gauge of transmissibility of the virus.
Each of these nations cited have had various methods of containing virus spread without lockdowns. Effective border controls have been key, and Sri Lanka some say does not have that option. However, preventive measures and quarantine were relentless in countries that effectively controlled both the economy and the disease.
The messaging — especially mixed messaging — has to be controlled too, and it’s easy to underestimate the value of the message in a pandemic situation. Is it too late to reach Taiwan levels of efficiency in Covid-19 management? It isn’t, but right policy supported by right messaging is key.
(The writer is a former Editor-in-Chief of three national English language publications and a practicing Attorney-at-Law. He is an Editors’ Guild award-winning columnist, and contributing writer and columnist for the Nikkei Asian Review and South China Morning Post, while his editorials have been published in The Australian)Combatting COVID caught up in controls within controls
18 May 2021
Combatting COVID caught up in controls within controls
18 May 2021
The Minister for Environment Udaya Gammanpila was insistent that this country cannot shut down due to Covid-19. He said the system cannot take it, as there was no significant growth in any area of the domestic economy when the former regime was in power. As a result, he said, the economy is yet to recover fully and in this shape, a lockdown was not feasible.
As it happens, the video of his comments to the media went public and almost viral soon after the clip was aired on public television. Here was a responsible frontline Minister of Government effectively saying a lockdown cannot work, and basically arguing against the type of comprehensive closures that went on for months in the initial days of Covid-19 management in 2020.
What happened next? The lockdown happened. It seemed that Udaya Gammanpila, if he was sincere in his views, was simply ignored. Or he was totally overruled.
However, the Government’s mixed messaging did not go unnoticed. On public television, Prof. Ranjith Bandara, Government National List MP, seemed to echo the sentiments of Udaya Gammanpila at a recent political talk show. However, Bandara seemed to be saying that Covid-19 eventually necessitated the shutdown, and the Government found a workaround to mitigate the loss by encouraging the export sector even within the controlled conditions of the current travel restrictions.
It’s a fact that the Government is encouraging exports even as the current restrictions take hold. Export sector executives have been given special passes, and these include those in auxiliary trades such as freight etc. The rationale is that the economy is sustained principally through the export sector, which would then mean that though the country is shut down, essentially the functioning export sector economy would keep the harm done to a minimum. Ranjith Bandara claimed as much in his segment on the programme that was aired.
So this boils down to control within control. There are Covid-19 controls and essentially a set of rules to restrict public sector and private sector activity in the country, impacting business and enterprise. But within these, there are a set of other controls which allow movement for some at the exclusion of others, and the Government hopes that this regime of controlling the control, would eventually save the economy.
This harks back to a different era in which a Government micromanaged all aspects of foreign trading, through exchange control regulations. This was during the Sirimavo Bandaranaike Government of the 70s. Self-sufficiency was the mantra then, but it was also hoped that the few export sector industries at that time would be the saving grace when control was the dominant aspect of the economy of that era.
However, there was no pandemic then. The Bandaranaike Government did not feel forced to enact the measures it did — this was the choice of policy at that time.
That is not the case now. However, despite the exigencies of the pandemic, the Government is free to choose its response when it comes to deciding economic policy. The mixed messaging apart, the policy making decision makers in the inner-sanctum seem to have been forced into a lockdown which in their hearts of hearts, such policy czars don’t believe in.
Their recourse was to rely on a piecemeal approach and to make sure that the shutdowns did not impede the export economy — the one sector identified as being vital to good economic performance. How reasonable is the Government’s calculus in this regard?
It relies a great deal on trickle down, and basically hopes for the best in the short term for the ordinary folk who are not the direct beneficiaries of the export economy, which is being helped to stay afloat amid the restrictions. This approach of ‘policy within a policy’ smacks of controlled economics. It is true that this is not by choice, and that the policy framework has been forced on policymakers due to an exigency. But does micro-control work? Does it do any good in any circumstances, particularly these circumstances?
On the one hand the beneficiaries are the exporters. Of course nobody would argue that by keeping exports alive, there would be an inflow of vital foreign currency that would hopefully keep the system in good trim despite the bad situation. This is essentially the definition of survival economics. The primary goal is to keep the ship of state afloat, but just barely.
It wouldn’t help in terms of avoiding the essential crippling of the domestic sectors of industry and commerce. People-to-people economic interaction would for all intents and purposes cease.
That’s an issue that has to be borne by householders essentially — individual exigencies that the ‘god of small things’ would take care of. However, if the domestic economy crashes, the economy crashes with it.
The fond hope that temporary survival through a continued infusion of foreign exchange through the export sector would keep the system from breakdown is at best a fond wish. Gammanpila may have been right. We essentially cannot afford to do this.
The refrain is that human lives come first. This has been repeated especially by opposition politicians from every rooftop. But crashing the economy also comes at a high cost in terms of livelihoods, and lost employment for instance could lead to more deaths than at the hands of Covid-19. There are other attendant risks to people’s lives, such as the neglect of other diseases brought on by a multiplicity of factors, which could be caused by variables such as the inability to find money for effective treatments within the required timeframes.
A controlled economy is a controlled economy, and there is really no such thing as a controlled free market. Trade protectionism in limited ways could be the only exception to this rule. The Government’s export sector experiment would be a good survival gambit at best that would keep the policymakers happy — keeping alive some sense of hope that there would be a better tomorrow.
What the policymakers could do is to control Covid-19 and not attempt to artificially control the economy. The domestic economy could for all intents and purposes be kept open, if there could be strict control protocols that could be introduced for the conduct of business.
Business spaces could be kept regulated by a bolstered health sector task force, perhaps empowered by the military. The same kind of isolation regimens that now impose local curfews could be replicated in some way in office environments as well. As much business as possible could be conducted in open air environs, and such alternate office space could be facilitated with State sector assistance, supported by the various federations of business that could contribute to the funding aspect.
Of course the Government is bound to be criticised by various loose cannon opposition types no matter which policy is implemented. The criticism has to be contended with, but nothing speaks better than delivery.
Countries controlling the outbreak effectively, adopted the best economic strategies too, according to One World Data. The data in fact doesn’t bear out that there is a tradeoff between good economic management and Covid-19 control. The opposite is true.
Nations such as Lithuania and Taiwan were able to both manage their economies and control Covid-19. Taiwan hardly ever shut down, except in a few cases in which local lockdowns of sorts were implemented. The country concentrated on what is called the R number — which is a gauge of transmissibility of the virus.
Each of these nations cited have had various methods of containing virus spread without lockdowns. Effective border controls have been key, and Sri Lanka some say does not have that option. However, preventive measures and quarantine were relentless in countries that effectively controlled both the economy and the disease.
The messaging — especially mixed messaging — has to be controlled too, and it’s easy to underestimate the value of the message in a pandemic situation. Is it too late to reach Taiwan levels of efficiency in Covid-19 management? It isn’t, but right policy supported by right messaging is key.
(The writer is a former Editor-in-Chief of three national English language publications and a practicing Attorney-at-Law. He is an Editors’ Guild award-winning columnist, and contributing writer and columnist for the Nikkei Asian Review and South China Morning Post, while his editorials have been published in The Australian)Kapruka
Discover Kapruka, the leading online shopping platform in Sri Lanka, where you can conveniently send Gifts and Flowers to your loved ones for any event. Explore a wide range of popular Shopping Categories on Kapruka, including Toys, Groceries, Electronics, Birthday Cakes, Fruits, Chocolates, Automobile, Mother and Baby Products, Clothing, and Fashion. Additionally, Kapruka offers unique online services like Money Remittance, Astrology, Medicine Delivery, and access to over 700 Top Brands. Also If you’re interested in selling with Kapruka, Partner Central by Kapruka is the best solution to start with. Moreover, through Kapruka Global Shop, you can also enjoy the convenience of purchasing products from renowned platforms like Amazon and eBay and have them delivered to Sri Lanka.Send love straight to their heart this Valentine's with our thoughtful gifts!
Discover Kapruka, the leading online shopping platform in Sri Lanka, where you can conveniently send Gifts and Flowers to your loved ones for any event. Explore a wide range of popular Shopping Categories on Kapruka, including Toys, Groceries, Electronics, Birthday Cakes, Fruits, Chocolates, Automobile, Mother and Baby Products, Clothing, and Fashion. Additionally, Kapruka offers unique online services like Money Remittance, Astrology, Medicine Delivery, and access to over 700 Top Brands. Also If you’re interested in selling with Kapruka, Partner Central by Kapruka is the best solution to start with. Moreover, through Kapruka Global Shop, you can also enjoy the convenience of purchasing products from renowned platforms like Amazon and eBay and have them delivered to Sri Lanka.Send love straight to their heart this Valentine's with our thoughtful gifts!