Why These Covid Scofflaws Matter. They're Almost As Infectious As the Virus Itself.

A lot of Canadian pols got their tits caught in the wringer for taking holidays abroad at Christmas. It was the height of hypocrisy. A couple of these bastards even pre-recorded holiday messages to their constituents about the need to follow pandemic precautions, real fireside chat stuff. 

We don't know how many of these "leaders" were blockade runners. Most of those we do know about were exposed by the media but that's like unleashing a couple of terriers into a barn infested with rats. They'll get a few but there will be more.

Premiers Ford and especially Kenney got tripped up. At first they minimized the reported incidents. Kenney even defended them as meeting the strict letter of the law in compliance. Later they were forced to confess they knew what their underlings were planning but said nothing until they were found out.

Okay, it's a senator here and an MP there and a few errant MLAs hither, dither and yon. And now they're getting demoted, paying for their sins. Are they really? What, sidelined for a month or two until they're quietly returned to their posts, supposedly chastened? Is that punishment commensurate with the sin?

Some insights into this phenomenon of breaking Covid rules is found in an article in today's Guardian written by Dr. Daisy Fancourt who leads a Covid Social Study project at University College London. She writes of the devilish problem of compliance with precautionary rules and how many who flout the rules follow the example of our leaders.

Compliance has been one of the most misunderstood and misrepresented concepts of this pandemic. During the first wave of the virus back in the spring, there was concern that a lengthy lockdown would lead to “behavioural fatigue” and diminishing compliance with social restrictions. In fact, “behavioural fatigue” was not a scientific concept but a political one, neither supported by research from previous epidemics nor by data that subsequently emerged from our lockdown (over 97% showed good compliance with the rules, with no meaningful decrease from March to May). During emergencies, humans are actually primed to act in the collective interest, as we saw from the sacrifices made by people in the spring of 2020 across the UK.

Fancourt cites the case of former BoJo right hand man, Dominic Cummings, who got caught having broken lockdown rules to take a countrywide road trip with his wife. For some while as the scandal simmered, Johnson refused to fire Cummings and Cummings refused to resign. (Does that sound familiar?)

During lockdown the message on compliance was clear: social restrictions were vital to stop the spread of the virus, so everyone had to play their part; no excuses, no exemptions. But Cummings changed the tone: if you could find a loophole in the rules, it somehow became acceptable (and defensible) to break them. The enemy changed from being the virus itself to being the measures designed to curb the virus.

The same sacrifices people had willingly made in the spring as part of a collective social responsibility suddenly seemed less necessary. Goodwill turned to anger and upset, largely targeted towards the government that defended Cummings’ actions. Trust in the government to handle the pandemic took a sharp downward turn in England, from which it has not recovered since. Trust is crucial, as research has shown that it is one of the largest behavioural predictors of compliance during this pandemic: larger than mental health, belief in the health service or numerous other factors. As humans, we need to trust our authorities if we are to follow what they tell us to do.

The corrosive role of privilege.

The more privileged within society (wealthier and more educated) were more compliant during the first lockdown as their privilege supported their ability to follow the rules: more opportunities to work from home, spacious homes and gardens to lock down in, and a strong infrastructure, from good social support networks to scheduled food deliveries. 

 

But as the pandemic has continued, this same privilege has been associated with a higher propensity to bend the rules. Money has bought a way out of social restrictions, from providing second homes in the country to retreat to (taking new strains of the virus with them), to enabling holidays abroad to escape more stringent UK measures (along with late-night covert escapes when quarantines are brought in).

Privilege has led to a belief that one can second guess the virus, meeting up with friends against guidelines because they’re “being sensible” or it “won’t do any harm”. Ironically, the more privileged actually confess to understanding the rules less. As with Cummings’ actions, the focus is on the wrong enemy: their mission is not to stop the virus but escape the measures designed to control it.

It infuriates me when celebrities issue tweets and video messages proclaiming "we're all in this together" or "we're all in the same boat." What nonsense. We're all on the same storm swept seas but some are riding it out on  the comfort of mega-yachts, while others are in skiffs bailing for all they're worth and others still are treading water for as long as they can.

As for our political caste, these slaps on the wrist are an affront to the public and, especially, to every nurse, doctor and long term care worker who are taking great risks daily.  Premiers and party leaders destroy the essential public trust when they look the other way and let bygones be bygones with a brief stint in the penalty box for those who are caught out. These miscreants should be thrown out of caucus and left to answer to their constituents and riding associations. Destroying the public trust when lives depend on that trust is as bad as stealing from the public purse.