I would like to resume what I spoke about last week, because I fear that some readers may have misunderstood what I meant. The purpose of my posts, in fact, is not to make controversial comments on this or that topic (and definitely not on Covid-19), far be it from me! There are far too many argumentative contents already found on social medial.
My aim is to generate purposeful discussions, especially in times like these in which, for obvious reasons, meetings and encounters are strictly limited. It may well be, therefore, that something escapes me and therefore different point of views from mine are more than welcome, especially the views of those who are perhaps better informed than me on this or any other topic.
That said, I reiterate the discussion which I started last week, when I wrote that – in my opinion – the government should be more transparent with regard to the strategy it is adopting. Indicating and explaining in detail, on the basis of which data it is taking certain decisions (for instance which enterprises had to go into provisional lockdown and for how long) and, especially, with what objectives (timing and number of infections). Otherwise it is very hard to believe that any form of short, medium or long term strategy actually exists.
At the moment the lockdown remains set in place until 13 April and no precise date for the resumption of activities has yet been defined. A few initial hypotheses have been put on the table.
Let me explain.
in February at MICROingranaggi we engaged in extensive operations to define and put in place all the new safety measures to combat the Covid-19 emergency.
So we stocked up on disinfectants and masks, reorganized the flow of employees so as to ensure safety distances and avoid gatherings in specific places, closed the canteen, reorganized production, initiated smart working and so forth.
The objective of this extensive and onerous work was to avert a lockdown: hence to continue working in safe conditions without having to close the facilities.
And many other enterprises did exactly the same.
But then what happened? What happened was that after just three weeks or so the government passed a new decree obliging all enterprises not of primary necessity (therefore also including those who – like us – had updated their safety measures) to go into lockdown.
Therefore one question jumps to mind:
so does that mean that everything we did in February was a waste of time?
Or again:
if everything we did to ensure the safety of our companies and our workers between the end of February and beginning of March was a waste of time, how do we know that this lockdown isn’t a waste of time too? A lockdown that is literally bringing the economy of our country to its knees.
Because, if we think about it, perhaps there are other factors to be considered.
On Saturday 4 April, for example, 9300 complaints were received about people who had breached the obligations laid down by the most recent decree. Which suggests that many more people violated these obligations than those who were actually fined.
And then – looking at another aspect – are we really sure that, before the lockdown, all the enterprises had actually adopted the new safety measures dictated by the Covid-19 emergency? I am not so sure.
So now this is the point:
why not allow only and exclusively enterprises that have certifiable safety conditions in place to exit the lockdown? And why not toughen the controls so as to inflict fines and/or to close down those that do not?
This is just an idea, an opinion and – I repeat – I would be really happy to receive your points of view in this regard. Especially those that differ from mine…
