More muddle from talking heads

And to be honest, that’s what we are getting: nothing like clarity from the people who are in charge of running the country.

All the way through the pandemic, the lack of decisiveness has been staggeringly dangerous (as evidenced by the number of excess deaths) and the muddled mixed-messaging has seriously compounded the problems.

So we move on to the next set of wrong-headed thinking, dithering and unclear and uncertain advice from the Prime Minister Boris Johnson and Minister for the Cabinet Office Michael Gove.

Let’s just look at two of the government’s current ‘policies’. I use the word policies advisedly as that implies there is a clear, easily understandable set of regulations and advice that everyone can follow and will benefit all of us but I’m pretty certain that’s not the case.

First up we have ‘working from home’.

From the start of the coronavirus lockdown, the very clear advice was work from home if you can. There was an obvious benefit from this. If you were able to stay at home, you were much less likely to contract Covid-19 and subsequently much less likely to pass it on.

In the time since lockdown started, homeworking had basically become a way of life for almost half of British workers, according to Office for National Statistics figures.

With ministers increasingly nervous about the outlook for the economy, the ONS said 49 per cent of workers reported working from home at some point in the seven days to 14 June, up from 41 per cent the previous week.

And there’s the problem. As the government eased lockdown, opening shops, pubs and restaurants, there was an expectation of an uptick in spending to boost the economy. But that didn’t really happen.

So we’re now faced with a government apparently putting money ahead of public health, and by public health I mean your health and my health.

While other countries seek to eradicate the virus (think New Zealand and Scotland), we have become conditioned to ‘managing’ the virus, accepting as normal the fact that 150 deaths in a day is acceptable.

So where does that leave us” Well, before the weekend, Boris Johnson did his ‘policy on the fly’ routine by telling a member of the public in a pre-recorded television question and answer session that people should now be going back to work in their offices and factories.

He backed that up on Monday in an interview with Sky News.

But I checked the advice on the Gov.uk, the government’s official website, and it still clearly says that anyone who can work from home should continue to do so.

Muddled, confused? Yes, so am I.

So should we go back to work (thereby risking our health) so we can buy a lunchtime sandwich and an overpriced cup of coffee or should we continue to work at home, stay safe and restrict our spending to Amazon and Tesco home delivery?

Johnson says ‘back to work’, the government says ‘stay at home’.

The problem actually goes a lot deeper. While home and remote working was forced on lots of businesses, many have not only coped but found it to be a benefit.

Workers are more productive because they are not faced with a long commute or can manage the home-work balance better, companies are now looking whether they actually need big, expensive city centre offices and there has been a very obvious and well-documented benefit to the environment with far fewer cars on the road.

One of my friends tells me she actually won’t have an office to go back to. The company she works for will be giving up the lease on its big headquarters building and moving into a much smaller office which can’t accommodate all the staff. As a result, it is encouraging its workers to continue to work from home.

I suspect there are many more companies out there planning on doing exactly the same so the muddle continues.

Which brings us to the absolute chaos of whether or not to wear face coverings in shops and other confined spaces.

It’s mandatory to wear a face covering on public transport, although I’m given to understand the policing of that particular regulation is sketchy to say the least.

It’s different in Scotland, however. The law there says: “In enclosed spaces, where physical distancing is more difficult and where there is a risk of close contact with multiple people who are not members of your household, you should wear a face covering.

“People must – by law – wear a face covering in retail environments and on public transport and public transport premises, such as airports, train and bus stations. This applies to open air train stations, but not to bus stops.

“There is no evidence to suggest there might be a benefit outdoors from wearing a face covering, unless in a crowded situation.”

There, that’s nice and clear, isn’t it?

But what of England? Well, before the weekend Boris Johnson did his ‘policy on the fly’ routine again saying that wearing face coverings in shops was probably a good idea and the government was going to look at the evidence, paving the way for a change of policy.

On to Sunday when Michael Gove went on television to say something along the lines of: ‘No, no no, we won’t be making face coverings mandatory. We’ll leave it up to the good sense of the English people.”

And so to Monday when Boris Johnson was again interviewed on Sky News and said face coverings were back on the agenda and an announcement would be made in a couple of days.

More muddle, more confusion, no decisiveness, no precision. In the words of a Talking Heads song: Same as it ever was.

Quick footnote: This column was written on Monday afternoon and maybe, just maybe, the government has actually decided about face coverings by the time you read it.