By Tim Neill, edited by Martha Evans
Credit: Petia Koleva
When the order initially came down from Boris Johnson, I'm hesitant to admit that my initial thought was that it would be roughly 6-8 weeks before things started to open back up. Aberdeen was fairly isolated from the other major Scottish population centres and there was an assumption on my part that the city wouldn't see any major impact from COVID-19.
Now it is early September and this seems like a foolish thought. Beyond this however one thing was immediately obvious was the differing approaches taken by the governments north and south of the border.
This all goes back to the independence referendum of 2014. This was unquestionably the most important moment in recent Scottish history because of how it showcased the desire for Scottish independence among 45% of the voter turnout that. The SNP know that with how the climate has changed since 2014 that they can secure a comfortable win in future. Even if it could be argued the reason the pro-independence vote was so high in the first place was down to the unionists not fielding a strong enough campaign.
This feeds directly into how the Scottish Government has handled the pandemic. Much as Nicola Sturgeon and company initially delivered much clearer messaging and guidance it was all a political move to gain good press from the more cautious among the Scottish population and get that second referendum on the table. However, they have been changes in the national attitude as the months went by. As lockdown in England began to ease with Scotland progressing at a much slower rate there is an argument to be had related to the effectiveness of the extreme caution showcased.
Then the Aberdeen Coronavirus cluster hit.
Aberdeen has become something of a ghost town over the past several years. The local economies reliance on North Sea oil has dried up significantly. It is the kind of city where little of interest happens on a regular basis. That was until an offshore worker directly disobeyed government guidelines and went to a local bar after testing positive for Covid-19.
Living through a localised lockdown was a somewhat odd experience after five months of the national equivalent. Unlike national lockdown the majority of non-essential shops outside of bars and restaurants remained open. This was devastating for the restaurants that had to automatically close after just reopening especially given limited participation in the governments UK wide Eat Out to Help Out scheme. There was something wonderfully ironic about Aberdeen being one of the first places to enforce local lockdown despite the Scottish Governments more cautious approach. From my perspective an extra three weeks of local lockdown seemed relatively straight forward.
The Scottish Government approach to lockdown was a lot more cautious than their neighbours south of the border. This was done entirely to gain political capital. A more cautious approach proved ineffective once news of the Aberdeen coronavirus cluster came through.
The evolution of the story and the ensuing local lockdown is a good indicator for the fact that's regardless of approach to a particular problem you can't plan for individual choices even on a national government level.
Now it is early September and this seems like a foolish thought. Beyond this however one thing was immediately obvious was the differing approaches taken by the governments north and south of the border.
This all goes back to the independence referendum of 2014. This was unquestionably the most important moment in recent Scottish history because of how it showcased the desire for Scottish independence among 45% of the voter turnout that. The SNP know that with how the climate has changed since 2014 that they can secure a comfortable win in future. Even if it could be argued the reason the pro-independence vote was so high in the first place was down to the unionists not fielding a strong enough campaign.
This feeds directly into how the Scottish Government has handled the pandemic. Much as Nicola Sturgeon and company initially delivered much clearer messaging and guidance it was all a political move to gain good press from the more cautious among the Scottish population and get that second referendum on the table. However, they have been changes in the national attitude as the months went by. As lockdown in England began to ease with Scotland progressing at a much slower rate there is an argument to be had related to the effectiveness of the extreme caution showcased.
Then the Aberdeen Coronavirus cluster hit.
Aberdeen has become something of a ghost town over the past several years. The local economies reliance on North Sea oil has dried up significantly. It is the kind of city where little of interest happens on a regular basis. That was until an offshore worker directly disobeyed government guidelines and went to a local bar after testing positive for Covid-19.
Living through a localised lockdown was a somewhat odd experience after five months of the national equivalent. Unlike national lockdown the majority of non-essential shops outside of bars and restaurants remained open. This was devastating for the restaurants that had to automatically close after just reopening especially given limited participation in the governments UK wide Eat Out to Help Out scheme. There was something wonderfully ironic about Aberdeen being one of the first places to enforce local lockdown despite the Scottish Governments more cautious approach. From my perspective an extra three weeks of local lockdown seemed relatively straight forward.
The Scottish Government approach to lockdown was a lot more cautious than their neighbours south of the border. This was done entirely to gain political capital. A more cautious approach proved ineffective once news of the Aberdeen coronavirus cluster came through.
The evolution of the story and the ensuing local lockdown is a good indicator for the fact that's regardless of approach to a particular problem you can't plan for individual choices even on a national government level.
RSS Feed
