... nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program.
Tyranny of the status quo, 1984, by Milton Friedman and Rose Friedman
Disclaimer: this entry does not intend to support the ideas of the Chicago school of economics, but it clearly describes the difficulties around reverting the application of a solution considered temporary.
Temporary things turning permanent, and vice versa, is something IT professionals are used to: just take a look at the evolution of the requirements of any project from the beginning to their final form. But the problem in this case is that what will become temporary is yet unknown.
If the temporary nature of the decision is known beforehand, the solution is to plan the application of the final alternative at the same time as the temporary one is applied. In IT it might be something as simple as an additional line in the application's logs: something slightly annoying, to the point that it forces assigning resources/time to fix that annoyance.
What if there is no motivation to change the temporary measure? It will stay. Kind of a case of the Newton's first law applied to business decisions.
Is it bad to keep stick to a temporary decision? Yes, no doubt. If not, it would not have been labelled temporary. But it can redeem itself: if on second thought the temporary measure is considered as the most convenient one, then it will no longer be pending on applying a better solution. But the key here is that rethinking.