The article you just read was brought to you by a few thousand dedicated readers. Will you join them?

Thanks for coming by The Tyee and reading one of many original articles we’ll post today. Our team works hard to publish in-depth stories on topics that matter on a daily basis. Our motto is: No junk. Just good journalism.

Just as we care about the quality of our reporting, we care about making our stories accessible to all who want to read them and provide a pleasant reading experience. No intrusive ads to distract you. No paywall locking you out of an article you want to read. No clickbait to trick you into reading a sensational article.

There’s a reason why our site is unique and why we don’t have to rely on those tactics — our Tyee Builders program. Tyee Builders are readers who chip in a bit of money each month (or one-time) to our editorial budget. This amazing program allows us to pay our writers fairly, keep our focus on quality over quantity of articles, and provide a pleasant reading experience for those who visit our site.

In the past year, we’ve been able to double our staff team and boost our reporting. We invest all of the revenue we receive into producing more and better journalism. We want to keep growing, but we need your support to do it.

Fewer than 1 in 100 of our average monthly readers are signed up to Tyee Builders. If we reach 1% of our readers signing up to be Tyee Builders, we could continue to grow and do even more.

If you appreciate what The Tyee publishes and want to help us do more, please sign up to be a Tyee Builder today. You pick the amount, and you can cancel any time.

Support our growing independent newsroom and join Tyee Builders today.
Before you click away, we have something to ask you…

Do you value independent journalism that focuses on the issues that matter? Do you think Canada needs more in-depth, fact-based reporting? So do we. If you’d like to be part of the solution, we’d love it if you joined us in working on it.

The Tyee is an independent, paywall-free, reader-funded publication. While many other newsrooms are getting smaller or shutting down altogether, we’re bucking the trend and growing, while still keeping our articles free and open for everyone to read.

The reason why we’re able to grow and do more, and focus on quality reporting, is because our readers support us in doing that. Over 5,000 Tyee readers chip in to fund our newsroom on a monthly basis, and that supports our rockstar team of dedicated journalists.

Join a community of people who are helping to build a better journalism ecosystem. You pick the amount you’d like to contribute on a monthly basis, and you can cancel any time.

Help us make Canadian media better by joining Tyee Builders today.
We value: Our readers.
Our independence. Our region.
The power of real journalism.
Get our free newsletter
Sign Up
Analysis
  |  
Coronavirus

Experts Rated 98 Nations Handling COVID. Canada Was 61st

Top performers had little in common politically, the think tank found.

Crawford Kilian 3 Feb 2021 | TheTyee.ca

Tyee contributing editor Crawford Kilian blogs about the pandemic here.

Our personal assessments of our government’s response to the pandemic seem to align closely with our politics. The Trudeau government’s response is largely supported (or at least tolerated), perhaps because few can imagine Erin O’Toole’s Tories or Jagmeet Singh’s New Democrats doing a better job. In the U.S., 75 million Americans voted for Trump despite his refusal to deal effectively with the pandemic.

When we look overseas, we glimpse countries that seem to be doing well, like New Zealand, and countries doing poorly, like the U.K. Again, our politics may affect our judgment: Jacinda Ardern gets media praise, and Boris Johnson seems like a British parody of Donald Trump.

Now an Australian think tank, the Lowy Institute, has ranked the COVID-19 responses of 98 countries on the basis of six indicators: confirmed cases, confirmed deaths, confirmed cases per million people, confirmed cases as a proportion of tests, and tests per thousand people.

“Collectively,” the Lowy Institute writes, “these indicators point to how well or poorly countries have managed the pandemic. An average of the rankings across the six indicators was normalized for each country to produce a score between 0 (worst performing) and 100 (best performing) on any given day in the 36 weeks that followed their hundredth confirmed case of COVID-19.”

The numbers still have a political tinge: some governments may well have suppressed embarrassing data, and China is not included “due to a lack of publicly available data on testing.” Even so, the rankings offer insights into what responses worked, and how politics influenced those responses.

Do the top-response countries have anything in common politically? Very little, which must disappoint those who want some simple quality that gives such countries an advantage. Unsurprisingly, New Zealand ranks 1, with a score of 94.4. The rest of the top five are literally and politically all over the map: Vietnam is 2, Taiwan 3, Thailand 4 and Cyprus 5. They range from democracies to Thailand’s monarchy and Vietnam’s Communist government.

“On average,” says the Lowy Institute, “countries with authoritarian models had no prolonged advantage in suppressing the virus. Indeed, despite a difficult start and some notable exceptions, including the United States and the United Kingdom, democracies found marginally more success than other forms of government in their handling of the pandemic over the examined period. By contrast, many hybrid regimes, such as Ukraine and Bolivia, appeared least able to meet the challenge.”

Economic development was also a poor predictor of an effective response. While rich countries have more resources, the study notes that poor countries often dealt better with lockdowns and contact tracing. (Poor countries’ recent experience with outbreaks like Ebola and SARS may have primed them for a faster, no-nonsense response.)

The study finds no heroes: “Most countries outcompeted each other only by degrees of underperformance.”

Canada’s degree of underperformance is pretty impressive: we ranked 61, essentially tied with Israel and beaten by the likes of Belarus, Italy and Paraguay. Cold comfort that our underperformance was better than the U.K. (66), Russia (76), the U.S. (94) and dead-end Brazil (98).

This is why governments dislike serious disease outbreaks: they’re not only bad for business, they make governments look as lazy and inept as they really are. Worse yet, the success of government measures depends on their damn citizens. The study quotes American political scientist Francis Fukuyama, who argues that effective crisis response doesn’t depend on regime type “but whether citizens trust their leaders, and whether those leaders preside over a competent and effective state.”

So the Kiwis trusted Jacinda Ardern, and the Vietnamese trusted Nguyen Phu Trong, and both leaders knew they had effective state machinery to direct against the pandemic. That may have given them the confidence to move really fast a year ago, shutting down schools and closing borders while most governments dithered.

Trudeau was among the ditherers, though he earned a lot of sympathy when his wife contracted COVID-19 and he quarantined his whole family — emerging daily on his front porch to update the country, looking tired and older in his new beard.

Months before COVID-19 appeared in China, Trudeau’s government had shut down the Global Public Health Intelligence Network, whose purpose was precisely to spot outbreaks around the world and assess their threat to Canada. He had staffed the Public Health Agency of Canada with civil servants, not scientists (PHAC’s civil-servant president Tina Namiesniowski abruptly resigned last September). And he had expelled Jane Philpott, his highly competent minister of health, in the wake of the SNC-Lavalin affair.

So Justin Trudeau’s grave demeanour in those updates may also have reflected his knowledge of how ill-equipped he and Canada were.

Better said, he and the provinces and territories. As in the U.S., our response was run chiefly on the provincial level, and our premiers tend to be more concerned about the health of the economy than that of their citizens. Hence the uneven responses over the past year, with half-hearted lockdowns and premature reopenings. As on the international level, provinces may look good compared to their neighbours but only by underperforming less badly.

If Fukuyama’s argument is valid, Canadian and American public responses reflect a serious lack of trust in their governments. It could be that Trump understood this very well — he’d been criticizing his own government for years — and knew that his supporters would be disappointed if he backed Dr. Anthony Fauci and other health experts. Disappointed backers might not vote for him. Better, then, to downplay the pandemic while his voters (and Republican governors) ignored masks and social distancing.

If that was Trump’s strategy, it very nearly succeeded. Brazil’s Jair Bolsonaro did something similar, even to catching and surviving COVID-19. As recently as December, his popularity remained high. A few weeks later, after disastrous case counts in the Amazon and a clumsy vaccine rollout, it’s finally beginning to drop.

Canadians evidently distrust their federal and provincial governments also, though not as much as the Americans or Brazilians. Still, it’s striking that neither we nor other publics seem in the mood to overthrow our governments, or even to vote in a new set of rascals. Occasional anti-lockdown protests lead at most to pointless riots like those in the Netherlands.

Instead, we stoically absorb the daily case and death counts, wear our masks when we shop, and shrug off the vaccination screwups. We may not trust our governments, but they seem to trust us to wait out the pandemic, mourn our dead, and then forget all about this unfortunate episode as we return to the golden age of 2019.

If that indeed is what we do, our new golden age will be short-lived, and we will soon find ourselves locked down yet again, against yet another damn virus, when the next pandemic ambushes us. It will be pointless to blame China or whatever other country it hits first. We will have only ourselves to blame.  [Tyee]

Read more: Coronavirus

Share this article

The Tyee is supported by readers like you

Join us and grow independent media in Canada

Facts matter. Get The Tyee's in-depth journalism delivered to your inbox for free

Tyee Commenting Guidelines

Do not:

  •  Use sexist, classist, racist or homophobic language
  • Libel or defame
  • Bully, threaten, name-call or troll
  • Troll patrol. Instead, downvote, or flag suspect activity
  • Attempt to guess other commenters’ real-life identities

Do:

  • Verify facts, debunk rumours
  • Add context and background
  • Spot typos and logical fallacies
  • Highlight reporting blind spots
  • Ignore trolls and flag violations
  • Treat all with respect and curiosity
  • Stay on topic
  • Connect with each other

LATEST STORIES

The Barometer

Tyee Poll: What Coverage Would You Like to See More of This Year?

Take this week's poll