Hopefully, Lamrock's criticism will force a better government response

Kelly Lamrock’s report on the mask mandate last week was anything but supportive of Premier Higgs. So credit to the newly minted Child, Youth, and Seniors Advocate for deciding to dive into this issue in the first place, and for producing a document that cuts right to the nub of the matter in a no-nonsense way. And also credit to the Premier for appointing someone who he probably knew would tell it like it is, even when that may cause discomfort.  

Photo Credit: CBC

Combined, this report is a service to New Brunswickers and hopefully will lead to improvements not only in government decisions, but in government communications.  

Right from the start of Covid two-plus years ago, and for the longest time, New Brunswick had been doing a better job than many jurisdictions not only in Canada but worldwide, in its approach. Our strategy was solid, and the information that was released was thorough and timely. We were doing as well as could be expected. 

But then there were a couple of hic-cups, the big one was Higg’s premature version of President Bush’s Mission Accomplished. You may still recall the video of his celebratory chicken dance. That was unfortunate – not only the dance like no one was watching, but the accompanying lifting of restrictions a little too soon. It was a setback that to this day the Premier still hasn’t fully taken responsibility for.  

Photo Credit: Radio Canada

It was after that, that the way the government handled Covid continued downhill, especially in the general abandonment of vaccination targets, testing, and sharing Covid information with the public.  

Which is relevant as we jump to today, and Lamrock’s conclusion that the mask mandate decision should be revisited.  

I used to do lobbying workshops and one of the key points I would try to instill in participants is that it is a whole lot easier to try to influence a government decision before it is made, than to get them to change their mind after a policy has been announced.  

It’s both for personal and political reasons. Personal because like anybody, Premiers and other elected officials don’t like to admit they were wrong, and politically, because changing one’s mind gives the opposition fuel for ridicule, accusing the government of “flip-flopping”. As an aside, I never understood why changings one’s mind is seen in political circles as something bad, or negative. Seems to me that when you are presented with new or more information, that a responsible person would weigh that information and change course if that’s what the information suggests should be done. But that’s politics.  

In this case, you can bet the government will be reluctant to change its mind because it would be interpreted as them making the wrong judgment on the mask mandate in the first place.  

Photo Credit: Global News

Maybe they did or maybe they didn’t. The problem is, as Lamrock’s report points out, we don’t know what the rationale was. Was it the science? Was it a political decision based on a gut feeling that people were fed up with Covid and simply want it ignored from here on? Was it research that shows that among school kids, the psychological harm of having to wear a mask outweighs the benefits? Was it because even if kids get infected most of them won’t get very sick? The fact is, we have no idea what the decision was based on. Or what the consequences have been, other than we know a lot of kids got sick as have teachers and at least some of those whom the kids brought the virus home to.  

I tried a google search for this blog to see if there is any research on the spread of the virus in NB without a mask mandate and the other Maritime provinces which have one, but I couldn’t find anything. But the province’s capacity to do such research dwarfs mine, so it would be good to know if they have or are doing any, and would they be so kind as to share it?  

The lack of a reason for scrubbing the mask mandate is obviously a problem. The way this should have worked is the government presenting its rationale, and then have that debated both in the legislature and in the public square. Let the government defend its decision based on the facts used to make it.  

Photo Credit: Acadie Nouvelle

At the very, very least the government should feel compelled to share its thinking.  Even Dominic Cardy, who had his fingers slapped for not adhering to the government line on related issues, is silent on this one except for an equally problematic position that it is Public Health’s call. No Minister it isn’t. Or if it is, it shouldn’t be. Public Health’s job is to study and recommend, based on the science. It is the government’s job to weigh those recommendations against other pertinent facts, and decide on policy.  

In his report, Lamrock exposed a pretty big fault in the government’s actions on this one. It’ll be interesting to see whether the government will give a better response than it has so far. The citizens of the province certainly deserve one, but I’m not sure how much weight that “the public deserves to know” argument carries these days.   

Thanks for reading. And if you are sharing this, a special thanks for that.