-
But immediate total lockdown at an early enough stage to really prevent much spread would have seen as alarmist.
This shower of shit choosing optics over competence every single time is one of the reasons we're so angry at them.
But there have been lots of potential pandemics. If the response to the first slightest sign of a potential pandemic was instant lockdown that would be a bad policy. They didn't choose optics over action, they made a difficult call that everyone is now criticising in hindsight.
ffm-
So when China, South Korea etc, who all have much greater experience in these matters than us, started to clamp down hard, our government faffed about and didn’t implement restrictions or even testing until weeks afterwards, you were happy with that? It wasn’t a difficult decision, it should have been a tough but necessary decision, but Johnson, being a libertarian conservative (which is fucked up in itself) didn’t have the balls to take the necessary steps. Which is we are where we are now.
If the world is to learn anything from this mess it’s that we need a worldwide immediate response to even the slightest sign of a pandemic in the future.
-
To be fair, this is a cabinet selected for its willingness to dismiss and denigrate any and all expertise that doesn't suit the party narrative of the day. Johnson boasting about handshakes and proclaiming the UK would remain open for business when Italy was being engulfed is redolent of his contempt for the science, and MPs have been lobbying for controlling arrivals to the UK and implementation of quarantine measures for months now.
jj72
deleted
This shower of shit choosing optics over competence every single time is one of the reasons we're so angry at them.
And now they've also completely failed at the optics parts I don't know what the point of them is.