[wraymond]

Thanks Brian, these reports trawl the depths of reasonability and believability to the extremes. The authors try to give rosy glows to the measures imposed and to embarrass any detractors into self-imposed moderation.

Oh dear, talk about muddied waters. The garden path down which we are being led has more inbuilt trips and stumbling blocks than ever before. These statements from official bodies or associated academics are threaded with similar intent to others from official sources.

The latest moves on display today are being offered under the guise of a polite request from ‘our’ NHS but the detail is, given a more subjective view, ominous. It is directly implicit that failure to comply can bring the law down on people who dare to think otherwise.
Personal phone numbers, email addresses and identities are being demanded from gullible frightened people and the list of identifiable others extended to a wide degree. This gives the multitude of scammers a free go at vulnerable people who are oblivious to what is going on. Is there anybody anywhere who trusts either the NHS or any government agency to be secure with such information?

For instance, looking at the confidence inspiring person in charge of the test and trace scheme, who was also the chief executive of TalkTalk when it was hacked in 2015, can we have any faith in government appointees? Or the system of buggins’ turn that appoints them? This just 5 years ago. It cost them ultimately around £60 million and two thirds of the value of the company.

Of course, in the present situation nobody could be sued and if any penalties were due in the event of similar incidences then We would pay. Even so although it is being rolled out today, to the surprise of some of the administrators who were only told by text late last night, it is reported that the program leader admitted it would not be properly ready until the Autumn. Built in ambiguity!

Conspiracy theories do indeed abound. But who claims the wisdom or expertise to proclaim which ones are wide of the mark and which are closer? I certainly wouldn’t, but we are all eminently entitled to presume.