Xinhua calls for phaseout of pandemic measures - in 2024
China's state news agency criticizes inconvenience of real-name metro ticket purchases and strict access at hospitals and universities, urging prioritization of public interest.
It may be surprising to see that some COVID-19 policies, like the real-name purchase of metro tickets for contact tracing and strict entry management at hospitals and universities to prevent virus transmission, are still in effect in China, in 2024.
Recently, Xinhua News Agency, China's official state news outlet, has advocated for phasing out these outdated measures. This call for change reflects a gradual recognition that these policies are no longer required and have become burdensome to people's daily lives.
Written by Wu Mengda, Lu Chang, and Xia Ke, the commentary was originally published on Xinhua Net on April 25. The East is Read has translated the full article to offer a glimpse of how China is gradually returning to pre-pandemic norms and easing restrictions following the optimization of COVID-19 measures at the end of 2022.
新华网评：不合时宜的“防控”当退则退
Xinhua Commentary: Untimely "Prevention and Control" Should Be Withdrawn When Necessary
Recently, a news report highlighting a city's metro system still enforcing real-name ticket purchases, a legacy of COVID control, sparked widespread attention. Surprisingly, passengers can reportedly buy tickets by entering arbitrary information, such as "111," in the name field, raising questions about whether the real-name system is just a formality.
While China's pandemic policies have entered a new phase and life has largely normalized, certain remnants of COVID-19 measures still persist in various public venues. For instance, several top-tier hospitals continue to enforce restrictions on patient escorts, permitting family members to accompany patients only under special circumstances, necessitating the hiring of caregivers. Additionally, some universities that closed their facilities for pandemic control have not yet reopened to the public.
It seems that for certain administrative bodies, maintaining control and limiting access has served as a strategy to reduce management costs. This approach has indeed proven somewhat effective. For example, a university security department head noted that campus closures have reduced incidents of food delivery and bicycle theft; some medical staff have observed that the use of professional caregivers can enhance care efficiency.
However, these practices often prioritize departmental ease of management or risk avoidance over public needs, placing administrative convenience above public welfare.
The people's interests should always be the paramount consideration. As society resumes its normal routines, it is essential to phase out outdated practices. Notably, some universities have progressively reopened their campuses, refined entry procedures, and received favorable feedback. Similarly, many regions have enhanced museum reservation systems, allowing tickets to be purchased both online and offline, [whereas previously, tickets could only be purchased via specific online platforms] significantly improving convenience and visitor satisfaction. These examples demonstrate that through scientific, meticulous, and intelligent management methods, it is possible to strike a better balance between public needs and venue management.
Certainly, opening up should not equate to negligence. Public spaces with a social welfare focus, such as universities, hospitals, and tourist spots, can foster positive interactions only within a regulated and orderly framework. This approach helps build a community of shared social governance where everyone shoulders responsibilities, enjoys rights, and shares benefits.
Consultation with the public is essential for understanding the shortcomings of policies and assessing whether the needs of the people are being met. Managers of urban public spaces must prioritize listening to the public's voices and demands. They should also adopt a more practical perspective, exercising control when necessary while also being willing to relax restrictions where feasible. This approach allows for high-level governance that successfully balances vitality with order.
