Quite where we are going with this, is frankly, anyone's guess. When "R" goes up, the Deputy Chief Medical Director advises that we don't take it too seriously: it is created from data that is weeks old and at best, it is just an estimate - regional "R" values will differ. Yet, as it decreases, that apparently gives the green light for the PM to unlock the UK.
A member of a Facebook group that I follow (for driving instructors) answered a question of mine superbly well I thought. I asked, "When will you be happy to go back then, what has to happen for you to feel it is safe enough to go back?" I was half expecting a reply based on the dreaded 'science'. Not at all, the swift reply was: "When the examiners go back to work." Stunningly succinct and very logical, do you not think?
I invited the members to give their opinions in a poll, and 70% of them said the same thing. Can you think of one good reason why ADI's across the UK should go back any earlier than the examiners? There appears to be this myth flying around that ADI's are going to need a certain number of days/weeks/months head-start on examiners because no-one is going to be ready for tests any earlier. Really? There is a demand for 400 critical workers every week who are near test ready. Why should that not be multiplied many fold for the rest of the population? Demand I imagine will be extremely high - right from the off.
The problem with these times we find ourselves in is that we are just offering an opinion, attempting to anticipate what might happen. 'The science' as the government like to refer to the basis of their decisions, is pretty unreliable. Opinions differ depending on who you speak to. It also tends to have an 'all or nothing' vibe about it. The whole country can and can't do this or that. It strikes me as being a very blunt, dull way of creating policy. There will be regional differences quite naturally, and the strategy should reflect that fact.
Many ADI's are wondering if the government 80% handouts are likely to be extended. Again, it's just an opinion, but I would be very surprised if it is. I say that for a couple of reasons. Firstly, the cost of such a decision is astronomical. We are heading straight into a depression the depths of which was last witnessed in the 1700's. Having the government paying people for staying at home doing nothing is hardly going to reduce the burden on the economy. Secondly, we just have to get going. When all is said and done, as unsavoury as this sounds, and I genuinely mean no disrespect to families who have lost close ones, the death rate is something like 0.05% of our population. One hundred million global deaths occurred with the Spanish virus in 1918 - I do think we need to get things in a bit of perspective (as unpalatable as that inevitably sounds in the written form). I read with admiration a Facebook poster who was 87 years old. He had two operations cancelled due to the priorities of C-19, and even he recognised that this country needs to get going. He said this in the knowledge that the elderly are the most vulnerable.
There are a couple of worries I have about this continued lockdown. Firstly, it has created an economic depression that is unimaginable, and according to experts, that will undoubtedly lead to the poorer members of society taking a hit post lockdown. I'm talking here about an inequality based on wealth, which affects the type of jobs that are done, the nature of accommodation people live in, the access they have to technological provisions like broadband or pc's, laptops, smartphones, data. Secondly, the long term effects this lockdown is having on mental health is potentially enormous. There are genuine concerns at the moment that there is every likelihood that the lockdown has created such fear and anxiety that people with genuine needs for vital medical attention are not accessing the resources. The death toll created by that situation could outnumber the eventual death toll from C-19, many times over.
I don't know - it is a complex problem and one that creates fear, sadness, anger and quite instinctive reflexes for survival.
I've applied for a contact trace vacancy and wait to see if I am successful or not. It involves a 60 hour week, 12 hours per day, paying £8.72 per hour. My driving school offers a course of 20 hours in-car driving training with resources for £997 so as you can tell, this isn't about the money. Personally, I'm not comfortable with receiving state money for doing absolutely nothing towards GDP while sitting at home. It's not for everyone clearly, but if it means I am in some small way positively contributing to the situation we all find ourselves in, then I'll happily do it.
No comments:
Post a Comment