Civil Protection Miscellany

Further to my ramblings about the new policies on face coverings I am pleased to report that the required regulations are now available for the public to see.   The regulations to enforce the wearing of face coverings on public transport came into force less than 24 hours after they were published.   The Secretary of State for Transport signed them last Sunday.  (i)  Rushed legislation is rarely good legislation and it would be hard to find an example of something more rushed than the Health Protection (Coronavirus, Wearing of Face Coverings on Public Transport) (England) Regulations.   Of course there have been lots of warning that the regulations were coming.   The government has issued various press statements and ministers have made (rather garbled) pronouncements on television on the subject,t but there was no opportunity for Parliament to see the Regulations in advance or for passengers to get a glimpse of them before they became law. The regulations only cover the wearing

What are emergency planners doing at the moment? The relative invisibility of this worthwhile trade has been the subject of considerable comment and debate (See for example the comments by Prof David Alexander and posts on Linkedin by members of the Emergency Planning Society).   Invisibility means only that they are working in the background without the spotlight of the media shining upon them.   But what are theses protectors of our future up to? Well they are not sitting in their penthouse suites sipping fine vintages, counting their bonuses and planning post lockdown holidays to the Caribbean.   As a putative profession they continue to be unsung and largely deprived of the resources they need to do their jobs.   One improvement, although it is hard to generalise, is that for the moment at least, they have the ears of those who hold budgets and set strategy. This creates an opportunity that should not be missed, but this is a discussion is for another time. Most eme

It is obvious to everybody - apart from politicians - that clarity of guidance and precision of language is vital. I have just seen the Secretary of State for Transport being interviewed on BBC Breakfast. I do wish I hadn't. Not impressive. He repeatably said things like 'to remove ambiguity' 'to be clear' etc. He obviously has had some media training, But it sounds like he attended only part of it. Having declared the importance of 'being clear' he then went on to create considerable ambiguity. He should know the difference between guidance and regulations but seemed to use the words interchangeably, See also the attributed comments in the BBC News (link below). In answer to a direct question 'Will it be illegal not wear masks on public transport?' He said 'That's right' and went on to describe it as a 'condition of travel'. Conditions of travel do not create criminal offences. It is right to say that the wearing of face cove