Russell Bell: New Zealand's Covid-19 traffic light system lacking simplicity

The 'traffic lights' announced last Friday are not simple and bring complexity, writes Russell Bell. Photo / File

OPINION

Readers of this column will know that I have been extolling the virtues of strategic planning in numerous articles over the years.

My view is, no matter what the situation, you are more likely to be successful (be it running a business or otherwise) if you have a vision of what your future will look like and a plan of how to get there. To do that effectively you need a coherent and understandable description of that plan so those who you are working with (and for) can understand it and join you on the journey. You also need targets and milestones which are clearly described and easily understood.

Friday's new traffic light system for managing the virus rapidly gaining function here and around the world is not a plan and, frankly, it is rather an announcement of a future announcement of an updated plan later in November.

I have sympathy for the Government, I really do, trying to manage dynamic slow-moving crises is never easy – particularly where you have multiple competing priorities and infrastructure which is not prepared or "fit for purpose" as many commentators explain. However, in times of crisis people look to leaders with cool heads but equally a message that can be easily understood.

Traffic lights are easy to understand. Red means stop, Orange means prepare to stop (not accelerate to beat the red, as most baseball capped young drivers appear to have been taught) and Green means go – they are simple. The "traffic lights" announced last Friday are not simple and bring complexity which emerges very quickly when you apply your own circumstances to it – particularly if you own a business in a level 3 environment.

Yes, we did get a vaccine target (one thing asked for in a previous column) but the rest of the system announced on Friday falls very short on the remainder of my column's request for "clear and realistic". Of concern is the emerging "race" to 90% (which you could argue is a target, but one which has been in the ether for weeks) and the consequences if your local DHB is unable to meet that target.

If you haven't done it yet, I encourage you to get advice (if you need it) and be vaccinated because Whanganui DHB vaccination stats appear to be performing like a newly promoted Premier League football team at the moment – great early success but slipping down the league table. Given it appears that close contacts of actual cases can freely travel out of the Waikato (in spite of level 3 restrictions and a "border"), what happens if cases emerge here and we end up in extended level 3 while the majority of the country gain their "red" and "orange" status? (Am I the only one who sees that "red" means go here?). Would we remain in level 3 in perpetuity if we can't crack 90 per cent? Would the target change (meaning this really isn't and never was a plan to be adhered to)?

How can businesses plan and have surety in that environment?

A favourite trope from the podium which appears to have disappeared is "you only have to look at what is going on overseas". When you do look overseas, you see countries and states with simple emergence plans. Yes, as pointed out to me in the letters to the editor, jurisdictions overseas have seen higher cases and hospitalisations - they also don't have the geographic advantages or the gift of time which we have had.

And it is this that made Friday's announcement all the more disappointing. There has been plenty of time to prepare for this eventuality, think clearly and set reasonable targets for business. Without that clarity the risk of incidents at the traffic lights is higher than it needs to be, and we will continually have our foot on the brakes as we try to move forward.