1. Despite the government’s exhortations many people seem reluctant to go back even to quasi normal life.

The first wave was a disaster but now the chance of infection is very small and infection then death (for most) very small indeed.

But many are reluctant. Why?

THREAD

2. To begin with, it is a gigantic category error to continue to equate the impact of the virus to the simple alternatives of ‘mild’ illness versus death.

3. Consider this.

You will not leave your home if you think there’s a decent chance you might catch the virus and die.

But you also may not leave your home if you think there’s a decent chance you might catch the virus and be hospitalised.

4. And you may be unlikely to revert even to a quasi normal life if you think the effects of the virus may linger for months.

5. Then consider the numerous other factors involved in the new normal - mask wearing (v sensible), the risk of quarantine, local lockdowns and numerous other changes to life...

6. To understand why many will be reluctant to revert to the new normal, it might be sensible to consider a much broader measure of virus impact salience than ‘mills illness’ vs death.

7. But it is also true that the chances of catching the virus are currently very small. Leaving to one side the understandably greater weighting of virus risk (v small) versus, say, going to the pub (I’ll give it a miss), do people believe the government’s assurances?

8. To a large extent, the answer - no - is self evident.

If everyone believed the government and, by extension, the numbers there would be much less reluctance to resume quasi normal behaviour.

9. Let’s assume that most governments begin their administrations with a broad level of trust that is inclined to deepen during periods of national emergency.

10. In other words, many people (however they voted) will be inclined to believe the government will do both the ‘right thing’ and act competently, especially during a national emergency.

11. But this ‘natural’ level of support is not fixed.

It depends on performance - both competence and the perception of acting in the national interest.

12. It is not hard to understand why trust in government may have been eroded.

Whatever the reasons (and life is not fair), the govt’s performance (during the first wave has not been great - overall deaths, the care homes tragedy, the lack of PPE, the contact app debacle...

13. Also, especially for people inclined to view Mr Johnson sceptically (after four years of divisive Brexit debate), it may not be obvious the government’s first motivation is the pursuit of the national interest rather than its own ambitions, & perhaps, more nakedly, itself.

14. The government may consider these ambitions to be one and the same. It embodies the national interest.

But they are not and it does not.

15. The obsessive pursuit of self interest seems a defining element of the personality of this government.

Nothing can be permitted to stand in its way.

Dissent is ruthlessly punished.

16. Political one sidedness has been evident (or can be so construed) in many aspects of the pandemic: the awkward straddle between public health & the economy, the EU procurement fiasco, ministers not wearing masks, scientists not at public briefings, ofc the Cummings farrago.

17. But then, if people remain cautious, if many are not inclined to trust the government, what are politicians meant to do to encourage a return even to quasi normal life?

18. Abandon politics as normal - for the next six months at least.

19. Recognise and understand people’s concerns.

Maybe even apologise - show you’re listening.

Seek consensus with the opposition.

Hold an enquiry sooner rather than later.

Find a way not to let Brexit disrupt the national environment.

20. More than anything, with every action, every decision, every speech, every interview, every word written or spoken, ruthlessly prioritise the pursuit of the national interest.

21. Does the government have the intelligence to make this change? It seems most doubtful.

22. The mistake is hamartic - fundamental & damaging.

Rather than the govt framing its actions to the behaviour of the public & the virus parameters (we might loosely term these‘reality), its principal motivator & analytical prism is the achievement of its political objectives.

23. Until this dynamic is reversed, the government’s ambition of a return to a quasi normal life will be frustrated.

/ends