Is the new government narrative to blame the public/put pressure on the public with rules a deflection tactic?

[User158340]

Now, we're in a really bad place with Covid this month and it's serious. The government are largely responsible given the decisions they've made and Boris's cowardice in making the decisions that need making until it's too late.

Now they seem intent on blaming the public for this. Is a lot of this smoke and mirrors to turn people against each other, rather than blame the government?

I don't see the government have any tactical nous either but maybe I'm missing an important piece of the "narrative." Should I watch Peston?

@christinarossetti19

insisting that schools open for all pupils with no mitigation measures

So the 'keep schools open because my little ones deserve an education and will be scared if they see a mask' mob have no role to play in this

doing nothing about travel into the country

So those who went on holidays ignoring all common sense and came back infected have no role to play in this

including the fiasco of T&T

So those who gave false details or ignored T&T have no role to play in this

eat out to help out

This was done to get those sectors moving again, but still, those who went out/drinking with their mates when they should have known better have no role to play in this

I could go on. Yes, the public are innocent victims and the government are evil. Get a grip!

The government has always wanted to blame someone else, it's not new.

Though you could blame the Tory members who chose Boris Johnson instead of someone vaguely competent.

@User158340

Now, we're in a really bad place with Covid this month and it's serious. The government are largely responsible given the decisions they've made and Boris's cowardice in making the decisions that need making until it's too late.

Now they seem intent on blaming the public for this. Is a lot of this smoke and mirrors to turn people against each other, rather than blame the government?

But it IS the public who aren't following the rules isn't it?

eat out to help out

We went out, saw how busy our local pub was, with people ignoring social distancing, and came back home again.

Just because "you could" do things, like foreign holidays, EOTHO, etc., doesn't mean you had to do it.

There is this thing called personal responsibility you know.

Yes, the current hospitalisations are due to Christmas household mixing that the government allowed (2-3 weeks ago).

The government aren't mentioning this. Apparently it is because we are exercising in the countryside.

The law makes no mention of exercising directly from your front door only. The Guidance says you can travel for exercise within your area, but does not specify any distance for this 'area'.

Yet the government and police are lying that there is a rule that you cannot travel for exercise.

Boris Johnson can travel 7 miles for exercise, so can I.

Plus the government is solely responsible for throwing away the benefits of Lockdown 1, which did work to reduce infections to a very very low level.
Did we really need to be in this terrible position now for the sake of EOTHO, eating out, drinking, foreign holidays?
I wish restrictions on travel and hospitality had been left in place after June/July so that we could still have low infection rates (and low death rates).
We can rebuild the economy but we can't bring people back to life or give them back their health.

@lazeeboy

the current hospitalisations are due to Christmas household mixing that the government allowed

Even if the government 'allowed' it, people could have engaged their brains and not do it

Same for all the other reckless behaviour

@trulydelicious
I agree, people should have been more sensible, but a lot of people will do what they are told is allowed. The ultimate responsibility can only lie with the government, who could have simply said Christmas indoor mixing was not allowed. That would have made a significant different to the current hospitalisations and deaths.

[quote trulydelicious]@lazeeboy

the current hospitalisations are due to Christmas household mixing that the government allowed

Even if the government 'allowed' it, people could have engaged their brains and not do it

Same for all the other reckless behaviour[/quote]
Fully agree. Same with Christmas, just because socialising was allowed didn't mean you had to go and do it.

Walking across a busy road with your eyes closed is "allowed" in that there's no law against it, but anyone doing it is bloody stupid.

Same applies with covid. People need to minimise ALL contact, even within their bubbles. Some crazy people even thought it's a good idea to party with their work "bubble" on Xmas and/or NY eve. Just because they have to risk themselves working together (doing something essential) doesn't mean it's safe for them to do something non essential like having a party. If, as appears the case, viral load is a big part of the consequences of catching covid, then reducing the time spent with anyone is obviously something to aim for.

Yes, people need to accept that indoor mixing is just over for now (and the government need to reinforce this by closing non-essential shops, hospitality and workplaces).

Only 2 supermarkets are enforcing masks as of today (with exceptions for those with medical exemptions) and the police have said they will not police mask-wearing inside shops (too busy in countryside car parks fining people for travelling within their area for exercise, as specifically allowed under the Guidance).

The government's and police's priorities are totally messed up. Indoor mixing (and not wearing masks) is far far more of a danger for virus transmission than driving 5 miles for a walk in an open space (allowed under the Guidance).

I'm not a rule-breaker, nor do I defend others' rule-breaking, but I agree with you OP. That's what this government does. Same way they said that schools were safe as long as they did what they were supposed to - the implication being that schools must be choosing not to make themselves safe if cases spread in them.

They are also refusing to be specific about things like how local you have to stay for exercise, and then implying that unless you are psychic enough to know what 'local' means, you are bending the rules and failing to adhere to the 'spirit'of the guidance, i.e. blaming the public instead of their own vagueness. Driving 5 miles to go for a walk with a coffee? £200 fine. BoJo cycling 7 miles from home? Perfectly fine apparently.

@lazylinguist

Unfortunately we can't legislate for every single dynamic of human existence. If you can get there under your own steam and you are not interacting with somebody ... then that seems perfectly reasonable to me

This is what Mr. Malthouse said and I would have to agree (although probably 70 miles is too far). Very different to what the two ladies with Starbucks did (i.e. drove to get to a beauty spot and met up for a coffee)

Yes definitely. The key point imo was the failure to put London and the South East into tier 3/4 at the beginning of December. Lockdowns have also been too slow - reactive rather than proactive. I believe that history won't look too well on the government's responses when this is over.

The only positive is the vaccinations - this had been put in place very quickly. Although praise goes to the NHS rather than Boris!

But they drove there separately. And they went for a walk with each other. That is literally what the guidance says you can do. No of course you can't legislate for every dynamic of human existence. But why would you specifically put "You may go for a walk with one other person" and then criticise people for doing so?! Similarlu, why keep takeaways open if you don't want people to use them?

@Pan2

Of course it's an attempt to shift focus away from blatant govt failure, corruption and misuse of resources.

The analysis of this being a "vote Leave" campaign group, NOT a competent govt. is so true.

This.
Yes, some people are being idiots and it only takes 'some'.

But the this govt's response and mishandling of the pandemic is more than evident, and it's their fault the NHS can't cope. So EVERYTHING is now about the public behaviour and presenting facts and figures in such a way that stops us asking the right questions.

Richard Murray at the Kings Trust has said that Bojo's dithering has cost lives and that mistakes have been made. Hope yet that this dithering Buffoon and his band of monkeys may be held accountable in some way.

Fully agree. Same with Christmas, just because socialising was allowed didn't mean you had to go and do it. Walking across a busy road with your eyes closed is "allowed" in that there's no law against it, but anyone doing it is bloody stupid.

Yes but we're not talking about things there just 'isn't a law against', are we? We are talking about things the government has actively and specifically decided to say in their guidance that people can do.

Given the wide variety of misinformation available all over the place from other sources, people can surely be forgiven for assuming that actual government instructions about what you can do are based on scientific advice about what it's safe to do. Otherwise wtf is the point of issuing guidance?

They've been doing this all along OP. They have made things so confusing and made so many U turns.

Too fucking right the government's agenda is blaming the public, and deliberately pitting them against each other. Also the DELIBERATE confusion, and DELIBERATE mixed messages.

And also, because over the years the media (and occasionally the government) have CONSTANTLY fed us a diet of doom and gloom, much of which is false, we just don't know what is real and what is not.
"Your mobile phone is killing you."
"There are paedophiles working in your child's school."
"There are terrorists round every corner."
"Saddam Hussein has weapons of mass destruction."
Desensitisation and cynicism have been in place for a long time, with many people.

[quote trulydelicious]@christinarossetti19

insisting that schools open for all pupils with no mitigation measures

So the 'keep schools open because my little ones deserve an education and will be scared if they see a mask' mob have no role to play in this

doing nothing about travel into the country

So those who went on holidays ignoring all common sense and came back infected have no role to play in this

including the fiasco of T&T

So those who gave false details or ignored T&T have no role to play in this

eat out to help out

This was done to get those sectors moving again, but still, those who went out/drinking with their mates when they should have known better have no role to play in this

I could go on. Yes, the public are innocent victims and the government are evil. Get a grip![/quote]
@trulydelicious

The government are the decision makers regarding whether schools are open or closed. They don't consult with educationalists or teachers, let alone those with 'little ones'.

I said travel into the country ie those who travelled into the UK. This obviously includes returning holiday makers.

T&T had a few weeks in the summer when rates were low to get systems set up and staffed. They failed miserably.

If you look at the data, which is freely available in the public domain, schools have been the main drivers of community infection. The government refused to entertain any suggestions of blended learning/mandatory mask wearing or provide any extra funds for staff cover, cleaning measures and to enable more social distancing.

They are the ones responsible, not Jason and Darren who sat outside and had a few beers in the summer.

Sorry but I do feel it’s mostly the public fault for not following the rules and doing what they want. No one is social distancing anymore with the worst people not to social distance is the elderly, the amount who just push passed me or stand slap bang next to me in queues is amazing. Less and less people wear masks and nearly everyone has a supposed issue as to why they should not where one some are genuine others just lazy. My kids school never shut the bubbles when there was a case and only the kids sat next the positive person had to isolate. Then the only thing around isolation 1 child off to isolate but other child can still go to school until sibling tests positive is just stupid. Schools seem to be all about there attendance figures than keeping rates down. The government should have not allowed anyone to mix at Christmas now two weeks later the rates are huge. They also only pay you support. Only if contact to isolate from track and trace so when school bubble burst you get nothing and people can not keep isolating and have no money coming in.

I’ve no wish to support the govt but in fairness the virus spreads when people get too close together. It doesn’t matter if that closeness is within the rules or not - the virus doesn’t care. So what I think Chris Whitty is trying to do is get people to stop meeting as far as possible. So not trying to enforce rules but to develop a mindset that isn’t ‘is this allowed’ but ‘is this necessary’. Unsurprisingly this isn’t popular because human beings are social creatures and we can all justify many things on mental health grounds. So to the extent we all justify our actions ‘because it’s allowed’ we’re all responsible every time we meet someone. We may not have any choice, or feel we have any choice, but from a virus transmission point of view that’s irrelevant.

@MrsWobble3

I’ve no wish to support the govt but in fairness the virus spreads when people get too close together. It doesn’t matter if that closeness is within the rules or not - the virus doesn’t care. So what I think Chris Whitty is trying to do is get people to stop meeting as far as possible. So not trying to enforce rules but to develop a mindset that isn’t ‘is this allowed’ but ‘is this necessary’. Unsurprisingly this isn’t popular because human beings are social creatures and we can all justify many things on mental health grounds. So to the extent we all justify our actions ‘because it’s allowed’ we’re all responsible every time we meet someone. We may not have any choice, or feel we have any choice, but from a virus transmission point of view that’s irrelevant.

Well said @MrsWobble3