In the lead up to his statement on the
road out of lockdown, the Prime Minister of England was keen to stress that his
plans would be based more on data than on dates. Given his customary and casual
relationship with truth and consistency, it was no surprise to find that what
he eventually produced was heavy on dates and vague on the data. Assuming that
he will do the opposite of what he says he’ll do is usually a safe bet. It would also be no surprise to find that his
apparent ‘caution’ this time round was merely a spin-based shift from
over-promising and under-delivering to under-promising and over-delivering, and
that he actually intends to move faster than his road map suggests with more
than half an eye on the English local elections in May. His repeated use of
phrases such as ‘irreversible’ and ‘one-way route’ sounded ominous.
In theory, all his plans relate only to
England, but as we have repeatedly seen over the past year, short of imposing
and policing a hard border along Offa’s Dyke it is impossible to fully insulate
Wales from the reckless decisions of an impetuous English PM, and the Welsh
Government is right to be wary
of the consequences. Johnson’s critics in his own party have been arguing long
and hard that once the vulnerable parts of the population have been vaccinated
there is no reason to continue with restrictions, and it’s hard to escape the
conclusion that Johnson and his cult followers agree with that analysis but are
only being held back by the caution of the government scientists. Such an
approach would amount to allowing the virus to rip freely through the
unprotected sectors of the population (as well as any of the vulnerable who
have, for whatever reason, not been vaccinated). It’s a policy which depends on
an assumption that those not yet vaccinated will only get a mild illness from
which they will quickly recover.
That is a big assumption and a huge
gamble. We know that, allowed to circulate freely amongst any sizable
population, the virus can and will mutate. There’s a reasonable chance that
most vaccinations will not cause any worse symptoms, and that the vaccinations
will still protect against them. But it only takes one mutation that either
causes worse symptoms (and more deaths) or against which the vaccinations don’t
work for us to be facing another major surge later this year, in which tens of
thousands more lives would be lost. None of us can know whether Johnson’s bet
will pay off or not, but his record of recklessness is not exactly a sound
basis for optimism. Statistically, betting on him being wrong would have shorter
odds than betting on him being right.
The sight of the leader of what is
euphemistically called ‘the opposition’ supporting Johnson’s insistence on
irreversibility not only gives Johnson a degree of political cover, it also
increases the risk. Even more worrying is that the most vocal opposition to
Johnson’s approach is coming from people on his own side – and his natural
supporters within his party at that – who think he’s still being too cautious
and want to end restrictions even sooner. When dealing with a chancer and
gambler like Johnson, the last thing we really need is people who are egging
him on to up the stakes, especially when those stakes are measured in human
lives. Yet that is what we have, and with a compulsive and over-optimistic
gambler like Johnson at the helm, the dangers for the rest of us are obvious.
No comments:
Post a Comment