A LOT can change in a week. The aftermath of Matt Hancock’s bombshell resignation left us with many unanswered questions about his conduct and whether it constituted a breach of the ministerial code, the law – or both.
Unfortunately, it looks as though those questions are destined to remain unanswered until such a time as the England football team does, or does not, bring it “home”.
It’s a trio of lions, rather than a dead cat, that has pushed Hancock’s behaviour off the front pages and off the media agenda for the time being.
Sajid Javid was a smart choice to replace the horny former health secretary. He has extensive ministerial experience and bringing him off the back benches and back into the fold meant the Prime Minister avoided a messy reshuffle.
Crucially, Javid is also somebody who was seen as unaligned in the ongoing hawks v doves battle within Cabinet over the easing of coronavirus restrictions in England.
But that was then and this is now. In the short time since he became Health Secretary, it seems Javid has already picked a side. Speedy work. He came to a decision on that quicker than Matt Hancock can peer down a corridor to check that the coast is clear.
In a bullish article penned for the Daily Mail at the weekend, Mr Javid said the UK is on track to end almost all restrictions on July 19. He said that both the economic and health arguments for getting back to normal were clear and that we will need to learn to live with the virus.
READ MORE: Who is new Health Secretary Sajid Javid and what has he said about independence?
“We also need to be really clear that cases are going to rise significantly,” he added.
Of course, when Javid says “we” in this context, he means England. When he says “the UK” he is referring to England, and England’s freedom day.
In Scotland, we are working to a different timetable. During a coronavirus briefing last week, Nicola Sturgeon said we remain on course to lift all remaining legal restrictions on August 9.
The First Minister said that, notwithstanding the recent surge in case numbers, she is hopeful that vaccinations will offer us the protection we need to take that decisive step back to normality.
While the aim is for all of Scotland’s local authority areas to be moved into Level 0 on July 19, social distancing rules aren’t scheduled to be abolished until August 9.
Since the beginning of the pandemic, we have heard much about the benefits of taking a four-nation approach to tackling the virus. This is true, up to a point. Collaboration with your nearest neighbours during a global pandemic is eminently sensible.
And while those attempts at collaboration have not always been successful, there has at least been a willingness to try to reach agreement wherever possible.
But working together doesn’t mean working in lockstep. In the past, Nicola Sturgeon has been criticised for not blindly following Boris Johnson’s lead. Some of her critics genuinely believe that her Government has pursued – relatively minor – differences of policy or timing just to be “difficult”.
It was always bizarre to see certain UK commentators pulsating with anger on those occasions when the First Minister announced something before Boris Johnson did, as though doing so was a direct attack on the Prime Minister’s not inconsiderable ego.
READ MORE: Sajid Javid condemned over 'Freedom Day' announcement for England
We can all see where this is going, can’t we? If England sticks to its timetable and we stick to ours, the Scottish Government will come under enormous pressure to ease restrictions faster and more comprehensively than currently planned. Business and industry leaders, as well as opposition parties, will ask why, if it is safe for England to get back to normal, we aren’t following suit.
During an interview on The Andrew Marr Show yesterday, the UK Government Housing Secretary Robert Jenrick said “we would like the whole of the Union to move as one” in ending legal restrictions. While he did acknowledge that the four nations each have different cases numbers and challenges, it is interesting that “as one” again seems to mean “at the same time as England”.
We would all like to get back to normal as quickly and safely as possible. The Scottish Government’s scientific advisers haven’t plucked our freedom day date out of thin air: it’s that date for a reason and – for obvious reasons – it is subject to change.
According to a report by the World Health Organisation, Scotland currently has six out of 10 of Europe’s top Covid hotspots. At the moment, those numbers are thankfully not translating into the rate of hospitalisations and deaths we saw before the vaccination programme, but they are still a cause for concern.
There’s no doubt that footage of jubilant, maskless people at mass gatherings in England will provoke demands for the same for Scotland.
We’ll get there. But after more than a year of living with some form of restrictions and with the vaccination programme nearing its conclusion, it would be a mistake to let impatience and envy push us faster than it’s safe to go.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel