Meddling Medley's threat to pubs

The news that the government’s scientific advisors are considering the re-imposition of restrictions on pubs and restaurants, as some sort of a trade-off between the full re-opening of schools in England, has taken many commentators by surprise. The story, which featured in both the Guardian and the Telegraph, will send shockwaves through a hospitality sector already stricken by over three months of enforced closure, and comes at a time when the licensed and restaurant trades are slowly getting back on their feet.

Unfortunately, it is yet another example of the media-induced, mass-hysteria surrounding Coronavirus and demonstrates how our hard-won freedoms and liberties are being eroded by the increasingly powerful “Nanny state” in the guise of Public Health England.

Professor Graham Medley, a member of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE), has suggested that because of recent increases in Coronavirus infections, it might come down to prioritising which areas of public life we should keep open and which should be closed. Medley claimed that the re-opening of schools might come down to a trade-off involving the closure of another sector and then went on to ask, “Do we think pubs are more important than schools?” 

Well apart from telling this self-appointed “expert” to go forth and multiply, I know what my answer to this question would be, and I imagine there are tens of thousands out there who would agree with me. Unfortunately, Prime Minister Johnson appears to be backing his SAGE committee, stating, “Getting pupils back into the classroom was a national priority, while other freedoms were ‘conditional’.”

Now I’m not sure I heard that right, but these are dangerous words for the leader of a supposedly free and democratic country to be uttering. They smack of dictatorship, wrapped up in the guise of “Nanny knows best,” and bring with them shades of 1984 and “Big Brother.

I’m also concerned over the increasingly emotional arguments being used to justify these curbs on our liberties, and the effect the continuing closures of certain sectors is having on our already fragile and damaged economy. 

To argue that the education of the “cheeldren” should take preference over other key sectors of the economy, is the exactly the same spurious argument that the life of a police officer is somehow worth more than  that of an ordinary member of the public. These example illustrate how, regardless of the facts, emotion is often used as a foil against cold, level-headed logic.

Instead, the question must be, will the nation accept another lock-down, especially when they can see no real light at the end of the tunnel? Populations all over the world are becoming increasingly restless over restrictions imposed in the name of public health.  Earlier today, in Germany, a demonstration in Berlin against the wearing of masks attracted an estimated crowd of 20,000 protestors, and this is in a country where people are normally renowned for their adherence to the rules.

The subject of masks has also sparked fierce debate, here in the UK, with the chairman of the Metropolitan Police Federation openly criticising the government over what is seen increasingly as "making up policy on the hoof." The PM’s expectation that already over-stretched police forces should  enforce the mandatory wearing of masks in retail outlets, is one area where the government has failed to provide clarity, as is the late night announcement of the new restrictions affecting certain parts of the Yorkshire and the North West. Local businesses, and also the police were given very little time to prepare for these changes, or to decide how they should be monitored and enforced. 

This comes on top of the requirement for all travellers returning from Spain, to self-isolate for 14 days; yet another policy that was brought in at extremely short notice.

Many people I have spoken to are also becoming increasingly angry over the government’s muddle-headed approach, and this latest piece of nonsense over pubs, from “Meddling Medley,” will only serve to inflame what is an already tense situation.