Nicola Sturgeon's consistently inconsistent message has sown confusion - Brian Monteith

No matter how popular a political leader or that leader’s party might be, the 100% guaranteed way to lose support is to be inconsistent; it is a highly corrosive rust that eats away at confidence, respect and admiration.

Messaging on Covid regulations differed across the UK

Even cult followers and ideological bedfellows throw up their hands in frustration when their leaders become consistently inconsistent by making announcements that cannot be easily explained.

Such a moment arrived last week when yet more details were announced by the Scottish Government on its latest rules on using facemasks.

For those who believed enforcing lockdowns was necessary beyond just buying three weeks for the NHS to better prepare for the Covid pandemic there was some logic behind the idea of applying rules differently between local authorities that were experiencing obviously contrasting conditions (even if I would argue the logic did not stand up to scrutiny).

What surely made no rational sense was to also have different levels of classification for the pandemic restrictions (from the five levels of four to zero in Scotland, to levels four to one in England). This only sowed confusion to the millions who would be travelling quite justifiably across our legislative jurisdictions, never mind the local authority borders.

“Keep it simple, stupid” is a golden rule in engineering that means simplicity of a system guarantees the greatest levels of user acceptance and interaction – which surely must have been the communication goal in reaching out to the public in a pandemic. Yet our Scottish Government has been an exemplar in keeping its messaging confusing and complicated, including the use of a different memorable instructive phrase that required an acronym (FACTS) to be deciphered – compared to England’s immediate and simple Hands-Face-Space.

It is self-evident to me that while it should have been possible for the Scottish Government to decide what levels of restriction might pertain in Scottish local authorities the number of levels of restriction and the language of communication should have been uniform and consistent across the whole of the UK. I do not think this is an unreasonable position to hold – it would undoubtedly have aided understanding and acceptance, which are key factors in raising compliance. It also happens to be a logical application of the devolution of powers that can then be held to account.

Last week we had another example of how the Covid pandemic has been badly managed thanks to the Scottish Government’s iconoclasm which insists it must be seen to be different from whatever comes out of London. This contrary approach only breeds confusion. I write of the creation of a new level of regulation – announced without any self-awareness of its idiocy or banality, for being the level the dare not speak its name – the level below zero.

Some wits wondered aloud if it was “level -1” or “ground zero” or “absolute zero” or even “level Sturgeon (as low as it gets)” but whatever it was it was not fit to be classified – and no wonder.

Suddenly we found Scotland was to have another raft of different and inconsistent rules that will make comprehension, understanding and acceptance far less likely and can only spread ridicule about the need for the rules at all.

At Scottish wedding ceremonies the bride and groom shall still have to wear masks during the ceremony but not during the reception. I would wager the risk of transmission of the Covid virus at a wedding is far less likely between the bride and groom (and even the rest of the immediate family and bridal party) than their interactions with the assembled gathering over drinks (presumably standing up).

There are many other examples, such as not requiring a mask when dancing at a nightclub but needing one on a bus – tell me the faster breathing exertions of the former are not more risky than the latter.

It reminds me of the inept and hypocritical videos I have seen of President Biden and Nancy Pelosi posing for photographs in the White House with recipients of congressional awards – all wearing masks – only to then rip them off for a second photograph without the masks. Who do they think they are fooling? Transmission without masks is either a threat or it isn’t – and the hypocritical inconsistency of our leaders suggests we are safe without them.

The same scenario was witnessed at the recent chummy G7 get-together in St Ives, Cornwall. Official photographs showed the leaders socially distanced and wearing masks but afterwards hugging and air-kissing just like old times as if nothing had changed – or at least not for them. Such are the double standards that quite justifiably cause cynicism towards our leaders in particular and politicians in general.

Recently the greatest ire towards Boris Johnson was when he vacillated about self-isolating after he was “pinged” when a work-colleague in Downing Street tested positive for Covid (despite having antibodies from being infected last year and since being double-jabbed). Likewise the greatest ire towards the Scottish Government will be that inconsistencies abound – that the new rules make no sense and apply to one group of people and not others.

To avoid the public’s cynicism all that’s required is to set the people free.

Brian Monteith is editor of ThinkScotland.org and served in the Scottish and European Parliaments for the Conservative and Brexit Parties respectively.