Read on Twitter
You know, it might have been a good idea if the government guidelines *had* addressed what very ill parents of small children were supposed to do?
The guidelines were not written in a way that suggested they were supposed to be rigorously enforced, and that all eventualities had been considered and catered for. They were written in a way that suggested a lot of things you should and shouldn’t do
and a lot of personal leeway in deciding whether you HAD to do something you weren’t really supposed to, or COULDN’T do something you were supposed to.
And like, there are some very good reasons for doing it that way, rather than trying to do an airtight, rigorous code with clear penalties for breach.
But there government, supported by the media, have a) provided some general guidelines with a lot of laxity and space for personal decision-making and interpretation, b) behaved like it’s a rigorous code and that anyone breaking the rules is clearly & obviously in breach
c) picked and chosen at different times whether it’s the letter of the law that matters or the spirit d) adopted a hectoring and threatening tone for some and an indulgent tone for others
e) failed to provide visible leadership in following their own guidelines f) failed to provide leadership to the media in how to support people in making the desired decisions g) failed to appreciate the sacrifices people are making in following the guidelines
h) failed to be clear in what the guidelines are supposed to be achieving and how we’ll know if it worked.
And with a state that treats people very unevenly and a political class who thinks the rules don’t apply to them, that lack of clarity goes beyond incompetence and into iniquity.
Like, I wouldn’t personally blame anyone who didn’t know whether they were not *allowed* to take the kids to their grandparents or just *advised* not to—
But if you’re one if the people responsible for writing and implementing the rules, you should absolutely be held to a higher standard.
Cummings either broke the rules, or he took a major role in writing and promoting rules that were so unclear nobody knows whether he broke them or not. That’s indictable either way.
this is a perfect example of the government’s uselessness at messaging. Is it advice or legal requirement? Are we supposed to be following it to letter, or is it ok to ignore it as long as we’re in line with “the aim”? Do we all understand what the aim is?
