The government efforts at stemming the spread of coronavirus have been commendable thus far. While I don’t agree with every measure rolled out, I’ll give credit when credit is due. Nonetheless, there’s always room for improvement even though some may argue that hindsight is 20/20. As much as the world has heralded us to be the gold standard in containment, there have been gaps.

First, that whole narrative on wearing a mask only when one is sick which also translated to the healthy having no reason to don one.  Yes, it may give a false sense of security but to actively discourage the use of one is a wrong move in my opinion. We are not known to be a socially responsible bunch. There’s a reason for our reputation of a “fine” city because citizens tend to only toe the line when regulations are in place for fear of being prosecuted.

So putting the onus on the infirm to put on masks when they’re out and about is by far a tall order, civic-mindedness be damned. The responsibility then falls back on the rest of the population to protect themselves. Rather than putting out such a narrative, more focus and effort could have been put into educating how to wear one properly should they choose to do so.

Of course, there’s another reason why wearing a mask isn’t encouraged and that’s the limited quantity available. No matter how the story arc was positioned, it doesn’t change the fact that the mask supply is insufficient if everyone wore one and changed it daily. Yet this qualifier wasn’t laid outright as the government aggressively sought to assure that there was sufficient inventory in the stockpile instead.

Had they justified that we need to be ring-fence these stocks for front-line healthcare workers to bolster their fight against the virus in the first place, and in ideal circumstances, the accumulation of a larger stockpile for prolonged haze or pandemic situations, perhaps they wouldn’t have dug themselves into a hole and infuriated the public with their try-hard positive spins.

Then that’s the whole furore of a certain leak where a particular segment of society were shamed for panic buying and hoarding. Although such a behaviour isn’t localised as it was quickly proven to be a global phenomenon, we can’t blame human survival instinct, can we? Yes, it’s true  that they can be more civilised but disparaging a swathe of the population (even if it’s behind closed doors) is regrettably unstatesmanlike. A nation in crisis calls for an inspirational figure who shows empathy for the masses.

Now that we’re in a situation where we don’t have the means to adequately protect ourselves, we resort to social distancing to avoid being infected by the asymptomatic or irresponsible amongst us. Social distancing is perfectly acceptable but coupled with additional safeguards like mask wearing and better personal hygiene, it’d have been more effective.

I must admit that a total lockdown is economically painful and not a decision to be taken lightly. There are also legitimate implications arising from such circumstances, like the care of children for essential services workers being affected by school closures. So gradual plans to restrict movements and congregations are certainly welcomed.

That said, while the intentions are good, the ideas are sometimes ill-conceived and tend to look good on paper but in reality, tough acts to follow. For example, retail malls quickly sprung into action by enforcing crowd control when safe distancing measures were implemented . However, queues quickly formed outside where people clustered waiting for their turn to enter.

What made matters worse were contradictory actions as stakeholders had their own interests to safeguard. Shopping avenues started offering free parking and drastic discounts to combat the drop in footfall which led to increased mall crowds. Similarly there were calls for staycations and visits to local attractions to support the embattled tourism sector that unwittingly result in clustering.

To practise social distancing on public transportation during peak hours is a tough ask. While the government has encouraged for more companies to activate their telecommuting protocols to ease the crowd on trains and buses, it goes back to the fundamental problem of it being an advisory and not a directive. Without penalties for failures to implement work from home measures, private companies are, honestly, not going to roll over and comply.

This begs the perennial question: Should we be put in dykes, wait for leaks to spring and deal with them? Or should we build one giant dam to parry the waves? It’s contentious and I think a question which no one has the right answer to as much as some would like to believe. On the spectrum of being sitting ducks and draconian measures, my gut feel is that we could have been a little more aggressive and erected some of the dykes earlier. As workplace safety would have it, one incident is one too many.

Many have commented that the floodgates have not been shut quickly enough and I can’t help but agree. As the number of foreign imported cases crept up, the brains in the government must have posited a scenario that medical tourists would rapidly descend upon us to seek treatment. But did we not have foreseen such a possibility and thereby show more proactiveness to bar foreign arrivals earlier?

What we also need in this crisis is openness which is sometimes lacking. As cases mount and the outbreak drags on, data has grown scant instead – tested figures are no longer publicised and case details were left omitted. It doesn’t help to suppress numbers and information as questions will be asked. While the figures were eventually revealed when pressed, such data ought to be readily available for the population to form their own judgement.

Overall, our strategy to flatten the curve has been much lauded on the international stage, and I have no qualms that it’s the most viable under the current climate to prevent pushing our healthcare system to the brink. We may done well so far, but this doesn’t mean every move in that playbook was executed to perfection or in a timely fashion. Furthermore, there’s also that elephant in the room of a looming election amid the burgeoning crisis, but that’s another story for another time.