Lockdown diary: day two
Even less traffic observed on the journey to and from the hospital than yesterday and at a comparable time.
The hospitals in North Cumbria are coping at the moment, partly through huge efforts from a lot of people, but cases and, tragically, deaths are rising and it will be fourteen days before the measures announced at the start of this week really slow things down.
Work situation is really strange - everyone who can is working from home. One of my close colleagues is self-isolating because his wife had come down with something which may or may not be COVID-19. Hasn't hit him too badly though.
News of colleagues who are self-isolating, and the news that that Prince Charles has tested positive for Coronavirus and is now self-isolating rams home the point that none of us are immune.
Although we are all classed as key workers a lot of my colleagues are working from home with children needing attention because the crisis has affected childminders as well as schools.
There are a whole range of factors which are sending my irony meter off the scale, I'll save most of them for future diary entries but here's one for today.
On different social media platforms I'm getting various feedback about the action the government is taking.
One view, mostly on Facebook, comprises people who have been arguing for some time that much more drastic action was needed to lock the country down. An alternative view comes from other people sending me posts, mostly but not exclusively on this blog, expressing worry about whether the measures taken are a first step to totalitarianism and posting quotes like "This is how liberty dies: to thunderous applause."
Nothing in this post is intended to belittle either group of people - indeed, if we don't want our freedom to die it is extremely important that we continue to respect their right to express reservations either about whether enough is being done to fight the virus or to preserve our ancient liberties.
Please take as an amusing irony, and not as a criticism on the individuals concerned, that the most outspoken voices among my social media circle who have been calling for tougher action and suggesting that if anything the measures announced on Monday did not go far enough are also hardline Remainers who were extremely critical of the decision to prorogue parliament last year - not, perhaps quite in the camp who accused the PM of acting like a dictator but certainly among those who were vociferously accusing him of exceeding his powers back then.
While at least some of those who are worried about the democratic impact of the measures being taken to address Coronavirus were Leave campaigners who presumably agreed with the PM when he was trying every trick in the book to implement the referendum decision, which some in parliament were trying to block.
Both issues are far too complex to make it impossible or inconsistent for someone who was worried about the arbitrary use of executive power in the one instance to honourably support strong action by the government in the other case, either way round. But the irony amuses me.
Meanwhile the line remains:
Please stay home: Protect the NHS: Save lives.
Comments
2) Absolutely we need to test, which is why the UK is testing more people than the vast majority of other countries and ramping it up further. Nationally testing is being extended, with an estimated 10,000 tests by the end of last week and projection of up to 25,000 by the end of this week, moving towards tens of thousands per day.
Mostly? I think that it is one and his name is Jim. For the avoidance of doubt, my worry was that Boris was in danger of taking that first step by arbitrarily suspending the rule of law and directing Chief Constables to police an impromtu edict. I'm delighted that certain QCs and the Chief Officer's union agree with me even if craven careerist cops and tory government apologists don't.
And actually, even on here there are actually two people who have been posting comments making references to totalitarianism, for example by using language like "temporary totalitarian state" and "suspend the rule of law."
One of them is indeed called Jim and the other is called - now what was the name? Oh yes, Gary Bullivant.
I think that if we were to try to suppress criticism in either direction of the specific measures the government has or indeed has not taken, we really would be starting down the slippery slope to the loss of our freedoms.
However, I think you are bang out of order by suggesting that people who think the rules should be enforced as Boris suggests are being "craven careerists" or government apologists.
Whatever my disagreements with the Labour party for instance, I will give many of them credit for behaving very responsibly in these extremely difficult times - and Labour supported the lockdown, and supported asking the police to enforce it, and they are hardly "tory government apologists."
There is a strong possibility that those who support the actions the government have taken might genuinely believe that enforcing those decisions as quickly and thoroughly as practical will reduce a body count which, if no effective action is taken, could easily hit half a million deaths in Britain alone.
You don't have to agree with that view, but to discount any possibility that at least some, and probably quite a lot, of those who do agree with it do so because they want to save lives rather than advance their careers would be the most destructive kind of cynicism.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/876500/Consolidated_Landlord_and_Tenant_Guidance_COVID_and_the_PRS_v4.2.pdf