School re-opening during COVID-19-the health, educational and logistical dilemma (Part II)
Columns
As you are aware, on 27th July, the Greater Gaborone COVID-19 zone was put under lock down after a reported spike in new COVID-19 cases. In essence, we have suffered the much dreaded second spike.
Worth mentioning is the fact that new COVID-19 cases were also identified in some schools in Gaborone and Mogoditshane, with one private school recording an estimated 30% infection rate. In view of this, Botswana Sectors of Educators Trade Union (BOSETU) has called for the closure of schools up to next year, arguing that no effective learning can occur under the circumstances.
BOSETUs calls notwithstanding, the only commitment that government has made is that pre-schools will not re-open when schools re-open. The question is: is government right not to accede to calls to leave all schools closed when the Greater Gaborone lockdown is lifted, possibly in a weeks time? To answer this question, a detailed background is required.
In May, when government announced its intention to open schools on 2nd June and 16th June for completing classes and all other classes respectively, debate ensued as to whether it would be safe in view of the COVID-19 pandemic.
At the time, trade unions, especially BOSETU and Botswana Teachers Union(BTU) argued that the shortage of classrooms, laboratories, toilets, washing basins, etc will make the observance of social distancing and hygiene impossible, risking an uncontrollable spread of COVID-19 when schools re-open.
Government, on the other hand, argued that the aforesaid constraints notwithstanding, opening schools is important lest our children lag behind to an extent which will be difficult of remediation in future. Government further argued that schools have been assigned funds to address the infrastructural concerns raised by the trade unions.
At the time, I argued that because government had, for years, failed to build more classrooms, laboratories and toilets, such backlog could not be addressed in the two months that schools were closed during the national lockdown. I also argued that the high teacher-student ratio caused by limited teachers, classrooms and laboratories would also take years to address.
I, however, argued that be that as it may, schools must open at one point or another. To me, the question then was: when would it be appropriate for schools to re-open, and in what manner?
In attempting to answer the question, I considered what other countries had done. At the time, France, which had recorded 70 new cases of COVID-19 in schools, had allowed schools to reopen, with classes capped at 10 students for preschools and 15 students for other age groups.
In the United Kingdom, there were plans to re-open schools from 1st June though trade unions were opposed to the decision. Some local Councils were threatening to defy the national government and not re-open as planned, arguing that opening so early poses a risk of a second COVID-19 spike.
In South Africa, government also intended to re-open schools in June, but trade unions, especially the South African Democratic Teachers Union (SADTU), were threatening to advice teachers not to go back to work until it is safe to do so. South Africas Minister of Basic Education, Angie Motshekga, defended governments decision to re-open, arguing that it would be unfair for those who do not want to re-open to disadvantage those who want to re-open.
As you may be aware, the South African government later decided to close schools when, as trade unions had warned, the country suffered a second COVID-19 spike. From the above, it is clear that the trend was to re-open schools in June. The Botswana government was, therefore, not alone in that regard. However, I argued then, as I do now, that this is not a case of the majority; It is a question of life and death where rationale, not numbers, must prevail.
I also wish to add that the determining factor here should be the circumstances of each country, taking into account such factors as the health system s readiness to cope should the number of those who require hospitalisation rise exponentially. The question I posed then was whether opening in June would not pose the risk of a second COVID-19 spike as had happened in France?
According to the guidelines given by the Ministry of Health & Wellness, all institutions, including schools, must practice social distancing, where people must be about two meters apart. I argued then that if we still have classes of more than forty students, some of whom share chairs, desks, textbooks and laboratory equipment, social distancing is not feasible in schools.
I also argued that the requirement for combis to keep registers, take body temperatures, and to keep record of such in respect of all passengers, including students, was a near impossibility. To illustrate my point, I gave an example of urban schools, where students would have to be waiting for combis from as early as 5:30 am, in the cold of winter.
As you are aware, that early in the morning combis are in a rush and students struggle for combis with those going to work. Is it realistic that combi operators would keep registers; take temperatures and record such in such circumstances? I also argued that the fact that this routine must also be done at schools compounds the problem. I gave an example of a senior secondary school with, say, 2000 students, arguing that taking body temperatures is a near impossibility considering that some schools would have only two thermometers, for instance?
I opined that even if the students arrive at school as early as 6:00 am, it is near impossible for them to complete all the said protocols in time to start their lessons at, say, 7:45 am? As you may have observed, an attempt to adhere to the above protocols has resulted in students overcrowding, for instance, in queues at the school gate, something which increases the risk of infection.
Then there is the requirement to wash hands regularly. I questioned whether our schools would have enough washing basins and soap or sanitizers for such? Even if we had enough, how many students would wash their hands, especially in the cold of winter?
Then there is the requirement to wear face masks. I had a suspicion that it will be difficult for students, especially at lower primary school to wear face masks at all, or to wear them properly. Then there are boarding schools whose hostels are, as of necessity, congested, with bunker beds and shared showers. In some schools, about 98% of students are boarders. I wondered how social distancing and hygiene would be ensured in such an environment?
Then there is mealtime where students queue for meals; seat in groups when they eat; and gather at the tap for washing their hands and utensils after meals. Then there are primary school students, especially at lower levels, who, even if they may have been told that COVID-19 is a deadly virus, may not have the cognitive and affectionate ability to comply with the social distancing and hygiene protocols.
I concluded that if strict regard is had to the aforegoing, schools would not re-open in June, even in January 2021. I, however, opined that that would have devastating consequences in the long term, contending that we must make do with what we have and re-open schools as soon as it is safe to do so for the sake of our childrens future.
For me, the question was: when and how, then, should we re-open schools? I gave three alternatives in order of priority. The first alternative was for schools to re-open in July. This view was informed by the fact that June is the coldest month of the year, during which many people contact the influenza virus and suffer bouts of flue.
It was my view that if schools opened in June, we may face a double jeopardy of flue and COVID-19 in schools. I contended that because when somebody has flue, they have a temperature rise, this will pose a challenge considering the requirement to take temperatures for COVID-19.
I argued that, as per the COVID-19 protocols, we could end up having to refer many students whose temperatures are more than 37.4 Degrees Celsius not because of COVID-19, but because of a common cold, something which would, no doubt, overwhelm our system.
As you are aware, we have students with such underlying illnesses as Asthma. Ordinarily, such conditions worsen in winter. Some may be triggered by allergies, and some students may be allergic to the sanitizers that will be used. The second alternative was for only completing classes (i.e. Standard 7, Form 3 and Form 5) to re-open in June, and the rest to re-open in January 2021.
In my view, this would free up classrooms; laboratories; hostels and dining halls, making compliance with the COVID-19 social distancing and hygiene protocols feasible. The third alternative was for only Form 5s to re-open in June and the rest, including Standard 7s and Form 3s, to re-open in January 2021.
As you are aware, we have automatic progression from Standard 7 to Form 1. We also have near automatic progression from Form 3 to Form 4. In my view, there would, therefore, be limited impact on Standard 7s and Form 3s since their examinations are, for all intents and purposes, more formative than summative.
I opined that to cater for the subject matter the students would have lost, a bridging course and/or remedial lessons could be developed for January 2021. Also, the Form 1s and Form 4s could open early and have reduced school vacations to cover up for lost time. I argued that, in any event, students taking such practical subjects as Agriculture, Home Economics and Design & Technology have already lost a lot of time in preparing for their practical examinations.
At the time, government had hinted at the possibility of using the double shift system in terms of which a class would be split into two, with each sub-class coming to school at different times. You may be aware that this system has been used before and it was stopped because of the numerous problems it presented. Besides overworking teachers, something which affected their delivery and led to poor results among students, some students were attacked and raped by criminals because they had to knock off late from school.
I argued that in the COVID-19 era, this would be problematic because students, especially in urban areas, would be put at the risk of boarding combis which have not been sanitized and without the requisite social distancing since such protocols are unlikely to be observed when it is dark, especially in winter.
From the new infections recorded in the one school in Gaborone and another in Mogoditshane, it is clear that if the COVID-19 virus finds its way into a school, many students may be infected.
Therefore, in view of my argument that it is difficult for students to comply with COVID-19 protocols, it may be in the childrens best interest that school re-opening be delayed until it is safe for them to return.
In my view, considering that August is said to be the peak month for many countries, including our neighbour, South Africa, it may be advisable to re-open schools in January 2021 because after August/September very little will be left of third term. Logically, the January 2021 argument should only be applicable for the schools in the Greater Gaborone zone, but if the Greater Gaborone zone schools are to remain closed, so too should schools in the rest of the country because students sit for the same national examinations.
*Ndulamo Anthony Morima, LLM(NWU); LLB(UNISA); DSE(UB); CoP (BAC); CoP (IISA) is the proprietor of Morima Attorneys. He can be contacted at 71410352 or HYPERLINK “mailto:anmorima@gmail.com” anmorima@gmail.com
Columns
THE KEY TO HAPPINESS
Speaking at a mental health breakfast seminar last week I emphasised to the HR managerial audience that you cannot yoga your way out of a toxic work culture. What I meant by that was that as HR practitioners we must avoid tending to look at the soft options to address mental health issues, distractions such as yoga and meditation. That’s like looking for your lost bunch of keys, then opening the front door with the spare under the mat. You’ve solved the immediate problem, but all the other keys are still missing. Don’t get me wrong; mindfulness practices, yoga exercise and taking time to smell the roses all have their place in mental wellness but it’s a bit like hacking away at the blight-ridden leaves of the tree instead of getting to the root cause of the problem.
Another point I stressed was that mental health at work shouldn’t be looked at from the individual lens – yet that’s what we do. We have counselling of employees, wellness webinars or talks but if you really want to sort out the mental health crisis that we face in our organisations you HAVE to view this more systemically and that means looking at the system and that starts with the leaders and managers.
Now. shining a light on management may not be welcomed by many. But leaders control the flow of work and set the goals and expectations that others need to live up to. Unrealistic expectations, excessive workloads and tight deadlines increase stress and force people to work longer hours … some of the things which contribute to poor mental health. Actually, we know from research exactly what contributes to a poor working environment – discrimination and inequality, excessive workloads, low job control and job insecurity – all of which pose a risk to mental health. The list goes on and is pretty exhaustive but here are the major ones: under-use of skills or being under-skilled for work; excessive workloads or work pace, understaffing; long, unsocial or inflexible hours; lack of control over job design or workload; organizational culture that enables negative behaviours; limited support from colleagues or authoritarian supervision; discrimination and exclusion; unclear job role; under- or over-promotion; job insecurity.
And to my point no amount of yoga is going to change that.
We can use the word ‘toxic’ to describe dysfunctional work environments and if our workplaces are toxic we have to look at the people who set the tone. Harder et al. (2014) define a toxic work environment as an environment that negatively impacts the viability of an organization. They specify: “It is reasonable to conclude that an organization can be considered toxic if it is ineffective as well as destructive to its employees”.
Micromanagement and/or failure to reward or recognize performance are the most obvious signs of toxic managers. These managers can be controlling, inflexible, rigid, close-minded, and lacking in self-awareness. And let’s face it managers like those I have just described are plentiful. Generally, however there is often a failure by higher management to address toxic leaders when they are considered to be high performing. This kind of situation can be one of the leading causes of unhappiness in teams. I have coached countless employees who talk about managers with bullying ways which everyone knows about, yet action is never taken. It’s problematic when we overlook unhealthy dynamics and behaviours because of high productivity or talent as it sends a clear message that the behaviour is acceptable and that others on the team will not be supported by leadership.
And how is the HR Manager viewed when they raise the unacceptable behaviour with the CEO – they are accused of not being a team player, looking for problems or failing to understand business dynamics and the need to get things done. Toxic management is a systemic problem caused when companies create cultures around high-performance and metrics vs. long-term, sustainable, healthy growth. In such instances the day-to-day dysfunction is often ignored for the sake of speed and output. While short-term gains are rewarded, executives fail to see the long-term impact of protecting a toxic, but high-performing, team or employee. Beyond this, managers promote unhealthy workplace behaviour when they recognize and reward high performers for going above and beyond, even when that means rewarding the road to burnout by praising a lack of professional boundaries (like working during their vacation and after hours).
The challenge for HR Managers is getting managers to be honest with themselves and their teams about the current work environment. Honesty is difficult, I’m afraid, especially with leaders who are overly sensitive, emotional, or cannot set healthy boundaries. But here’s the rub – no growth or change can occur if denial and defensiveness are used to protect egos. Being honest about these issues helps garner trust among employees, who already know the truth about what day-to-day dynamics are like at work. They will likely be grateful that cultural issues will finally be addressed. Conversely, if they aren’t addressed, retention failure is the cost of protecting egos of those in management.
Toxic workplace culture comes at a huge price: even before the Great Resignation, turnover related to toxic workplaces cost US employers almost $50 billion yearly! I wonder what it’s costing us here.
QUOTE
We can use the word ‘toxic’ to describe dysfunctional work environments and if our workplaces are toxic we have to look at the people who set the tone. Harder et al. (2014) define a toxic work environment as an environment that negatively impacts the viability of an organization. They specify: “It is reasonable to conclude that an organization can be considered toxic if it is ineffective as well as destructive to its employees”.
Columns
Heartache for Kelly Fisher
| T |
o date, Princess Diana, General Atiku, had destroyed one marriage, come close to ruining another one in the offing, and now was poised to wreck yet another marriage that was already in the making. This was between Dodi Fayed and the American model Kelly Fisher.
If there was one common denominator about Diana and Dodi besides their having been born with a silver spoon in their mouths, General, it was that both were divorcees. Dodi’s matrimonial saga, however, was less problematic and acrimonious and lasted an infinitesimal 8 months. This was with yet another American model and film actress going by the name Susanne Gregard.
Dodi met Susanne in 1986, when she was only 26 years old. Like most glamourous women, she proved not to be that easy a catch and to readily incline her towards positively and expeditiously responding to his rather gallant advances, Dodi booked her as a model for the Fayed’s London mega store Harrods, where he had her travel every weekend by Concorde. They married at a rather private ceremony at Dodi’s Colorado residence in 1987 on New Year’s Day, without the blessings, bizarrely, of his all-powerful father. By September the same year, the marriage was, for reasons that were not publicised but likely due to the fact that his father had not sanctioned it, kaput.
It would take ten more years for Dodi to propose marriage to another woman, who happened to be Kelly Fisher this time around.
DODI HITCHES KELLY FISHER
Kelly and Dodi, General, met in Paris in July 1996, when Kelly was only 29 years old. In a sort of whirlwind romance, the duo fell in love, becoming a concretised item in December and formally getting engaged in February 1997.
Of course the relationship was not only about mutual love: the material element was a significant, if not vital, factor. Kelly was to give up her modelling job just so she could spend a lot more time with the new man in her life and for that she was to be handed out a compensatory reward amounting to $500,000. The engagement ring for one, which was a diamond and sapphire affair, set back Dodi in the order of $230,000. Once they had wedded, on August 9 that very year as per plan, they were to live in a $7 million 5-acre Malibu Beach mansion in California, which Dodi’s father had bought him for that and an entrepreneurial purpose. They were already even talking about embarking on making a family from the get-go: according to Kelly, Dodi wanted two boys at the very least.
Kelly naturally had the unambiguous blessings of her father-in-law as there was utterly nothing Dodi could do without the green light from the old man. When Mohamed Al Fayed was contemplating buying the Jonikal, the luxurious yacht, he invited Dodi and Kelly to inspect it too and hear their take on it.
If there was a tell-tale red flag about Dodi ab initio, General, it had to do with a $200,000 cheque he issued to Kelly as part payment of the pledged $500,000 and which was dishonoured by the bank. Throughout their 13-month-long romance, Dodi made good on only $60,000 of the promised sum. But love, as they say, General, is blind and Kelly did not care a jot about her beau’s financial indiscretions. It was enough that he was potentially a very wealthy man anyway being heir to his father’s humongous fortune.
KELLY CONSIGNED TO “BOAT CAGE”
In that summer of the year 1997, General, Dodi and Kelly were to while away quality time on the French Rivierra as well as the Jonikal after Paris. Then Dodi’s dad weighed in and put a damper on this prospect in a telephone call to Dodi on July 14. “Dodi said he was going to London and he’d be back and then we were going to San Tropez,” Kelly told the interviewer in a later TV programme. “That evening he didn’t call me and I finally got him on his portable phone. I said, ‘Dodi where are you?’ and he said he was in London. I said, ‘Ok, I’ll call you right back at your apartment’. He said, ‘No, no, don’t call me back’. So I said, ‘Dodi where are you?’ and he admitted he was in the south of France. His father had asked him to come down and not bring me, I know now.”
Since Dodi could no longer hide from Kelly and she on her part just could not desist from badgering him, he had no option but to dispatch a private Fayed jet to pick her up so that she join him forthwith in St. Tropez. This was on July 16.
Arriving in St. Tropez, Kelly, General, did not lodge at the Fayed’s seaside villa as was her expectation but was somewhat stashed in the Fayed’s maritime fleet, first in the Sakara, and later in the Cujo, which was moored only yards from the Fayed villa. It was in the Cujo Kelly spent the next two nights with Dodi. “She (Kelly) felt there was something strange going on as Dodi spent large parts of the day at the family’s villa, Castel St. Helene, but asked her to stay on the boat,” writes Martyn Gregory in The Diana Conspiracy Exposed. “Dodi was sleeping with Kelly at night and was courting Diana by day. His deception was assisted by Kelly Fisher’s modelling assignment on 18-20 July in Nice. The Fayed’s were happy to lend her the Cujo and its crew for three days to take her there.”
Dodi’s behaviour clearly was curious, General. “Dodi would say, ‘I’m going to the house and I’ll be back in half an hour’,” Kelly told Gregory. “And he’d come back three or four hours later. I was furious. I’m sitting on the boat, stuck. And he was having lunch with everyone. So he had me in my little boat cage, and I now know he was seducing Diana. So he had me, and then he would go and try and seduce her, and then he’d come back the next day and it would happen again. I was livid by this point, and I just didn’t understand what was going on. When he was with me, he was so wonderful. He said he loved me, and we talked to my mother, and we were talking about moving into the house in California.”
But as is typical of the rather romantically gullible tenderer sex, General, Kelly rationalised her man’s stratagems. “I just thought they maybe didn’t want a commoner around the Princess … Dodi kept leaving me behind with the excuse that the Princess didn’t like to meet new people.” During one of those nights, General, Dodi even had unprotected sexual relations with Kelly whilst cooing in her ear that, “I love you so much and I want you to have my baby.”
KELLY USHERED ONTO THE JONIKAL AT LONG LAST
On July 20, General, Diana returned to England and it was only then that Dodi allowed Kelly to come aboard the Jonikal. According to Debbie Gribble, who was the Jonikal’s chief stewardess, Kelly was kind of grumpy. “I had no idea at the time who she was, but I felt she acted very spoiled,” she says in Trevor Rees-Jones’ The Bodyguard’s Story. “I remember vividly that she snapped, ‘I want to eat right now. I don’t want a drink, I just want to eat now’. It was quite obvious that she was upset, angry or annoyed about something.”
Kelly’s irascible manner of course was understandable, General, given the games Dodi had been playing with her since she pitched up in St. Tropez. Granted, what happened to Kelly was very much antithetical to Dodi’s typically well-mannered nature, but the fact of the matter was that she simply was peripheral to the larger agenda, of which Dodi’s father was the one calling the shots.
On July 23, Dodi and Kelly flew to Paris, where they parted as Kelly had some engagements lined up in Los Angeles. Dodi promised to join her there on August 4 to celebrate with her her parents’ marriage anniversary. Dodi, however, General, did not make good on his promise: though he did candidly own up to the fact that he was at that point in time again with Diana, he also fibbed that he was not alone with her but was partying with her along with Elton John and George Michael. But in a August 6 phone call, he did undertake to Kelly that he would be joining her in LA in a few days’ time. In the event, anyway, General, Kelly continued to ready herself for her big day, which was slated for August 9 – until she saw “The Kiss”.
THE KISS THAT NEVER WAS
“The Kiss”, General, first featured in London’s Sunday Mirror on August 10 under that very headline. In truth, General, it was not a definitive, point-blank kiss: it was a fuzzy image of Diana and Dodi embracing on the Jonikal. A friend of Kelly faxed her the newspaper pictures in the middle of the night and Kelly was at once stunned and convulsed with rage.
But although Kelly was shocked, General, she was not exactly surprised as two or three days prior, British tabloids had already begun rhapsodising on a brewing love affair between Dodi and Diana. That day, Kelly had picked up a phone to demand an immediate explanation from her fiancé. “I started calling him in London because at this time I was expecting his arrival in a day. I called his private line, but there was no answer. So then I called the secretary and asked to speak to him she wouldn’t put me on. So Mohamed got on and in so many horrible words told me to never call back again. I said, ‘He’s my fiancé, what are you talking about?’ He hung up on me and I called back and the secretary said don’t ever call here again, your calls are no longer to be put through. It was so horrible.”
Kelly did at long last manage to reach Dodi but he was quick to protest that, “I can’t talk to you on the phone. I will talk to you in LA.” Perhaps Dodi, General, just at that stage was unable to muster sufficient Dutch courage to thrash out the matter with Kelly but a more credible reason he would not talk had to do with his father’s obsessive bugging of every communication device Dodi used and every inch of every property he owned. The following is what David Icke has to say on the subject in his iconic book The Biggest Secret:
“Ironically, Diana used to have Kensington Palace swept for listening devices and now she was in the clutches of a man for whom bugging was an obsession. The Al Fayed villa in San Tropez was bugged, as were all Fayed properties. Everything Diana said could be heard. Bob Loftus, the former Head of Security at Harrods, said that the bugging there was ‘a very extensive operation’ and was also always under the direction of Al Fayed. Henry Porter, the London Editor of the magazine Vanity Fair, had spent two years investigating Al Fayed and he said they came across his almost obsessive use of eavesdropping devices to tape telephone calls, bug rooms, and film people.”
Through mutual friends, General, Porter warned Diana about Al Fayed’s background and activities ‘because we thought this was quite dangerous for her for obvious reasons’ but Diana apparently felt she could handle it and although she knew Al Fayed could ‘sometimes be a rogue’, he was no threat to her, she thought. “He is rather more than a rogue and rather more often than ‘sometimes,” she apparently told friends. “I know he’s naughty, but that’s all.” The TV programme Dispatches said they had written evidence that Al Fayed bugged the Ritz Hotel and given his background and the deals that are hatched at the Ritz, it would be uncharacteristic if he did not. Kelly Fisher said that the whole time she was on Fayed property, she just assumed everything was bugged. It was known, she said, and Dodi had told her the bugging was so pervasive.
KELLY SUES, ALBEIT VAINLY SO
To his credit, General, Dodi was sufficiently concerned about what had transpired in St. Tropez to fly to LA and do his utmost to appease Kelly but Kelly simply was not interested as to her it was obvious enough that Diana was the new woman in his life.
On August 14, Kelly held a press conference in LA, where she announced that she was taking legal action against Dodi for breach of matrimonial contract. Her asking compensation price was £340,000. Of course the suit, General, lapsed automatically with the demise of Dodi in that Paris underpass on August 31, 1997.
Although Kelly did produce evidence of her engagement to Dodi in the form of a pricey and spectacular engagement ring, General, Mohamed Al Fayed was adamant that she never was engaged to his son and that she was no more than a gold digger.
But it is all water under the bridge now, General: Kelly is happily married to a pilot and the couple has a daughter. Her hubby may not be half as rich as Dodi potentially was but she is fully fulfilled anyway. Happiness, General, comes in all shades and does not necessarily stem from a colossal bank balance or other such trappings of affluence.
Pic Cap
THE SHORT-LIVED TRIANGLE: For about a month or so, Dodi Al Fayed juggled Princess Diana and American model Kelly Fisher, who sported Dodi’s engagement ring. Of course one of the two had to give and naturally it could not be Diana, who entered the lists in the eleventh hour but was the more precious by virtue of her royal pedigree and surpassing international stature.
NEXT WEEK: FURTHER BONDING BETWEEN DIANA AND DODI
Columns
EXTRAVAGANCE One of The Scourges in Society.
Extravagance in recent times has moved from being the practice of some rich and wealthy people of society in general and has regrettably, filtered to all levels of the society. Some of those who have the means are reckless and flaunt their wealth, and consequently, those of us who do not, borrow money to squander it in order to meet their families’ wants of luxuries and unnecessary items. Unfortunately this is a characteristic of human nature.
Adding to those feelings of inadequacy we have countless commercials to whet the consumer’s appetite/desire to buy whatever is advertised, and make him believe that if he does not have those products he will be unhappy, ineffective, worthless and out of tune with the fashion and trend of the times. This practice has reached a stage where many a bread winner resorts to taking loans (from cash loans or banks) with high rates of interest, putting himself in unnecessary debt to buy among other things, furniture, means of transport, dress, food and fancy accommodation, – just to win peoples’ admiration.
Islam and most religions discourage their followers towards wanton consumption. They encourage them to live a life of moderation and to dispense with luxury items so they will not be enslaved by them. Many people today blindly and irresponsibly abandon themselves to excesses and the squandering of wealth in order to ‘keep up with the Joneses’.
The Qur’aan makes it clear that allowing free rein to extravagance and exceeding the limits of moderation is an inherent characteristic in man. Allah says, “If Allah were to enlarge the provision for his servants, they would indeed transgress beyond all bounds.” [Holy Qur’aan 42: 27]
Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) said, “Observe the middle course whereby you will attain your objective (that is paradise).” – Moderation is the opposite of extravagance.
Every individual is meant to earn in a dignified manner and then spend in a very wise and careful manner. One should never try to impress upon others by living beyond one’s means. Extravagance is forbidden in Islam, Allah says, “Do not be extravagant; surely He does not love those who are extravagant!” [Holy Qur’aan 7: 31]
The Qur’aan regards wasteful buying of food, extravagant eating that sometimes leads to throwing away of leftovers as absolutely forbidden. Allah says, “Eat of the fruits in their season, but render the dues that are proper on the day that the harvest is gathered. And waste not by excess, for Allah loves not the wasters.” [Holy Qur’aan 6: 141]
Demonstrating wastefulness in dress, means of transport, furniture and any other thing is also forbidden. Allah says, “O children of Adam! Wear your apparel of adornment at every time and place of worship, and eat and drink but do not be extravagant; surely He does not love those who are extravagant!” [Holy Qur’aan 7: 31]
Yet extravagance and the squandering of wealth continue to grow in society, while there are many helpless and deprived peoples who have no food or shelter. Just look around you here in Botswana.
Have you noticed how people squander their wealth on ‘must have’ things like designer label clothes, fancy brand whiskey, fancy top of the range cars, fancy society parties or even costly weddings, just to make a statement? How can we prevent the squandering of such wealth?
How can one go on spending in a reckless manner possibly even on things that have been made forbidden while witnessing the suffering of fellow humans whereby thousands of people starve to death each year. Islam has not forbidden a person to acquire wealth, make it grow and make use of it. In fact Islam encourages one to do so. It is resorting to forbidden ways to acquiring and of squandering that wealth that Islam has clearly declared forbidden. On the Day of Judgment every individual will be asked about his wealth, where he obtained it and how he spent it.
In fact, those who do not have any conscience about their wasteful habits may one day be subjected to Allah’s punishment that may deprive them of such wealth overnight and impoverish them. Many a family has been brought to the brink of poverty after leading a life of affluence. Similarly, many nations have lived a life of extravagance and their people indulged in such excesses only to be later inflicted by trials and tribulations to such a point that they wished they would only have a little of what they used to possess!
With the festive season and the new year holidays having passed us, for many of us meant ‘one’ thing – spend, spend, spend. With the festivities and the celebrations over only then will the reality set in for many of us that we have overspent, deep in debt with nothing to show for it and that the following months are going to be challenging ones.
Therefore, we should not exceed the bounds when Almighty bestows His bounties upon us. Rather we should show gratefulness to Him by using His bestowments and favours in ways that prove our total obedience to Him and by observing moderation in spending. For this will be better for us in this life and the hereafter.