A Little Bit More Clarity - REAL Clarity Please


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 coverings will be compulsory (no face covering = no travel) but criminal sanction can only be found in the emergency health regulations. If they want to use them the Railway Bye-laws (No 12?) - are available (but only for use on the railway of course, how this will be enforced in buses is a mystery) - or they could introduce new or amended regulations/bye-laws -they have had plenty of time to do this. We have seen the consequences of muddled regulation/guidance in the failure of prosecutions and fixed penalties under the 2020 Act and the Health Regulations.

Shapps was better when he described the marginal case for face coverings but was unable to explain why they are waiting to 15th June when, for example, this could be introduced on the London Underground (the infectious cesspit of the Great Wen!) with a day's notice.

For the sake of the public and more especially for those that have to enforce these things pleases can politician be 'really clear' (as they love to say) about what is guidance, what is compulsory (and what makes it so) and what is the law. It will be the staff and police on the ground that have to sort out the muddled thinking of those that purport to be in control.

P.S I am pleased I resisted the temptation to mention the Secretary of State's chosen background for the interview!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-51205344

This rant is taken from the blog: Civil Protection Miscellany: https://scott-trendall.blogspot.com/




Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Pandemic: Prosecution Mistakes

Image
A piece in the Guardian has highlighted the fact that 56 people have been incorrectly prosecuted for offences under the emergency regulations and that a further 44 charges (that is ALL of them) under the Coronavirus Act 2020 were wrongly brought.   The article concludes that the errors were a result of the rushed nature of the legislation. Rushed and ill considered legislation rarely works as anybody who has ever tried to use the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 will know.   How can legislation and the regulations that sit under it be drafted, enacted and enforced within a few days without there being any errors?   The introduction of new legislation takes time.   Police officers and prosecutors need training and briefing.   Procedures and bureaucracy needs to be developed (everything from policy to counting codes).   But of course this was an emergency – things had to move quickly.   This is true, but isn’t this what contingency planning is for...
Read more

A Long Reply to a Short Post on Linkedin: JESIP

  This isn’t an article, it isn’t really a blog (although I will post it as such elsewhere).   It is really a comment on a recent helpful post on Linkedin by Rob Davis on the subject of the Joint Emergency Services Interoperability Principles (JESIP).   Alas my comment is too long winded for the normal format. Before saying anything else I would mention that some posters have suggested that Mr Davis has pre-empted his own research findings.   This doesn’t worry me – some things are obvious even early on in research and any final conclusions that the author reaches will be subject to the rigours of the academic system that surrounds such high awards.   The fact that JESIP doesn’t always work is a well documented fact. JESIP is a simple, indeed a worthy, statement of good intent.   The principles are, in one sense, not capable of being doubted.   Perhaps this is the reason that criticism is sometimes treated as heresy.   As a member of the publi...
Read more

Being a personal reflection on the importance of anniversaries

Image
  As anybody who reads my blogs knows, I think that that anniversaries are important.  One piece of feedback I received was to stop ‘banging on about them’.  I value feedback but I reject this suggestion because I have seen that recognising anniversaries can be a strong force for good.  This is true emotionally, but also practically.  They serve as landmarks in the temporal landscape.  They are an aide memoire of the lessons from major events and a benchmark to mark our progress or decline.  They also allow us to respectfully reflect on lives lost and loss endured.  Of course for those with personal connections with disasters anniversaries have a deeper and rawer significance. From a professional point of view we do well to remember the contributions of our forebears.  Their efforts are no less important than our own. Today my appointments took me through Moorgate station in the City of London and as always my thoughts turned to the horrors o...
Read more