Vældigt interessant indlæg i The Spectator forleden.
Punkt 1: Er nedlukninger kommet for at blive? I UK talte de åbenbart om en form for nedlukning i forbindelse med hedebølgen forleden.
There was something more alarming than the temperature: how quickly the authorities started to close down society – and showed that the lockdown instinct is still very much alive.
The Met Office, a body that has turned from fairly comical to slightly sinister in recent times, started advising everyone to stay at home. The unions asked for schools, offices and transport systems to be closed down. There were no trains north out of King’s Cross or Euston, and Luton airport closed completely. Sadiq Khan lost no time in asking people not to have barbecues. We didn’t quite get to the stage where the police were handing out on-the-spot fines to anyone more than five miles from their home, but it may only be a matter of time.
At der også i Danmark er risiko for, at nedlukninger forbliver et redskab i myndighedernes værktøjskasse mindede Jens Lundgren os om i slutningen af juni, hvor han anså nedlukninger for at være en mulighed, hvis ikke tilpas mange børn bliver vaccineret mod influenza.
Punkt 2: Brandene i London blav af bl.a. Information (selvfølgelig) sammenkoblet med klimaforandringerne. Men rent faktisk er der langt færre brande i London end tidligere.
There will be fires now and again – they go along with heatwaves – but statistically, fires have never been rarer. There will be alarmists like Sadiq Khan claiming that it was ‘the busiest day for the fire service in London since the second world war’. But he won’t admit that fires in London have fallen two-thirds since the 1980s (let alone the 1940s) or that there were just 6,600 secondary (i.e. grass) fires last year, a record low and some 83 per cent below the 2003 peak. As for increased wildfires across the UK, satellite studies show no such trend in recent years. So why the panic?