Maybe I am coming down with something - I feel the need to defend the government on some things....

Well, not really. More that I think if you accuse them too wildly of things, they are easily denied and you look untrustworthy yourself. So it is a good idea not to get too hyperventilated.

"The government knowingly and deliberately de-prepared the UK, even as the pandemic began to bite."

That seems to me a bit of a misrepresentation. It sounds almost as if the objective was to make the UK less prepared. It is much more accurate, I would guess, to say the value of preparation was unrecognised and undervalued. Reducing stockpiles 'saves money' in the grand scheme of things. That is makes you less resilient was not treated with enough seriousness, but it should not presented and a deliberate decision to increase risk, in my opinion.


Mary Bousted, Joint General Secretary of the National Education Union said "The government's plans on reopening schools since they were first produced on 12 May have been changed 41 times, and that's because they constantly had to be revised as things they'd forgotten, things they didn't know, things they got wrong, have been added in."

I think that very much depends on what the changes were and if they were highlighted. Imagine an overall document on school management that says within it there will be appendices issued over the next week covering these 10 specific areas where special considerations apply, followed by a list including things like science laboratories, contact sports, changing rooms and so on. I would not personally consider the appearance of those anticipated appendices changes. On the other hand, if the same appendices appeared with no form of warning they were planned, it does look very much as if they have only arisen because after release of the documents someone said "What about science labs?"

Ok, got that off my chest. Normal opinions will resume shortly.