We marked last month’s fifth anniversary of the imposition of lockdown on the British people by republishing some of our articles from that week. While the mainstream media were baying for stronger and longer restrictions, we were almost alone in criticising lockdown and showing that it would have catastrophic results for zero benefit. We continue to remind readers of the weeks – and the insane policies imposed on us – that followed. Today’s article ‘You say Yes, Hancock’s had his half hour’, appeared exactly five years ago on April 10, 2020, when the country had the misfortune to have Matt Hancock as Secretary of State for Health and Social Care devising covid policy. It reported the results of a poll TCW had run on him.
LAST Sunday Health Secretary Matt Hancock came under fire for proposing to ban exercise outside as, he said in true Gauleiter fashion, a ‘small minority’ continue to ‘break the rules’.
Our view was that this officious minister is a disgrace, pure and simple. We asked whether it should be the other way around: whether it is his inhumane threats of punishment that should be locked down.
It was a relief to see that nearly two thirds of those who responded to our poll question agreed (64 per cent to 36 per cent) and want no truck with such overbearing and intrusive State interference in our lives.
One tweeter asked if his ego would allow him to change tack?
https://twitter.com/swcrisis/status/1246863372190126080
In fact it did, and he did, on that one diktat. But that’s not been enough, to judge from readers’ criticism, though he is not the only target.
In Paulski’s opinion: ‘Hancock seems to be rather relishing himself in his role as the autocratic king and adjudicator of the populace’s simple pleasures. Shame because he seemed fair and reasonable a couple of weeks back. Demotion to minister for paperclips seems rather certain after this has passed
Burt thinks Hancock, Boris Johnson and the NHS Blob have all been suckered by the mad professor. From Lionel Shriver’s article in the Spectator, Researching Game Control in 1990, Burt ‘tracked down all seven studies then available that modelled the impact of Aids on population growth in Africa, where the epidemic was exploding. Four (all authored by epidemiologists) predicted that HIV would devastate African populations, whose growth would plunge to the negative. Three (authored by demographers) predicted that HIV would have a negligible effect on the continent’s population, whose numbers would continue to soar. Thirty years later, guess who was right.’
The last word goes to Colonel Mustard: ‘Hancock has an unfortunate face which makes him look permanently unsure of himself and that is exacerbated by his stuttering style of talking. Really he should probably not be a Minister in this age of appearance and spin. He doesn’t inspire confidence.’
He doesn’t, we agree. Isn’t high time for the Prime Minister (when he has recovered) to see that his colleague’s ego way surpasses his ability?
