Ha ha - very true Stagger 😄
Printable View
Ha ha - very true Stagger 😄
So in a nutshell, we listened to advise flowing from SAGE when they advised close the schools, but we are reluctant to follow advise following from SAGE when it comes to re-opening schools because a Guardian article has sliced up some evidence given to a select committee which seems to cast some doubt on the SAGE advise.
Jackd, thanks for your response to the muck that was thrown towards e.g. teachers, I know many teachers and how dedicated they are and the work they do.
At first, I thought Oracle was having a laugh and just fishing for comments (casting pebbles?). Having read the follow up posts from Oracle and his comrades I am not so sure.
My apologies if this post is longer than you would like, but it’s not easy to put these things in a nutshell. That’s often how we end up being unable to see the sense in what others are saying (myself included) as we fail to see beyond our entrenched positions and views.
My contradiction, as you see it (and I can see why you view the statements as conflicting conditions), is down to a lack of clarity on my part. I was trying to keep it brief (some people don’t like the long posts I’ve been told).
I will attempt to clarify my position, and hopefully satisfy the rigour to which you are subjecting the point (and its good that our statements and views are challenged):
I will continue to take advice from my union, who also want as quick a return to work as I do, when the scientific advice says it is the right time to do so, the advice has been published and my union are satisfied that it meets the five tests they have set out to ensure the safety of all involved.
My reason for getting involved in this thread was to challenge some of the anti-public sector views being expressed (Oracle’s posts were the most extreme examples) and bring a bit of balance.
I’d be interested to hear your views on the rest of the points I addressed in my reply to Oracle
The unions are not being contradictory. They were calling for schools to close before the government ordered it. They asked to see the evidence for staying open. The government refused to share that evidence so the union felt forced, in a letter to the PM, to call for school closures before the government acted to do so. The unions were acting in the interests of its members and the wider school community. They were not convinced by the advice the government was presenting to them then.
Now the unions are taking exactly the same approach to the reopening of schools. They have asked to see all the evidence. It has not been published. The five tests they have set out have not been met. Again, they are acting as before. They are not convinced by the advice the government is presenting to them now.
The two stances are logically consistent and are therefore not a contradiction.
However, as you seemed to suggest you have a problem with unions, Nothing I can say will convince you otherwise.