One thing struck me - from a news management perspective - about today's briefing.
On 'freedom day', much of the media focus is on the announcement that the Govt will, in September, introduce a vaccine passport scheme for clubs and mass events. 1/5
On the face of it, this looks like an own-goal by an incompetent Govt. On 'freedom day', it has managed to alienate many businesses and many of its own MPs.
You can add their critical voices to those opposed to the 'reckless' easing of restrictions. 2/5
There may, though, be method in the madness. Here's my theory.
The critical voices of those opposed to the 'reckless' easing of restrictions have, literally, been marginalised. *Instead* we hear the voices of those urging a return to pre-COVID normal. 3/5
So, the Govt appears not as 'reckless' but instead as cautious and balanced. It will elicit (some) public sympathy.
Some will blame the public for abusing its newly found freedom. They will say that the Govt was doing its best (they even mentioned vaccine passports...). 4/5
As for the passports?
Chances are that they will have served their purpose well before September (especially if they induce an increase in vaccination rates). 5/5
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
But first, two 'corrections'.
In the tweets on the attempts to shore up power, I omitted to refer to the 'anti-protest' law, described here by @IanDunt. It merits a place.
And there (obviously) shouldn't be an apostrophe in 'its' in tweet 6. 2/ politics.co.uk/comment/2021/0…
So... how should we respond? The first key thing is to accept the inevitability that many of us, who all see the Johnson govt as a danger, will disagree (perhaps profoundly) about the best way forward. The disagreements are here to stay. 3/
The debate about 'levelling up' prompts this 10-tweet summary of the Johnson Govt. 1/10
The Johnson Govt excels at 'sloganeering populism'. 'Get Brexit Done', 'Global Britain', 'Freedom Day'... and now 'Levelling up'.
The rhetoric projects energy and is meant to show a Govt devoted to 'the people's priorities'. 2/10
Behind the rhetoric, one might hope for some substance, and for at least the beginnings of a coherent policy agenda. And yet - be it the relationship with the EU or the wider world, COVID or tackling inequality - there is *nothing*. 3/10
It strikes me that there has been a disjuncture - which has abruptly ended - between why people vote as they do; and the appeals which political parties make to people. 1/8
We know that most people vote on the basis that the promises of the party they vote for best match *their* interests and preferences. They vote, in other words, for their selfish interests. 2/
Of course, different people define their interests in different ways. They are also more or less rooted in their community, society etc.
The party which succeeds in best appealing to more people's interests tends to win elections. 3/
The more COVID hospitalisations there are, the less capacity the NHS has to deal with other conditions.
That's right, isn't it? 1/4
The more cases there are, the more hospitalisations there will be. Not at the rate of the second wave, but still.
And the more we lift restrictions, the more cases there will be. 2/4
So... why do SO MANY people argue that we need to lift restrictions now so as to enable the NHS to focus on the huge backlog in relation to other diseases? 3/4
In this thread I listed 5 major policy areas in which, win in Batley or Spen or not, @uklabour seems to be divided: Brexit, the economy, winning elections, COVID and the culture war. 1/5
It would be interesting to know what Labour supporters think about each of the issues (the divide is not a simple left/right or leave/remain divide), and what priority they would give to each of them (or any other pressing issue). 2/5
It would also be interesting to know more about how the Labour leadership is seeking to tackle them, and what (if any) steps they are taking to build support within the party for its (unavoidably contentious) policy positions. 3/5