THE DEATH toll of COVID-19 is mounting inexorably. An issue which I am sure will be explored fully in due course is the wide disparity of fatalities between one country and another.
The US, with 40,000 deaths and rising, is numerically the country which has suffered most. It has a population which is approximately three times that of the Philippines but has 100 times the number of casualties. The perceived wisdom previously was that since the coronavirus is new, then none of us has a built-in immunity. Nevertheless it is now clear that some populations suffer more than others. This is partly, but only partly, explained by the fact that restriction of people’s movements took place later in the cycle in some countries than in others.
For example, the US was relatively slow in introducing ‘lockdowns’ but where there is already pressure coming from many, including President Trump, to allow greater movement of the populace.
Trump, in his emotional tweets uses the word ‘liberate’ in the context where movement of the populace is curtailed. He applied this to the states that voted for the Democratic party such as Minnesota, Virginia, Michigan but not to the Republican state of Ohio which has approximately the same degree of lockdown as the Democratic states.
The politics of dealing with Covid-19 in the US confirms my view that a federal system of government has its disadvantages. Or perhaps it is just Trump who seems to be one of those people who tries to blame everyone but himself when problems arise.
Filipinos are to be congratulated for their generally remarkable discipline when it comes to adhering the lockdown conditions. There are those, of course, who break the rules and president Duterte has threatened martial law. This may not be a bad thing if we have disciplined officers operating with clearly established rules of engagement in controlling our movements. The question has been raised as to whether the lockdown in Luzon should be extended beyond 30 April. It would be disastrous if this caused a higher rate of fatalities than would have occurred if the lockdown continued.
***
The so-called liquor ban accompanying the lockdown has proved irksome for some. I always thought that liquor meant spirits: gin, vodka, rum, whisky etc., but it seems to be interpreted to include beer with an alcoholic content of only 3-5 percent (as opposed to 40 percent for the spirits). It is regrettable for those who obey the instruction to ‘drink moderately’ to not be able to partake in the infrequent tipple which to use the Americanism ‘takes the edge off’ which is helpful when trying to cope with the antics of boisterous children in our small homes.
***
Meanwhile, in some circles, life goes on. Huawei has urged the UK government not to make a 5G U-turn after the Coronavirus pandemic is over. Well said, but it remains to be seen how damaging the virus will have been to our economies.
***
The Philippines is already beginning to think about the 2021 budget. We will need to make cutbacks. One area is that of education where enormous resources are demonstrably failing to cause our system to be internationally competitive. The Education Act (RA 10533) needs to be modified, in particular needs to be made flexible so that four year high school graduates can, if they wish, apply to enter tertiary education. The Commission on Higher Education (CHEd) should provide guidelines as to the level of attainment necessary for our high school students to enter institutions under its auspices. The six year compulsory high school education embodied in RA 10533 is an expensive failure which under the economic conditions that will prevail in 2021 and beyond we cannot afford.
***
The current inconveniences and hardships provide an opportunity for a less acquiescent and a more combative national conversation to occur in future.
We may even have a vibrant democracy!/PN
