Govt refuses to lay blame on any of its own

Govt refuses to lay blame on any of its own

Practice makes perfect, they said. Unfortunately, the "second coming'' of the Covid-19 pandemic is proving the centre cannot hold.

To lock down, or not to lock down? That is not the only question.

The most immediate concern for the public at the moment is whether the government knows what it is doing.

So far, the authorities appear more focused on semantics than a clear strategy of what to do next as the infections graph gets steeper each day.

The number of new infections climbed up to more than 700 yesterday, with an assumption that it could pass a thousand next week.

Most people have already assumed the worst.

For many, it is a foregone conclusion that the strictest restrictions will be applied sooner or later.

What is weighing on their minds is whether the government has the interest of the majority of people, especially the poor and downtrodden, at heart as it weighs up tougher measures to curb the disease.

The Centre for Covid-19 Situation Administration (CCSA) did not inspire confidence when it proposed many new curbs earlier, including closures of schools and entertainment venues, but insisted these should not be called a lockdown.

The CCSA spokesman, Taweesilp Visanuyothin, suggested the government would rather avoid the term or it would have to pay compensation to businesses affected by the "lockdown" measures.

In plain language, that is a lame way to announce a public policy, let alone one during a crisis.

In a similar vein, the Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA) allowed restaurants to stay open for dine-in customers but forbade people to eat out after 7pm starting today. That order, however, was overturned by the PM who insisted the eateries can remain open untill 9pm.

Is this Covid-19 policy or a play on words?

The government showed its obsession with linguistics from the very beginning of this latest spread when the CCSA instructed people to call it a new outbreak, not a second wave.

What difference does it make in terms of policy responses and relief measures? Nobody seems to know.

The wording, however, could provide some comfort to the government which is keen to say that the latest round of outbreak is not its fault.

It may be a cunning way to evade responsibility. But it's not the most elegant.

As it became clear that the new outbreak was caused by the illegal trafficking of migrant workers, the government appeared busier coming up with excuses than preventive measures.

The military, which often boasts of its duty to "protect the territory'', simply said it did not have enough soldiers to patrol the thousands of kilometres of Thai borders.

The job was too difficult, the security agency seemed to suggest. And that was that.

Prime Minister Gen Prayut Chan-o-cha may have shown a stern face and given an order to crack down on the smuggling but no gangs or leaders have been arrested.

The same PM who issued one threat after another that the law must be strictly enforced when it comes to anti-government protesters has not punished any military personnel for failing to catch the labour smugglers either.

While members of the public suspected that the smuggling would not have been possible without cooperation from state officials, the military insisted there was no corruption.

And the government seems completely okay with that explanation. There was no further probe, nor concerted attempt to crack down on trafficking rings.

A popular online influencer who showed a photo of a crossing that remained open to illegal migrants was even threatened with a lawsuit.

The same is true with gambling dens, which have emerged as hot spots of infection not just in Rayong but several other provinces.

While the government seems content with reports that there are no gambling dens in the country, more new infections continue to emerge that are associated with such places.

And more restrictions will be imposed on the public, bringing more misery, hardship and bankruptcy.

It's therefore no surprise that many people are starting to wonder whether it's fair that the majority of people must now suffer the consequences of measures to curb the disease while the real culprits remain untouched.

For many people, the question is no longer whether full-blown restrictions should be in place.

Rather, it is who or which agency should take responsibility for the breaches that caused this second wave, and resulting outbreak and privation, and how?

Atiya Achakulwisut

Columnist for the Bangkok Post

Atiya Achakulwisut is a columnist for the Bangkok Post.

Do you like the content of this article?
COMMENT (42)