Saturday, 13 March 2021

Antidote to a Scary World

"When was the last time you actually ‘published’ or even tweeted about anything remotely positive ‘Jim’? Happy to contribute but you need to drop the shit cloud image first."


This from the Observer June 2019:-

Cold War Steve: satire is my antidote to a scary world

Twitter collagist tells how what started as a coping mechanism has led to the cover of Time and a Glastonbury hook-up. As the world around him gets madder by the day, the process of creating satirical collages has kept Christopher Spencer sane.

The artist known as Cold War Steve, whose image of Brexit Britain sinking beneath the Thames graced the cover of Time magazine this month, could have “gone on Twitter and ranted”. Instead he used the social media platform to share his versions of a Hieronymus Bosch-type hellscape.

“I know from my Twitter audience they are completely dismayed by what’s happening – not just Brexit, but Trump, the rise of the far right, the increase in hate crimes. But there’s something quite powerful about laughing at these people, flaying them alive with humour and sarcasm,” he told the Observer.


In a few days, Spencer will unveil a giant collaborative artwork at Glastonbury, where three years ago the music festival went into collective shock as the result of the Brexit referendum sank in. He has produced a book of his work, The Festival of Brexit, and has begun selling limited edition prints and giant postcards of his collages. But Twitter, where he interacts with 176,000 followers, remains his favourite showcase.

His work features public figures in typically English settings – seaside towns, low-cost supermarkets, working men’s clubs, car boot sales, a nostalgic place of “Fray Bentos pies and insipid high streets”. Among the Brexit cast list are Nigel Farage, Boris Johnson, Michael Gove, Theresa May, Jacob Rees-Mogg, Jeremy Corbyn and the Queen. An international presence is supplied by Trump and North Korea’s Kim Jong-Un.

There are also a handful of figures who epitomise Britishness – Cilla Black, Noel Edmonds and, most notably, Phil Mitchell, the EastEnders character played by Steve McFadden. Mitchell appears in almost every collage created by Spencer.

“He’s an everyman, an observer, the hero of the pieces, the anchor to the real world. He’s me looking on in disbelief, really,” said Spencer. He has never had contact with the actor, “but surely someone must have pointed out that he’s on the front of Time magazine? I’d like to think he’s got a copy in a drawer.”

The Time commission came out of the blue as Spencer was shopping for tartar sauce in Asda. “I’d been thinking I’d like to do something in America, it’s such a rich seam, but I didn’t know how to get a foot in the door. Then this email came, asking me if I’d be interested in doing an illustration for Time. The next day they said they wanted it to be the cover of the international edition. It was mind-blowing.”

Spencer, who usually creates his collages on his phone, often on the bus on his way to work as a probation officer, had never before worked to a detailed brief. “It was very specific. They wanted lots of cliched British references – Westminster, Big Ben, London taxis, red buses. But I thought, this is Time magazine, I’m not going to be precious.”

--oo00oo--

The Cold War Steve archive can be found here.



46 comments:

  1. Isnt it amazing how a lowly unqualified former VLO has become so successful - deseeservedly so. If we believe the caustic postings on this blog, only Probation Officers have any intellect or ability! Chris aka Cold War Steve is naturally talented and savvy and worked so hard for his success. A brilliant, lovely, humble genuine man who I am proud to call a friend. Long may he enjoy the respect and success he has achieved. He was brave to leave the job and follow his dreams. Thank you Jim what a breath of fresh air on here ...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There has been a lot of rivalry and blaming . PSO get accused of grovelling up for po work but actually don't get paid the same for it. vlos want equal pay as grade 4 vlos across the country but Napo sold them out while the po vlo vets 10k more and continues to do so. The remaining POs and I am sorry for them are just not able to organise any proper position within their group or union to put down a non crossing point. The NPS are now likely to do what they like with Napo onside. As for cold war steve he hits the mark for sarcasm and some parody love that. Vlo po whatever he is a talented guy and I hope he continues and remains relevant.

      Delete
    2. It's counter-productive for probation staff to play identity politics over job-evaluated grades. What's the point of squabbles between front-line grades? Grievances about pay differentials should be targeted at the job evaluation process and how it weights pay. Internecine arguments between grades only benefit those who prefer a divided workforce, rather than one which makes common cause on pay and other conditions of employment. It's always seems to be front-liners who are evaluating each other's worth and feeling short-changed when they anecdotally do job comparisons. It's never management grades who get drawn into such comparisons. Is that because they are self-evidently worth their weight in gold? Is everything above Grade 4 beyond reproach, and all the injustices to be found at lower grades?
      Expressing frustrations towards other grades may be cathartic, but it won't change anything, though it will keep the bad blood flowing. The faults lie in structures, not in individuals and the only way to possibly change things is to challenge the job evaluation structure. Given that austerity has made a comeback in the public services with another pay freeze, what's required is unity and solidarity, and a recognition that if there's a gravy train in probation, it's not to be found amongst those doing front-line work.

      Delete
    3. I'm sorry this argument reinforces the inequietous failures of the current situation supported and failed by Napo. You just can't pay two rates for the same job. Two tier workforce only brings pay down. Vlos are a case in point and no you are not required to be a po to do the job but you will get 10k more for adding nothing to the role. Don't write politely and argue for the status quo let's all argue for upward lifts.

      Delete
    4. Standardised entry criteria is the only way to resolve this issue.

      Delete
    5. Yes a good point and may well work however a poster has said it's about evaluation of the job. There is an evaluation scheme and we saw how the new incarnation of Napo fail to understand their basic function. Getting terms and conditions upward. Evaluations need properly trained assessors although it is well known this was not the case. Upward direction is based on argument dispute action and removal of any goodwill extras that all our staff deliver po PSOs whoever. Maintaing the downward trend requires them to do nothing. It is a shame this generates such rancour but the national agreements have been ignored and the management confidently know they can. We need a rank and file restart replace the idiot in charge of the now failing yet once great Napo.

      Delete
    6. I suppose a standardised entry procedure would mean all staff would have the same designation and qualifications. Reminds me of a time when the probation service was staffed by probation officers - before the job creation schemes that gave every public service its auxiliaries. Fine: let's do away with the various grades and have a single qualification.

      Delete
    7. I am not against any debate to be had on that but careers progression is for those wanting to develop further. The current problems are in many parts placing of po in lower rates jobs . I suspect it is because many of them are not capable and for manaegment it is a convenient parachute down to avoid capability. There inproperly placed spo in charge of just PSO teams and the roles don't require the qualification. It is not a catch all but specific to offender management. Dealing with complexities of offending and behaviours. If po are not deployed properly the posts they occupy and not practice their po rated job just wastes money and the burden of the work is distributed to non qualified. Let's face it unskilled staff who have no proper qualification to illustrate prior learning to attain a standard at all. I fear NPS will ride roughshod over all to level out functions.

      Delete
    8. We have seen services like probation and education recruiting staff on lower rates of pay, sidestepping the professional qualification previously required. We see dissent between grades as a consequence. It's fair to describe these developments as deprofessionalisation. Career progression in probation doesn't have to mean progression from the probation officer role. This role for many is an end in itself - and rewarding too. It's unlikely that the clock will be put back, but personally I'd like to see all probation work done by qualified probation officers.

      Delete
  2. Simon Armitage, Marc Drayford, most of the Wales Devolved Parliament. Loads of examples of people who have managed to get out and make a name and contribution elsewhere.

    ReplyDelete
  3. This a great piece J.B. Ihe artist as a cult following. Im surprised that more havent responded or do people only comment if they can criticise and moan in the negative. Ive enjoyed reading this today

    ReplyDelete
  4. As predicted by ian dunt, getafix & others - the uk will shutdown *any* & all protests using available legislation:

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2021/mar/13/reclaim-these-streets-vigils-womens-safety-uk-latest-updates

    Met Police (yes, the very same *Met police*) wait until sundown before moving in to arrest women at Clapham Common, having previously refused to allow a managed, covid-secure protest.

    #SheWasJustWalkingHome

    ReplyDelete
  5. Found this dreadful but not uncommon story on this evening's online crawl:

    https://www.newsandstar.co.uk/news/19154576.son-crying-helped--says-workington-mum/

    I would guess every office in the land has a similar case or six on their books.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A WORKINGTON man who was on the brink of suicide because he was homeless took part in a robbery after council officials refused to house him.

      Relatives of 29-year Mark Huddart – whose only previous crime was breaking a window – say he snapped after Allerdale Council officials repeatedly refused to find him emergency shelter. A qualified painter and decorator, he had to endure months of ‘sofa surfing’ after a relationship breakdown left him without a home of his own. Mr Huddart is now serving a jail term for a terrifying robbery at a Workington newsagents.

      Delete
    2. Allerdale Council again repeatedly refused to house him – despite medical proof of PTSD, anxiety, depression, suicidal thoughts and an emotional personality disorder. “I begged them to house him,” said Mr Huddart’s mum Lisa McAleavey. “I told them he’d made three suicide attempts in the previous four days; and if he didn’t get housed, he’d probably try again.

      Lisa was advised by mental health professionals not to accommodate her son because it would lessen his chances of being housed...

      “The housing officer told me: ‘Mark’s diagnosis isn’t a get-out-of-jail free card’.”

      Delete
  6. Well whaddya know... you go to a vigil to pay respects to a woman who was abducted & killed by a male metropolitan police officer & express concern at the risk of violence women regularly face at the hands of men, only to find yourself pinned to the floor & restrained by a male metropolitan police officer - live across the world's media.

    And the response from the person responsible for this situation, Priti Patel? "Its upsetting. I've asked for a report."

    Huzzah!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "a woman who was abducted & killed ALLEGEDY by a Met officer"

      Delete
    2. Anon 09:32 Very important correction.

      Delete
  7. Labour plans to abstain on Tory bill to make ‘annoying’ protests punishable by 10 years in prison

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Losing it labour I'm begining to see Tory blue forever in lost Britain. This appallingx arrests seen at the women vigil in Clapham last night are an awful testament to failing policy. The police only needed a light touch of femal of officers only. Those women in solidarity or fear and concern for their gender and constant threat of violent interactions are yet again intimidated to submissions.arresting those women is a last straw issue they had better not charge them. It is another Patel outrage . Time to axe Cressida useless dick and draw a new line in policing. I'm male and support the women whatever they want they should have and resources for safety first. No question. Tax payers money in Tory pockets yet our women live with do many gender based burden time to focus.

      Delete
    2. On the other hand we are at an absolutely crucial stage in trying to control a crushing pandemic that's killed 100,000 people in the UK. Those protesting were, predominantly in the lower risk of fatality and higher risk of spreading demographic, and had been told that the protest should not go ahead. The vigil had been cancelled by its organisers. And attendees refused to disperse when requested. I'm noy saying things were well-handled, but I don't think it's completely outrageous or shocking either.

      Delete
  8. I disagree that the disgraceful actions by the police at Clapham Common last night is in any way linked to the legislation restricting significantly disruptive protests.

    Instead it is a reflection of the totalitarian way in which the police have policed lockdowns over the past 12 months with endless incidents of the police arresting and fining people for being 3 miles from home, etc.

    We now seem to be in a position where the fear and panic of the past 12 months means society (and by extension, the police) value reducing COVID case numbers and death numbers above all else.

    On social media this morning I've seen countless people, both men and women, criticising the actions of those attending the vigil last night saying their actions will lead to more COVID deaths. And so what exactly? Unfortunately people die all the time. People die in car accidents on the way to protests. People die from flu, adenoviruses and a whole host of respiratory viruses where transmission will have been linked in someway to crowds attending protests. We've never used that as a reason for preventing lawful protests previously so why now?

    Tim Stanley who was quoted on here yesterday has said we're witnessing:

    "the transformation of Britain from a welfare state into a healthcare state, where every aspect of public policy is directed towards the mitigation of disease"

    It is all very worrying indeed.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I think the critics of yesterday's vigil(s) around the country have missed the point. At the direction of the court, the organisers put forward safe procedures for a peaceful and safe gathering. No response from the Met regarding any of them except to say that if they go ahead the organisers will be fined.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Those with responsibility for policiing the locality of Clapham Common stated very clearly that the decisions about the event & policing of it were taken out of their hands at a much higher level. Locally they were in favour of the covid-safe, organised vigil but someone in some ivory tower somewhere (Home Sec? Met Chief? Gold Command?) took a unilateral decision & rode roughshod over the local team.

    Sounds familiar? Straight outta Westminster.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Under current lockdown rules, the organisers of the Reclaim These Streets vigil acted impeccably. They offered to work with the police to ensure the planned one-hour vigil was calm and socially distanced, complete with volunteer stewards so that public safety could for the most part be self-policed. Given that a police officer has been charged in connection with the death of Sarah Everard, you might have expected the Met to have gratefully accepted this plan. Indeed, this seems to be what happened at borough command level, before Scotland Yard intervened. This catastrophic misjudgment appears to have come from high up, as Reclaim These Streets resorted to a high court application to ensure the vigil could go ahead (the judge recommended that organisers and police continue to talk)." - Shami Chakrabarti

      https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/14/sarah-everard-vigil-police-extra-powers-met-brutal-women-priti-patel-protests

      Delete
  11. I think any issues with pay or grade should be targeted at the organisation and agree its counterproductive. However, there is much reference to PSO doing the same job as POs. Have I missed something or are PSOs now responsible for all high risk cases, have to attend mappa level 2 and 3s, have to attend the awful parole board hearings, have the extremely complex cases? I'd say if some are asked to do that then they need to assert they are not paid for it. It is not the same job.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree staff do a lot of things but not paid for or, in their role or grade. I agree if po are doing the role you describe then they get what their grades are set at.
      I don't agree any po at spo role should be paid to band 5 to manage a vlo unit full of grade 3 vlos who do a lot of mappa grade work. Putting straight some awful proposals that fail safeguarding process for Victims mainly from po input. I don't agree a vlo role should be paid 10k more than a po role but for the same job description the rate has to be equal. All the points you make have their place but role erosion drift call it what you like is barred for lower grades on renumeneration but doing less for a lot lot more is ok if you are a po and that is and always will be wrong. We have a useless union leader who had no idea of his role but takes a 10k pay rise . It is all about self here. The unskilled pos who sat on the evaluation panel shafted staff as they had no idea what they were doing but following the instructions. This impacts more than pay it's about pension and life incomes.

      Delete
    2. Much of this pay grade damage was done years ago when 'enthusiastic' PSO grade staff were wanting to prove themselves, but they were played & ended up undermining all previous work done on holding grade boundaries by accepting PO-grade work.

      Some didn't care about anyone but themselves but most simply believed they were 'just as capable'.

      And yes, they may well have been 'just as capable' but... its just they weren't qualified nor were they paid the rate for the job.

      It suited management to exploit this 'enthusiasm' as their budgets could stretch further & they didn't need to exploy as many expensive PO-grade staff. Management extended this principle to managerial tasks at the earliest opportunity and hey, whaddya know, suddenly there is dissent & dissatisfaction everywhere, confusion about roles, buck-passing, no clarity as to where responsibilities lie & the development of the chumocracy-principle where a close knit clique are promoted based on who they know, not what they are qualified to do.

      It didn't take long for the rot to set in & spread; and now it is so widely established it will be hard to eradicate.

      The CRC merger back into NPS will result in the extent of this practice being revealed as chums look after chums, creating new posts or edging out non-chums to allow space for chums.

      And then this newly formed NPS will be aligned to, & can can merrily carry out the work of, the Tory government that created it.

      Delete
    3. I had a small chuckle to this and on many parts of what you say sort of feel true in all our experience. Just I recall I was against management all spo po and aco from expanding the role tasks of PSO staff. An advocate of po professional boundary underpinned by the final court report as the last professional protected task. Sadly we lost traction Napo failed it's members pos didn't get what was happening and now we have fragmented roles that as you say are filled on chum selection. None the less the sell out and underming came from the po qualified mess makers termed the senior management a right mess made.

      Delete
  12. Agree staff can be exploited but also think those whose contact or terms do not cover higher grade and salaried work should refuse it rather than keep asserting they do the same job. Not downplaying the volume of cases they manage but managing an overload of high risk cases and the responsibilities and stress that comes with it is not comparable. If psos want to be a pso though God knows why then they can do the much shortened qualification POs had to some of whom already had degrees. My view is either assert you won't do higher grade tasks or do the qualification.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ok some of this is right to me at least. Staff who are not qualified in some vocational assesment could not other than by the term qualified by experience actually fall back on some reliable level of certification. Where it falls off the cliff is staff no staff can refuse reasonable work instructions. New tasks yes that may well be a variation of job but anything being done already not a chance. The issues are clear the management like a cheapened staffing. The union's too fearful to take appropriate exploitation cases to law.
      Staff do make simple comparisons and neglect the serious effort po level attainment requires and needs to be protected by demarcation of po role duties and buck stop responsibilities. The management would lose their encroachment options and at last a workload limit and more po staff recruitment. It will take solidarity and real leadership this is a Napo duty which is a lost cause with them. Losing psr work courts and prisons gave a lot of distinction away as previously paid po roles . Breach court managers roles in cp and programmes . None of the roles there required any po related training seen as function not assesment. This is what management did to destroy confident self reflecting and able professional officers. If pay was rigid and fixed to role there would not likely be any shortage of POS and the NPS know this . Pos will need some strong help shortly don't look to Napo. They have agreed a transfer and what it will bring will be as worse as the CRCs seven month to redundancies clock.

      Delete
  13. I understand your point but I don't think it's as simple as that. The introduction of lower grade jobs to undermine the terms and conditions of those above is common in the public sector and has been going on since the 1990s. New jobs are created to 'assist' the established ones. As time progresses, the new contracts introduced become more and more vague about demarcation lines. Then there's always the catch all clause of 'and any other work assigned by the manager'. All done by stealth - saving money and downgrading tasks. This erodes boundaries and very difficult to challenge. All very well saying PSOs need to organise themselves but it's not that easy, especially when you're in an office where the majority are colluding with the manager. Maybe they think earning brownie points will help their careers, or maybe they don't know any different. Perhaps there isn't any local NAPO presence.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think your completely right but for the PSO point. I fear it will be the po that will need to demonstrate for recognition. In future there will be the already agreed pay structure for competency. Po will rightly have advantage to start and I hope remains but it is a stealth game long term they will level out on pay and I fear the grades. The language is here already singular title means a decline. There are to many crosds grade competitions for pay stays the po stands alone and the remaining staff are not loyal to professional structure. There is no one much left with investment of how things once were. I hope the balance is truck and we retain the specialised po function of risk parole and suchlike breach recall and everything else that plays to the skills of professional assesments and recomedations. I do see your position though.

      Delete
    2. I wonder just how many of those who post on here that cite the failure of the union as contributing to their current predicament in probation are actually members of the union?

      Delete
    3. I don't think membership matters. Recruitment to union is for the interests of its members. Napo nationally have consistently failed lied and spun everything it can to facade a foothold in some claimed negotiatary position. Yet it has none. No national terms no recognition arrangements and no national staffing agreements to honour or these criticisms would not occur. The leadership remains dysfunctional more likely incompetant and readily identifies with the management than its members. This is repeated through its structure and they lack any original direction for its members.

      Delete
  14. Haven't read all of that but to be clear are you saying that staff who do not volunteer to do jobs above their grade are being told to and that these tasks are mappa level 3, parole hearings, complex high risk cases? I don't see how this is legally viable under a reasonable instruction.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Perhaps read it all might help.
      The problem is there are no jobs or tasks that cannot be devolved or sacred. There are many incidence of mappa sit in or cover by non po staff. There are many non po but alternatively well qualified staff acting in all of the mentioned. Hostels in particular. If you really are baseing this in a legal framework you won't appreciate there is no legal protection. Employers can instruct whatever they choose provide basic training and shortly it's normal. The NPS have many legacy spo level staff in charge of all these tasks and currently manage probation officer teams. Fact.

      Delete
    2. I am aware of the issue with legal protection thanks. If it is as you say then the unions have clearly failed. My point was it should be directed at the wider forces at play rather than each other. If psos are not volunteering and made to do jobs associated with PO grade than that is the employer and unions

      Delete
    3. It gets ever more complicated when you factor in the use of the PSO role paid at the PSO rate, where the postholder is PO qualified. Not an unusual position for someone to be in if they need a job post-qualification but are not in the fortunate position of upping sticks to follow the money, e.g. the Band 5 enhancements currently on offer.

      And its yet another open door for employers to push aagainst to compromise of the rate-for-the-job argument.

      It only takes one occasion where a PSO *postholder* (qualified or not) has deputised for a PO, directed or otherwise, and the whole structure falls because the precedent has been set and management - regardless of their own qualkifications or past roles - will seize upon the opportunity to normalize the behaviour.

      That's why management of NPS & CRCs greedily embraced the proposed authorised officer or probation practitioner designations; it allowed them to play fast & loose with their staff deployment, save money & please their political masters without getting a hair stuck in their teeth.

      Delete
    4. Excellently described and well understood. Your spot on in my view and not wanting to go backwards the only union leader to identify the role distinctions properly for protections was Judy McKnight. Almost aggressively on many occasions. Both male leaders of Napo do not have a fraction of the trades union knowledge of Judy Mckight You might not recall Judy led role boundaries challenges several times against the employers threating real legal action they backed off. She led workloads weighting agreements in both local and national strikes where local areas failed to formalise agreements. The failings of drift thereafter is because neither ledger nor Lawrence actually had the skills or capacity to protect the conditions we had
      nor do that job. Judy challenged all the role incursions under her watch and fought off the first and second attempts to part privatise and separate probation. Both Lawrence and ledger failed and in their conjoined watches sold terms off and they ignored major movements for privatisation. All at Napo members peril. Bad leaders are the result of poor accountability. The NEC has allowed itself to be misled.
      I would love to hear from Judy what she thinks of the situations we face in a guest blog. It is a stark failure neither of the Napo leadership's have consulted and engaged the continued expertise of the greatest GS Napo will ever have served it and protected us all.

      Delete
  15. Changing the subject slightly and back onto recent discussion about the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill. Interestingly a number of Labour politicians have made media appearances today, including David Lammy and Jess Phillips, where they have called for men convicted of stalking and harassment to be more severely punished. They plan to table amendments mandating harsher punishments, including automatic prison sentences for harassment and stalking. I would presume those amendments will pass and so that combined with the original provisions in the bill will certainly have an effect on prison numbers and the licence/PSS caseload.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Do not fear... the Eton Government's tame probation service will have plenty big caseloads in the coming weeks, months & years.

      Don't forget to prepare yourselves for Control & Restraint training, learning how to run in a stab vest, requests for volunteers to join the tactical probation unit (armed & dangerous).

      No?? Who would have imagined probation staff administering lie detector tests back in 2010?

      https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/domestic-abuse-bill-2020-factsheets/mandatory-polygraph-tests-factsheet

      "Polygraph examinations have been successfully used in the management of sexual offenders since January 2013 in the National Probation Service...
      Provisions in the Domestic Abuse Bill will enable the Secretary of State for Justice to impose mandatory polygraph examinations on high risk domestic abuse perpetrators... We will appoint and train four qualified Probation Officers, experienced in the management of domestic abuse perpetrators to be qualified polygraph examiners."

      Just one little push at an open door...

      Delete
  16. Antiquated & ancient roles are handed out in Westminster like sweets. Here's one many won't have heard about until recently:

    "The Clerk of the Crown in Chancery - a senior civil servant who is the head of the Crown Office.

    The Crown Office, a section of the Ministry of Justice, has custody of the Great Seal of the Realm, and has certain administrative functions in connection with the courts and the judicial process, as well as functions relating to the electoral process for House of Commons elections, to the keeping of the Roll of the Peerage, and to the preparation of royal documents"

    Anyone know who's become the most recent incumbent?

    Clue: a favourite child of the Eton set, someone who fucked the probation service over & has been rewarded with a wide selection of sweet treats ever since.

    I think Mr A S Hatton knows the answer.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Someone called katy (and probably many many others) posted this on social media:. In case anyone in probation-land hasn't seen it:

    "The Met has issued this "apology"

    "We absolutely did not want to be in a position where enforcement action was necessary. But we were placed in this position because of the overriding need to protect people’s safety."

    'Look what you made me do' is the defense of every abuser."

    ReplyDelete
  18. "Ministers must learn from government failures in handling and sharing data if they are to build the necessary long-term public consent to bring the Covid pandemic to an end, according to a highly critical report from MPs... The MPs severely criticise Michael Gove for not appearing before them, which they say was “contemptuous of parliament”... They call on Gove to respond to their criticisms, “clearly outlining his understanding of his responsibilities”... Ministers sent in Gove’s place were poorly briefed and unable to answer the questions put to them, says the committee, and when it wrote asking for information, it was often not provided. “This is wilful evasion of parliamentary scrutiny,” said the committee... The MPs say the data presented at the Downing Street briefings for the press and public were sometimes based on worst-case scenarios... On the subject of worst-case scenarios, Sir David Spiegelhalter, Winton professor of the public understanding of risk at Cambridge University, said in written evidence: “I don’t want to ascribe motivations to anyone, but if someone were trying to manipulate emotions and wanting to frighten rather than inform, then this is the kind of thing they might do.” "

    (various sources re-public administration and constitutional affairs committee report due to be published)

    ReplyDelete
  19. There were 400 women and men at the vigil I attended. Plus the police - quiet, respectful, no interventions.

    ReplyDelete