Europe unprepared for the pandemic

The need to limit the pandemic forces European governments to move towards the ever more intense closure of normal social activities, in this context the European Union also tries to enter by trying to coordinate national governments, a laudable attempt, which, once again, he denounces the need for greater political integration, but which, at the moment, is only an impromptu initiative. The decline in infections in the summer was not exploited for a health reorganization both at the state and supranational level: a serious mistake in a regime of free movement between European states. The exponential increase in infections is due to an excessive loosening of the rules of coexistence with the pandemic and the absence of a tracking system for the infected, without coordination between states. The blocking of sports, catering and other activities deemed expendable has generated protests but will also cause a series of refunds that could have been used for other purposes. The feeling is that the governments of the European states are improvising temporary solutions that are too functional for the very short term, without a longer term perspective; it is true that we are still facing a problem that is still too little known, but the repercussions threaten to be even more serious than the predictions made a few weeks ago. The first issue is that relating to the health of citizens: covid-19 impacts both on the direct consequences of infections and on the treatment of diseases that continue to be present, but to which due attention is not ensured; there is a sort of exclusivity of covid-19 treatment, which has compressed assistance for other health problems, a situation already experienced in the first phase of the pandemic, but which should not have repeated itself when the infections resume. One of the problems is certainly the concern for aspects of the economy, that is, in the immediate reconciliation of health needs with economic ones, but in the short term to ensure the economic stability of countries, through the production and maintenance of jobs. Currently the executives seem to be aimed at keeping the primary, secondary and some parts of the advanced tertiary sector active, which can allow the continuation of the activity through smart working, to the detriment of the catering, culture and sport sectors ( without, however, touching the professional leagues). This vision may be justified by the desire to avoid the movement of people to prevent the spread of the virus, but it proposes an unbalanced vision of the labor society, a sort of vision still anchored to the importance of the factory; however, it can be argued that the share of gross domestic product produced by the sectors that are allowed to work is greater, therefore more significant than the closed sectors; so, however, the problem is also reversed: if those who are prevented from working are ensured, albeit indirectly, greater health protection, those who go to the workplace (which does not apply to smart working) have more chances of contracting infection. Of course this reasoning is an extreme, because the closure is not total for all sectors and the preservation from the resulting virus is not absolute; however, beyond the difficulty of the problem, what passes is a contradictory management, but which signals the need to form preventive rules in the event of extreme phenomena such as this pandemic. This is true both at the state level and at the European level, a dimension that cannot be exempted for political reasons but above all for practical reasons, given the free movement of people and goods. At the moment we are proceeding with provisional adjustments, which may not be satisfactory for everyone, but which must be the basis on which to reason for subsequent institutionalized measures. Another element of discord is school attendance, which is then linked to the transport system and digital communication networks. As can be seen, ensuring the right to education affects other sectors, which need new regulations and new impetus, the benefits of which will remain available to society when the pandemic is over. Because what the pandemic highlighted, in addition to the health and economic emergencies, was the general unpreparation due to wrong and often unproductive investments, which have characterized the whole of Europe. These are elements to be taken into account immediately, but above all for the future, a future to be planned right now, in parallel with the management of the emergency.