Our liberty must not be a casualty of Covid-19


Blackleaf
#1
In fighting the virus, democratic Britain must not take the same authoritarian measure as other countries in imposing a lockdown - a measure which might not even work anyway...

The Coronavirus Bill would hand the government frightening new powers.

Our liberty must not be a casualty of Covid-19

TOM SLATER
DEPUTY EDITOR
20th March 2020
Spiked



‘Our liberties and human rights need to be changed, curtailed, infringed – use whatever word you want.’ Those were the remarkably frank words of London mayor Sadiq Khan yesterday, as he told the London Assembly that all Londoners must prepare for severe restrictions on their freedom to stop the spread of coronavirus in the city, the epicentre of the UK outbreak.

This comes after concerns that British citizens are failing fully to heed government advice on social distancing – in particular steering clear of pubs, restaurants and public gatherings. But even so, Khan seemed particularly keen on more authoritarian measures. ‘The advice from the government is just advice, and I think that provides a mixed message’, he said.

Here, he joins a chorus of people who are clamouring for the sorts of remarkably authoritarian lockdowns we’ve seen in France, Spain and Italy. At No10’s now daily coronavirus press conference yesterday, Sky News’s Beth Rigby did her now daily routine of demanding London be turned into a mini GDR as soon as possible, claiming to speak ‘on behalf of Londoners’.

But those calling for lockdowns should be careful what they wish for. The scenes in various European cities – in which people are only allowed to leave the house for a few essential reasons – are unlike anything we’ve seen in modern times. Plus there is no telling when such restrictions will be lifted once imposed, given infections could then flare up again.

The British government’s policy of asking rather than compelling people to change their behaviour is surely preferable. Mandated lockdowns risk breeding resentment, especially if they drag on and on. Treating people as citizens to be persuaded rather than children to be instructed would do far more to keep the public engaged and in it for the long haul.

Plus, for all the talk about London not listening, Tube travel is believed to have already fallen by 50 per cent. Twitter anecdotes about packed pubs from London-dwelling journalists shouldn’t be enough for the government to change tack. (Though the fact that Boris Johnson is set to announce the forced closure of London’s pubs is perhaps a sign that, for him, it is.)

More broadly, any rush to embrace authoritarianism in our response to this crisis could cast a much longer shadow. Indeed, while Johnson has caught some flak in recent days for refusing to follow the draconian example of his European colleagues, his government is also preparing to bounce through a bill that will hand it unprecedented new powers to restrict our liberties.

The Coronavirus Bill, published yesterday, would hand the state terrifyingly broad powers. For one thing, notes the guidance, ‘the bill will enable the police and immigration officers to detain a person, for a limited period, who is, or may be, infectious and to take them to a suitable place to enable screening and assessment’ (my emphasis).

It will also empower the government to ‘restrict or prohibit events and gatherings during the pandemic in any place, vehicle, train, vessel or aircraft, any movable structure and any offshore installation and, where necessary, to close premises’. Another provision allows the home secretary to ‘request that port and airport operators temporarily close and suspend operations’.

Then there’s the powers around surveillance. As the civil-liberties group Big Brother Watch has put it, this bill also ‘weakens safeguards on the exercise of mass surveillance powers by quadrupling time review limits for urgent warrants’. At present, warrants issued under the Investigatory Powers Act 2016 must be reviewed every three days, but this bill would push that up to 12.

The bill would also have alarming knock-on effects for the liberties and minimum levels of care provided for ill and elderly people. Existing powers to detain and treat mentally ill people would in future be activated at the sign-off of just one doctor, rather than two. In social care, we are warned that people’s assessed needs will not be expected to be met during this crisis.

While emergency measures are sometimes needed in times of crisis, the lack of safeguards here are particularly worrying. The powers envisaged would only expire after two years. Thankfully, as the BBC’s Iain Watson reports, some MPs are pushing for monthly renewal votes. But Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn is just pushing for a review every six months.

The bill is expected to be nodded through the Commons on Monday without a formal vote. Of course, MPs don’t want to be seen to be obstructionist in a situation like this. And no one genuinely thinks this coronavirus thing is being used by the Tories as a pretext for an authoritarian takeover, for all some Labourites’ mad claims previously that Johnson is basically a fascist.

But the impulse towards authoritarianism in moments like this must be resisted as much as possible. Every new power set to be handed to the government must be closely scrutinised. Whatever might happen in the weeks and months ahead, we need to make sure we still have a free society at the end of all this. Our liberty must not be a casualty of Covid-19.

Tom Slater is deputy editor at spiked. Follow him on Twitter: @Tom_Slater_

https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/0...y-of-covid-19/
 
Blackleaf
#2
PETER HITCHENS: Is shutting down Britain – with unprecedented curbs on ancient liberties – REALLY the best answer?

By PETER HITCHENS FOR THE MAIL ON SUNDAY
22 March 2020

Some years ago I had the very good luck to fall into the hands of a totally useless doctor. It was hell, and nearly worse than that, but it taught me one of the most important lessons of my life. He was charming, grey-haired, smooth and beautifully dressed. He was standing in for my usual GP, a shabbier, more abrasive man.

I went to him with a troubling, persistent pain in a tender place. He prescribed an antibiotic. Days passed. It did not work. The pain grew worse. He declared that in that case I needed surgery, and the specialist to whom he sent me agreed with barely a glance. I was on the conveyor belt to the operating table.

In those days I believed, as so many do, in the medical profession. I was awed by their qualifications. Yet the prospect of a rather nasty operation filled me with gloom and doubt. As I waited miserably for the anaesthetist in the huge London hospital to which I had been sent, a new doctor appeared. I braced myself for another session of being asked ‘Does this hurt?’ and replying, between clenched teeth, that yes it blinking well did. But this third man was different. He did not ask me pointlessly if it hurt. He knew it did. He was, crucially, a thinking man who did not take for granted what he was told.


Here I am, asking bluntly – is the closedown of the country the right answer to the coronavirus? writes PETER HITCHENS. Pictured: London's streets were nearly deserted today

He looked at my notes. He actually read them, which I don’t think anyone else ever had. He swore under his breath. He hurried from the room, only to return shortly afterwards to say I should get dressed and go home. The operation was cancelled. All I needed was a different antibiotic, which he – there and then – prescribed and which cured the problem in three days. He was furious, and managed to convey tactfully that the original prescription had been incompetent and wrong.

The whole miserable business had been a dismal and frightening mistake. He was sorry. Heaven knows what would have happened if Providence had not brought that third doctor into the room. I still shudder slightly to think of it. But the point was this. A mere title, a white coat, a smooth manner, a winning way with long words and technical jargon, will never again be enough for me.

It never, ever does any harm to question decisions which you think are wrong. If they are right, then no harm will be done. They will be able to deal with your questions. If they are, in fact, wrong, you could save everyone a lot of trouble.

And so here I am, asking bluntly – is the closedown of the country the right answer to the coronavirus? I’ll be accused of undermining the NHS and threatening public health and all kinds of other conformist rubbish. But I ask you to join me, because if we have this wrong we have a great deal to lose.

I don’t just address this plea to my readers. I think my fellow journalists should ask the same questions. I think MPs of all parties should ask them when they are urged tomorrow to pass into law a frightening series of restrictions on ancient liberties and vast increases in police and state powers.


I think MPs of all parties should ask them when they are urged tomorrow to pass into law a frightening series of restrictions on ancient liberties and vast increases in police and state powers, writes PETER HITCHENS. Pictured: Manchester city centre was nearly deserted

Did you know that the Government and Opposition had originally agreed that there would not even be a vote on these measures? Even Vladimir Putin might hesitate before doing anything so blatant. If there is no serious rebellion against this plan in the Commons, then I think we can commemorate tomorrow, March 23, 2020, as the day Parliament died. Yet, as far as I can see, the population cares more about running out of lavatory paper. Praise must go to David Davis and Chris Bryant, two MPs who have bravely challenged this measure.

It may also be the day our economy perished. The incessant coverage of health scares and supermarket panics has obscured the dire news coming each hour from the stock markets and the money exchanges. The wealth that should pay our pensions is shrivelling as share values fade and fall. The pound sterling has lost a huge part of its value. Governments all over the world are resorting to risky, frantic measures which make Jeremy Corbyn’s magic money tree look like sober, sound finance. Much of this has been made far worse by the general shutdown of the planet on the pretext of the coronavirus scare. However bad this virus is (and I will come to that), the feverish panic on the world’s trading floors is at least as bad.

And then there is the Johnson Government’s stumbling retreat from reason into fear. At first, Mr Johnson was true to himself and resisted wild demands to close down the country. But bit by bit he gave in.

The schools were to stay open. Now they are shutting, with miserable consequences for this year’s A-level cohort. Cafes and pubs were to be allowed to stay open, but now that is over. On this logic, shops and supermarkets must be next, with everyone forced to rely on overstrained delivery vans. And that will presumably be followed by hairdressers, dry cleaners and shoe repairers.

How long before we need passes to go out in the streets, as in any other banana republic? As for the grotesque, bullying powers to be created on Monday, I can only tell you that you will hate them like poison by the time they are imposed on you.


The streets of Liverpool were also empty as Britons stay indoors following the government's announcement

All the crudest weapons of despotism, the curfew, the presumption of guilt and the power of arbitrary arrest, are taking shape in the midst of what used to be a free country. And we, who like to boast of how calm we are in a crisis, seem to despise our ancient hard-bought freedom and actually want to rush into the warm, firm arms of Big Brother.

Imagine, police officers forcing you to be screened for a disease, and locking you up for 48 hours if you object. Is this China or Britain? Think how this power could be used against, literally, anybody.

The Bill also gives Ministers the authority to ban mass gatherings. It will enable police and public health workers to place restrictions on a person’s ‘movements and travel’, ‘activities’ and ‘contact with others’.

Many court cases will now take place via video-link, and if a coroner suspects someone has died of coronavirus there will be no inquest. They say this is temporary. They always do.


Avoidable deaths are tragic, but each year there are already many deaths, especially among the old, from complications of flu leading to pneumonia, writes PETER HITCHENS. Pictured: Two people wear masks outside Northwick Park Hospital in London

Well, is it justified? There is a document from a team at Imperial College in London which is being used to justify it. It warns of vast numbers of deaths if the country is not subjected to a medieval curfew.

But this is all speculation. It claims, in my view quite wrongly, that the coronavirus has ‘comparable lethality’ to the Spanish flu of 1918, which killed at least 17 million people and mainly attacked the young.

What can one say to this? In a pungent letter to The Times last week, a leading vet, Dick Sibley, cast doubt on the brilliance of the Imperial College scientists, saying that his heart sank when he learned they were advising the Government. Calling them a ‘team of doom-mongers’, he said their advice on the 2001 foot-and-mouth outbreak ‘led to what I believe to be the unnecessary slaughter of millions of healthy cattle and sheep’ until they were overruled by the then Chief Scientific Adviser, Sir David King.

He added: ‘I hope that Boris Johnson, Chris Whitty and Sir Patrick Vallance show similar wisdom. They must ensure that measures are proportionate, balanced and practical.’

Avoidable deaths are tragic, but each year there are already many deaths, especially among the old, from complications of flu leading to pneumonia.

The Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) tells me that the number of flu cases and deaths due to flu-related complications in England alone averages 17,000 a year. This varies greatly each winter, ranging from 1,692 deaths last season (2018/19) to 28,330 deaths in 2014/15.

The DHSC notes that many of those who die from these diseases have underlying health conditions, as do almost all the victims of coronavirus so far, here and elsewhere. As the experienced and knowledgeable doctor who writes under the pseudonym ‘MD’ in the Left-wing magazine Private Eye wrote at the start of the panic: ‘In the winter of 2017-18, more than 50,000 excess deaths occurred in England and Wales, largely unnoticed.’

Nor is it just respiratory diseases that carry people off too soon. In the Government’s table of ‘deaths considered avoidable’, it lists 31,307 deaths from cardiovascular diseases in England and Wales for 2013, the last year for which they could give me figures.

This, largely the toll of unhealthy lifestyles, was out of a total of 114,740 ‘avoidable’ deaths in that year. To put all these figures in perspective, please note that every human being in the United Kingdom suffers from a fatal condition – being alive.

About 1,600 people die every day in the UK for one reason or another. A similar figure applies in Italy and a much larger one in China. The coronavirus deaths, while distressing and shocking, are not so numerous as to require the civilised world to shut down transport and commerce, nor to surrender centuries-old liberties in an afternoon.

We are warned of supposedly devastating death rates. But at least one expert, John Ioannidis, is not so sure. He is Professor of Medicine, of epidemiology and population health, of biomedical data science, and of statistics at Stanford University in California. He says the data are utterly unreliable because so many cases are going unrecorded.

He warns: ‘This evidence fiasco creates tremendous uncertainty about the risk of dying from Covid-19. Reported case fatality rates, like the official 3.4 per cent rate from the World Health Organisation, cause horror and are meaningless.’ In only one place – aboard the cruise ship Diamond Princess – has an entire closed community been available for study. And the death rate there – just one per cent – is distorted because so many of those aboard were elderly. The real rate, adjusted for a wide age range, could be as low as 0.05 per cent and as high as one per cent.

As Prof Ioannidis says: ‘That huge range markedly affects how severe the pandemic is and what should be done. A population-wide case fatality rate of 0.05 per cent is lower than seasonal influenza. If that is the true rate, locking down the world with potentially tremendous social and financial consequences may be totally irrational. It’s like an elephant being attacked by a house cat. Frustrated and trying to avoid the cat, the elephant accidentally jumps off a cliff and dies.’

Epidemic disasters have been predicted many times before and have not been anything like as bad as feared.

The former editor of The Times, Sir Simon Jenkins, recently listed these unfulfilled scares: bird flu did not kill the predicted millions in 1997. In 1999 it was Mad Cow Disease and its human variant, vCJD, which was predicted to kill half a million. Fewer than 200 in fact died from it in the UK.

The first Sars outbreak of 2003 was reported as having ‘a 25 per cent chance of killing tens of millions’ and being ‘worse than Aids’. In 2006, another bout of bird flu was declared ‘the first pandemic of the 21st Century’.

There were similar warnings in 2009, that swine flu could kill 65,000. It did not. The Council of Europe described the hyping of the 2009 pandemic as ‘one of the great medical scandals of the century’. Well, we shall no doubt see.

But while I see very little evidence of a pandemic, and much more of a PanicDemic, I can witness on my daily round the slow strangulation of dozens of small businesses near where I live and work, and the catastrophic collapse of a flourishing society, all these things brought on by a Government policy made out of fear and speculation rather than thought.

Much that is closing may never open again. The time lost to schoolchildren and university students – in debt for courses which have simply ceased to be taught – is irrecoverable, just as the jobs which are being wiped out will not reappear when the panic at last subsides.

We are told that we must emulate Italy or China, but there is no evidence that the flailing, despotic measures taken in these countries reduced the incidence of coronavirus. The most basic error in science is to assume that because B happens after A, that B was caused by A.

There may, just, be time to reconsider. I know that many of you long for some sort of coherent opposition to be voiced. The people who are paid to be the Opposition do not seem to wish to earn their rations, so it is up to the rest of us. I despair that so many in the commentariat and politics obediently accept what they are being told. I have lived long enough, and travelled far enough, to know that authority is often wrong and cannot always be trusted.

I also know that dissent at this time will bring me abuse and perhaps worse. But I am not saying this for fun, or to be ‘contrarian’ –that stupid word which suggests that you are picking an argument for fun. This is not fun.

This is our future, and if I did not lift my voice to speak up for it now, even if I do it quite alone, I should consider that I was not worthy to call myself English or British, or a journalist, and that my parents’ generation had wasted their time saving the freedom and prosperity which they handed on to me after a long and cruel struggle whose privations and griefs we can barely imagine.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/a...ht-answer.html
 
Avro52
+1
#3  Top Rated Post
Or just stay in for a few weeks until the curve is flattened instead of inciting riots and people running around with blue face paint screaming FREEDOM!
 
Blackleaf
#4
Quote: Originally Posted by Avro52 View Post

Or just stay in for a few weeks until the curve is flattened instead of inciting riots and people running around with blue face paint screaming FREEDOM!

Most people don't want to stay in for a few weeks. And won't do so.
 
Avro52
#5
Quote: Originally Posted by Blackleaf View Post

Most people don't want to stay in for a few weeks. And won't do so.

Guess those people have no will power. its been a nightmare trying to keep my teenage son in but so far so good.
 
pgs
Free Thinker
#6
Quote: Originally Posted by Avro52 View Post

Guess those people have no will power. its been a nightmare trying to keep my teenage son in but so far so good.

Where does your dog go ?
 
Blackleaf
#7
Quote: Originally Posted by Avro52 View Post

Guess those people have no will power. its been a nightmare trying to keep my teenage son in but so far so good.

Or maybe they feel they should have the right to go out whenever they want - i.e. to go for a walk in the park or to the pub or to work (many people have jobs that they need to go to) - and not be forcibly imprisoned in a free country. And forcing people to stay indoors all the time just because of some poxy virus which isn't very lethal is, ironically, not good for people's health and wellbeing.

I still don't get why entire countries are shutting down over this. Why the f*ck are countries closing their borders, sporting events and pubs and theatres all being shut? Why are people in some countries being forced to stay at home. Why are countries devastating their economies so needlessly, over a virus which could be less lethal than the flu? Hundreds of thousands of people die every year because of the flu yet we don't take all these silly measures.

People are going to lose jobs and our economies hit hard because of hysterical scaremongering people like you and Serryah.

Also, when things get back to normal, are you going to continue imprisoning your son in order for him to avoid getting a cold, the flu or any other virus? By the way, as a teenager he's unlikely to suffer severe complications as a result of coronavirus. It'll just be like a cold to him.
 
Serryah
Free Thinker
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by Blackleaf View Post

Or maybe they feel they should have the right to go out whenever they want - i.e. to go for a walk in the park or to the pub or to work (many people have jobs that they need to go to) - and not be forcibly imprisoned in a free country. And forcing people to stay indoors all the time just because of some poxy virus which isn't very lethal is, ironically, not good for people's health and wellbeing.

I still don't get why entire countries are shutting down over this. Why the f*ck are countries closing their borders, sporting events and pubs and theatres all being shut? Why are people in some countries being forced to stay at home. Why are countries devastating their economies so needlessly, over a virus which could be less lethal than the flu? Hundreds of thousands of people die every year because of the flu yet we don't take all these silly measures.

People are going to lose jobs and our economies hit hard because of hysterical scaremongering people like you and Serryah.

Also, when things get back to normal, are you going to continue imprisoning your son in order for him to avoid getting a cold, the flu or any other virus? By the way, as a teenager he's unlikely to suffer severe complications as a result of coronavirus. It'll just be like a cold to him.



My Gods you're a total ignorant jackass.

It's not less lethal, it's more lethal, more contagious and unlike the flu, there IS no known vaccine for it as of yet. But of course, you enjoy your ignorance because you don't care about anyone but yourself.

What you call 'hysterical scaremongering' is actually common sense. Do you even know WHY people are being asked to stay in, avoid being in crowds and so on? Do you know WHY flattening the curve of rise in infection is so bloody important? Oh wait, you admit you don't... even though the answers are out there and freely given, continually. You're being ignorant of the reasons on purpose, plain and simple.

Thank Gods for the sensible Brits I know; they counter your idiocy and give me hope for your country.
 

Similar Threads

29
0
Canada's new Covid-19 restrictions
by B00Mer | Mar 9th, 2020
0