1. My support of the President’s decision to escalate to a tier 3 lockdown has animated 2 groups on my account:the Trumpian ‘Rooi gevaar’ clan whose concern is the economy, jobs & Liberty, and the RET faction,especially the EFF lot, with their juvenile ‘we said it 1st’ reaction.

2. I am normally bemused by their very similar, but rhetorically different, responses. However, there may be merit it outlining why I support the President, if only to think through our options. We may even collectively impart some deliberative lessons to the 2 groups.

3. So here goes: 1st, all public choices involve hard trade offs. This is especially so in a pandemic when trade-offs have such serious consequences. This is what the Trumpians & CIC’s acolytes never understand. They make easy pronouncements without considering the consequences.

4. 2nd,there are 2 issue issues for consideration;who made the decision & the rationality of the deliberation.On who;it is worth underscoring that Ramaphosa is a duly elected President. You may differ with him,not like him,but he is neither a marginal Trumpian,nor a pretend CIC.

5.3rd,on the rationality of his decision,let’s think through the issue. As I indicated,all pub. choices have difficult trade-offs.These have serious consequences.On the one hand is the burden on hospitals. My health colleagues are clear;admissions are rising & the pressure is on.

6. The root cause,they hold,is alcohol abuse & non-adherence to covid 19 regulations.Not doing anything will have consequences. Health professionals will get sick or burn out,hospitals will collapse & lives will be lost. They called for an alcohol ban & a closure of pub. spaces.

7. But the consequences of an alcohol ban & closure of pub. spaces will be hard. Businesses will be severely impacted & jobs will be lost. There is no getting away from the fact that either choice will have serious consequences. This is why the President agonised with the choice.

8. The President’s rationale:Protect lives in the short term. We will lose jobs, but we can make up for these once the infection is under control. Will we make up all of the jobs? No! But the balance of costs will be less if lives are prioritised now, even if some jobs are lost.

9. This is a well thought out public choice. I wish this choice was not forced on us,but it is.Ranting about the failures of the ANC,while correct,does not avoid the need for the choice.Neither is success guaranteed.The decision could unravel because of inadequate state capacity.

10. But it is the only choice under the circumstances. This is why I support the President’s decision. I would, however, urge him to make an additional decision on the basis of the same logic. However well we observe Covid 19 protocols, our revival is dependent on the vaccine.

11. Vaccine availability is constrained by global inequality & how rich countries have bought up supplies. Some people will die because others have more than they need. This vaccine nationalism must be challenged. Most outrageous is that SA will produce vaccines for export.

12. We cannot allow this to play out.Covax will not provide sufficient supplies for SA. We need emergency legislation to regulate domestic production of vaccines so some output is retained for national use, others for continental, and yet others for global. This is to save lives.

13. We should also explore with the private sector the production of other vaccines,preferably under license, but also outside it if necessary.We will of course be legally challenged in these acts.But lives would have been immediately saved even if there will be subsequent costs.

14. It is also unlikely that we will not have a negotiated outcome.J&J & others cannot afford punitive action given that lives are at stake. In the best case,we may even force new rules on global supply lines for life saving medication.This is necessary for future health crises.

15. Note that WTO rules do allow for IP regulations to be set aside when lives are at stake. SA & India tried to activate this but were opposed by the US, UK & Europe. The issue needs to be brought to a head. Break the agreement by invoking the relevant clause & force the debate.

16. Enough said!Comments are of course welcome.But a warning to the Trumpian ‘Rooi gevaar’ & RET crowds;read carefully, think thoughtfully, & then comment measuredly. Differ, robustly if you must, but racism, foul language & threats will have you thrown out. Be safe & good night!