Well, we do live in interesting times.
Last week it was decided that, in order to allow school leaders to have Christmas Day off from monitoring Covid, schools could close to children a day early, as their education clearly wasn't that important, after all they would only miss one day and teachers could be made to stay at work and take advantage of an extra Inset day. Luckily all those end of term Christmas parties had been cancelled because of the need to keep children 2 metres apart even though they do not apparently spread the virus.
This week, when an increasing number of schools are unable to stay fully open because their staff have succumbed to illness, the Secretary of State has issued a court order to insist that schools stay open even when local conditions suggest that closure would be a sensible decision. Am I detecting a certain inconsistency here in what are considered to be the reasons why children go to school? Perhaps there is some confusion about the benefit of education? Perhaps other countries, who have recognised that closing schools might help to stop the spread of the virus, are mistaken? Perhaps the Secretary of State is not as concerned about children's education as he is about the economy? Perhaps they haven't told him that the majority of people in the country have been put into tier 3, with pubs, restaurants and many other businesses being forced to close, which might have an even greater impact upon the economy? Or maybe it is just panic at being seen to lose control in a role which has been beyond him from day one?
There will almost certainly be a lot of turkeys around looking for somewhere to go over the next few weeks and at least one headless chicken.
This one ran around like this for 18 months too