What is now referred to as "Partygate" has sent shock waves through the British electorate as even more scandalous details emerge, serving as a guideline on how not to manage a country during a serious health situation.
Speculation turned into fact as U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson admitted to having attended at least one staff function at Number 10 Downing Street while the rest of Britain was under severe lockdown restrictions.
But the wider picture is even more worrying. Setting the "25 minutes or so" stopover by Johnson aside for a moment and not even factoring in that there had been at least one more confirmed occasion – although not in Number 10 itself but on government premises further down on the same sealed-off street in central London – someone in Johnson’s inner circle must have knowingly breached COVID-19 lockdown laws before the prime minister popped in by arranging that social event.
The author of these lines had the honor and pleasure of visiting Number 10 in the pre-pandemic past and thus knows that under normal circumstances food and beverages for internal gatherings do not necessarily have to be ordered from outside caterers as the kitchen and cellars are well-stocked with consumables at all times.
Hence, observers, or shall we say journalists with a crystal ball on the kitchen tables, who unless working for mainstream media faced great difficulties in carrying out their jobs and required special COVID-19 waivers to travel, would not have seen any vans bringing in food and beverages to the gates.
But as mentioned earlier, there was at least one more party going on during lockdown. In this context, a staff get-together on the night before Queen Elizabeth II had to endure the unmeasurable pain of attending the funeral service of her beloved husband of many decades, the Duke of Edinburgh Prince Philip, alone as social distancing rules demanded no other person including close family could be seated next to the queen, appears more bizarre and alarming.
Once more clearly differentiating potential fiction from confirmed facts, comments published recently by James Slack, Johnson’s very own former director of communications and duly quoted in The Cambridge News, confirmed the event saying, it "should not have happened."
Actually, the event did not have any political significance whatsoever, nor was it a high-level meeting of government officials to discuss the spread of the killer virus all over Britain. At stake: a leaving-do, a farewell party for Slack as he was about to part ways with Johnson.
A "parting ways" party would describe it best – and the person organizing it was at the center of central command, a person with full knowledge of what is allowed and what is prohibited as he himself communicated many of those drastic lockdown rules to an often outraged yet obedient population.
Let us further recall that future mothers had to give birth without any other person by her side except for medical staff; let us remember that funerals were held according to social distancing rules; let us not forget that family visits to dying grandparents were made illegal.
Let us consider thousands of children suffering from stress caused by distance learning. Let us talk about the millions of people who either lost their jobs or had to live in fear of losing their incomes due to the continued lockdowns.
But the British public swallowed the bitter pill. A proud nation that came out on top of World War II for sure knows how to deal with a crisis that poses a risk to individuals as well as the entire nation. But the great difference between those eras gone by and today is that British politicians rolled up their sleeves and led per example.
Today, however, and with the understanding that more "partygates" are likely to emerge in the future as well, one thing is certain to ordinary voters: The prime minister himself did not lead by example as he admitted to having participated in at least one such gathering, and it sounds highly unrealistic that his soon to be leaving director of communications hosts a large bye-bye party without Johnson either having been invited or at least having known about that entry on Slack’s official diary. Unless of course, it was a secret official send off.
The damage to the British political system cannot be measured yet but when elected leaders and leading government officials ridicule their own pandemic laws and thus make a mockery of ordinary citizens confined to their own four walls devoid of any chance to socialize – not even with family living 100 miles away – who will ever trust a politician again?
Regardless of whether one agrees with strict lockdown measures or not, regardless of whether someone lauds the testing or vaccination strategy or not, one thing is obvious, fighting a pandemic was uncharted territory for all governments in all four corners of the world.
In order to do so successfully, the government needs to work hand in hand with the public. Hence, when strict measures are announced they are a kind of test to stem the tide of increasing infections. No one knew if it will work or not. But the public obeyed and stayed at home, stayed away from school, work and grieving family members.
Apparently, not everyone obeyed those rules. We are not talking about the one disgruntled restaurant owner who lost his livelihood and posted a sign outside his doors that read "no more lockdowns, please." This entrepreneur for sure would not have invited his staff and the entire neighborhood for after-work drinks parties. He was probably suffering emotionally and financially, for sure, but he abided by the government rules and laws.
The question now is: Will the public continue to do so? Many issues will come under discussion in the next few days and weeks.
First, if a pandemic is wreaking havoc in the country and everyone is rightfully worried and afraid of catching it, how come government officials, including the prime minister, are totally unconcerned about the contagion risks? Even more troubling is that Johnson himself has already suffered from the virus.
Second, if government officials party and have fun while the electorate cannot, what is the point of any laws being made in Parliament? One set of laws for the government, another for you, me and the voters?
Third, as vaccination is key to ending the pandemic, how will the government go around convincing the skeptical public that getting the jabs will save lives and that this claim is based on realistic assumptions?
Last but not least, as everywhere else in Europe there is a rising trend of racism, Islamophobia and far-right populism. An increasing number of citizens are losing their trust in the government, which could make them consider other options – a highly toxic development and very dangerous for the British political system.
This has become a political rollercoaster for Johnson. Although we know there were other factors that contributed to it, like it or hate it a prime minister is at the helm and must give, not take orders. Including canceling staff lockdown parties!
