CV19 Experts AND Politicians
The comments section underneath articles published in the media often contain calls for politicians to ‘leave it to the experts’, and to ‘stop playing politics’. I wish for neither of these options; from experts one should seek advice, from politicians one should expect an understanding of the various options, their trade-offs, the expert advice given for these options, and then arbitration among the competing requirements of the citizenry.
This article published in the SMH—written by Professor John Dwyer, an immunologist and emeritus professor of medicine at UNSW—provides a good example of why the desire to leave it to the experts is simplistic, and why our politics are insufficient for the times we are in. Clearly one cannot question his expertise, in the field of immunology. But is Professor Dwyer an expert in the myriad other facets of our lives impacted by extended lockdowns? For example:
- Mental health; what is the ongoing impact on mental health conditions such as depression triggered in many people by extended lockdowns?
- Primary or secondary education; what will be the impact on Australian society of an entire cohort, except for a few exceptional lads from Scots College, having the best part of two years of their schooling interrupted?
- Sociology; what are the long term impacts of an extended period of non-contact with close friends and family and the shutdown of so many community activities for two years?
- Overall health; what will be the consequences on the health of particular individuals from having restrictions placed on access to surgery and rehabilitation from injuries, and their own unwillingness to come forward for tests and check-ups?
The above list is not intended to support a particular position on the necessity for periodic lockdowns to manage the spread of the virus. Rather, a glance at this list, which does not even touch on the economic implications of lockdowns, highlights the breadth of knowledge required to address the problem. Thus, determining the appropriate course of action requires input from experts in multiple disciplines.
Fundamentally, decisions related to the management of the spread of the virus are decisions about life and death. So I ask, is John Dwyer an expert in life or death; is he a philosopher?
Enter politicians.
Politics is in everything. Not the game-playing that Scomo is so successful at, but the to-ing and fro-ing required to determine how we shall live, and indeed even how we shall die.
Do not allow politicians to abrogate their responsibility by proudly declaring they are following the advice of experts; their role is to make decisions. Insist that politicians arbitrate the opinions of experts in order to find a balance, not a consensus; that fits with our view of how we want to live.
This is not the politics of our time though.
