This is an apparently serious news report in The Guardian this morning (and no, my copy is not dated 1 April):
UK citizens will be told to stock up on tinned food and take steps to ensure they are prepared for national emergencies as part of a new government campaign to improve the nation's resilience.
The new campaign from the Cabinet Office will set out ways people can prepare for extreme weather events and potential attacks from hostile states, including stocking up on bottled water, sources told the Guardian.
For those old enough to remember, this reminds me very strongly of the instructions issued (I think) in the 1970s that said that if we wished to survive a nuclear attack, we should build a nuclear fallout shelter in the cupboard under the stairs, presuming we had one, and my family did.
I am well aware that August is the silly season for political news, but this really does scrape the barrel.
At the same time, we should perhaps take it extremely seriously. Maybe this is a real indication of the level of strategic thinking and planning that is to characterise the Burnham government.
Surviving climate change just requires storing a bit more water, in plastic bottles (irony alert). And a stock of tinned food will definitely get us through any national emergency.
The stupidity of this as a general announcement, rather than as a specific household choice, is quite extraordinary.
Twenty per cent of people in the UK live in poverty. They have no chance of buying these items. Many more households are stretched to their limits; they too will be unable to set aside money for these items during a cost-of-living crisis. They will be incredulous at this suggestion,
And where, in any case, are many households meant to store these items? Those who are issuing these suggestions might have the space available to store stacks of bottled water, but the millions who are living in small, overcrowded accommodation, where any space at all is at an absolute premium, will rightly ask the question, ‘What idiot thought this one up?'
In political terms, this suggestion is, to be very polite, crass.
However, there is a deeper point to be made. Instead of describing what these national emergencies are, and how the government will manage them, what is very clear is that this government is doing two things.
First, it is admitting it cannot, or rather will not, manage these crises. The message is sent, even if not very clearly, that we should not look to the government to solve these issues.
Secondly, it is therefore outsourcing supposed responsibility for any such eventuality to us. We are meant to take responsibility for the consequences of crises for which the government will not accept a duty of care.
This, of course, is neoliberal thinking gone mad. In 2011, in my book The Courageous State, I suggested that a sure sign of a neoliberal government was that whenever it identified a problem, it would deny that there was anything it could do about it, and then pass the burden of responsibility back to markets or individuals.
The whole point of the neoliberal politician, which Andy Burnham is proving himself to be, day in and day out, is to undermine the very organisation of which they have taken control purely for the sake of their own gratification and advancement, and not for the benefit of the people of the country they are meant to govern as a consequence.
So, what would a courageous government do in the face of national emergencies and the climate crisis?
First, it would define what those emergencies might be and ensure the government has the necessary reserves of food, fuel, and water available to supply on a rationed basis if required.
Second, having identified those potential national emergencies, it would take every possible step to prevent them from happening rather than swan around the country talking about the ability to cancel a Netflix subscription, which is all Burnham seems capable of doing.
Third, on the climate crisis, it would deliver a Green New Deal and make clear that this issue is so important that managing anything else would become secondary to achieving this goal. That would mean fiscal rules, inflation targets, rules about Bank of England independence, and much more would be set aside to deliver the necessary programmes. These programmes would, at the same time, create a carbon army of people to deliver the necessary processes of change, so that the problems of unemployment amongst young people and others in the UK would become a distant memory as a consequence.
That is what a courageous government would do.
Our problem is that we are a very long way from having one.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Thank you
Oh great, so now we scrabble for food to store when we can’t afford to fill our cupboards in the first place. Millions of people will just not be able to buy extra and the supermarkets will guess what, hike the prices up you can bet. A reckless and bad statement, the government should have stockpiled food like many other countries . . Ugh
We’ll never experience a courageous government of any political stripe. Most political parties’ leadership groups are utterly cowed by the prospect of right-wing media disapproval. This in turn leads their backbench MPs to panic, plot and eventually defenestrate their leaders; rinse and repeat.
That article sent me for an anxiety spin. I have severe reactions to foods, I can’t eat canned or dried due to it causing reactions (MCAS) . Has anyone actually looked at the ingredients in a can of ‘food’ or even tasted canned green beans recently, it’s like chemical warfare! I couldn’t last a week on just rice! This is wholly inappropriate, and clear sign the government again dosnt care for those that are disabled and living with food allergies/ intolerances, most of whom are in poverty and would be disproportionally effected in a food crisis. I am left with that sickening Covid feeling again where the government then gave the okay for ventilators to be switched off for covid patients with autism. My audhd brain is seeing a connection here…
I agree, this is wholly inappropriate.
I think the advice was given in the 1960s. If true it shows the govt is as usual out of its depth and detached from reality.
I recall a comedian at the time announcing that they were building a nuclear shelter made of crates of champagne lined with smoked salmon, so that, when the radiation got them they would die happy.
“We’re runing out of food, don’t panic, DON’T PANIC!!” cried Corpral Jones, as shoppers rushed to stock up on toilet rolls (‘cos the government told them to suddenly start bulk buying).
Maybe we’ll get another 90dB emergency phone alert about it soon?
That “stock up on tins and bottled water!” announcement sowed the seeds of despair in my heart. Not at the prospect of shortages, but at the further proof that we are governed by crooked incompetents, and that their message is, “You’re on your own folks, we haven’t got a clue, and anyway, we don’t care.”
Harsh? No, I don’t think so. After all, as you have demonstrated above, there are sensible and strategic alternatives – for a courageous government.
How do we get one of those? Once people see through the lies of our current crooks, and realise, “there is another way”. KUTGW!
Exactly https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nR0lOtdvqyg&t=3s.
I can’t help being reminded of the Golgafrincham ‘B’ Ark which crash landed on Earth during The Hitchhiker’s Guide To The Galaxy. The captain’s bath has has had a revolving door (can a bath have a door?) through which many occupants have passed in quick succession over recent years but the general outcome has been much as Douglas Adams predicted.
Those who find the above beyond their comprehension are advised to read, or listen to, the book which contains a remarkably accurate prediction of the world as we see it. The original radio series from about 1976 has the distinction of being one of the first to make full use of FM stereo radio broadcasting from the BBC, the recordings of which are the best way in which to enjoy this masterpiece.
When you say 20% of households are in poverty, where do you get that statistic from and what definition do they use?
The Joseph Rowntree Foundation
60% of median household incoem
As a start, Government must begin to take action to curtail climate denial campaigns. Some thoughts.
Ban misleading environmental claims (greenwashing) and fossil fuel advertising.
Force social media companies to de-prioritise, demonetise, or label climate misinformation.
Expose “dark money” by requiring full transparency for lobbying groups and think tanks.
Sue organisations for consumer fraud if they knowingly spread false climate data to protect profits.
It should also be noted that the government is far from pursuing any green policy. It has espoused AI without any clear motive apart from trying to appear “with it” and is planning 100 AI data centres which is suggested are each the equivalent of a small town in terms of energy and water use. As I have written in my own blog, there does not appear to be any identified meaningful benefit for the ordinary people of the UK.
I agree.
I think genuine progress is being made to very significantly reduce water and energy consumption by the data centres, like for example at the big Isambard one. But the trouble is they are appearing at such a rapid rate that it is outstripping the benefits of the improvements. So the development of them needs to slow down. Whether AI is beneficial or not depends on human beings and our tendency to make the wrong choices, motivated by greed. Same old story.
Is anyone doing “reource accounting” for these destructive data centres?
Given the parlous state of our water and energy infrastructure, might we end up switching them off, like the nuclear power stations that relied on the Danube for cooling water, and one in the UK whose cooling water discharges were too hot for the river to cope with?
When the resource accounting is done, then maybe it WILL be true to say, “We can’t AFFORD it!!”.
Under sustainable cost accounting these dqta centres would not exist
“And where, in any case, are many households meant to store these items?”
Well, in the last few years, there seems to have been an explosion of self-storage unit providers on industrial estates on the edge of most towns. Units seem to cost from around £50 upwards per month. Surely people should rent those instead of buying all those lattes etc., if they need to stock up on tins of tuna and bottles of water. Priorities after all.
I am hoping that was meant to be humorous.
Excellent piece of writing.
This is about what one would expect from a government that has at it’s head a twice failed labour leadership candidate who was eventually anointed leader and prime minister by his own sorry bunch of MPs.
I despair.
Thank you, and so do I despair.
What is Stupid about this is that most modern tinned foods will no longer keep. They all have a use by date on, which is not far away. As someone who likes toi eat healthy food, I will not be churning through an aged stock of processed tinned food to keep the government happy.
Most houses also don’t have anywhere to keep sacks of rice or pulses, and things packed in plastic are likely to degrade.
Not really thought out this one, but typical of government!
Modern ring pull cans do not keep as long as the older sealed cans. You do have to be careful of the use by dates with these.
Is it cynical of me to wonder whether the short best before dates on tinned food are a ploy to discourage people from bulk buying to reduce exposure to food price inflation?
Only a bit….there used to be no sell-by dates on tinned food as the risk was so low.
Apart from all of the other issues that this message creates there is another angle.
If a government decides to centrally procure a mass holding of essential items to protect the public from such crises they will be able to do so at a fraction of the cost that individual families up and down the country all paying top retail prices at their local supermarkets can – what a lovely gift to the corporate world Andy.
This is simply yet another example of the complete indifference Westminster has towards the human beings living on this patch of ground called the UK.
The Westminster machine cannot be rehabilitated and must be redesigned from the bottom up if there is to be any hope for the future.
Agreed
I have supplies and water stashed away, from a couple of years ago (mostly for long hikes etc). Prices have rocketed up since then for army/expedition items, and I’d now expect another supply price hike following that vacuous government announcement. It’s expensive.
One thing goveenments could do to help the poorest would be to improve building standards for social homes and indeed private rented accomodation, so families did not have to spend so much on keeping warm/cool. Whilst both reducing the risk of climate induced emergencies, and increasung residual income significantly espescially for tbe poorest, it would have a beneficial action on house builders to up their game so houses for purchase exceeded the standards of social housing. Cost per dwelling at contruction, approx £500 to £2000, but pays for itself within 5 to 10 years depending on energy source used.
The nuclear ‘shelter under the kitchen table’ in the 1970’s or whenever it was, makes today’s tinned food advice almost rational and sensible in comparison<p>
We have survived 40 years since the nuclear advice – and maybe govt is getting marginally less stupid. <p>
But that’s hardly a courageous state..Cold comfort.
How did we sink so low as a country, when you compare it to Switzerland! Switzerland keeps national compulsory food reserves to cover average national requirements for three to four months. And has bunker’s for all it’s 9 million population!
It all puts me in mind of this film – don’t forget to stock up on black sacks! https://youtu.be/-Aecq410vzk?is=nEcs-V6GOJLofhC2
The National Emergency Briefing campaign is seeking to achieve step one above (for climate) by getting the government to brief the nation on primetime about the climate emergency. The petition calling for it has already reached 112,000 signatures which means that it will be considered for debate in parliament. There have already been 2,500 screenings of the associated film which covers impacts on food, the economy, national security, weather extremes etc. If we can achieve step one then steps two and three should be a little easier. You can check for a screening near you at https://www.nebriefing.org/screening-map and see the briefings on other pages.
My husband’s grandmother stocked up on bags of sugar before the war. She put it under her double bed. The whole space was taken up by bags of sugar. It was still there when she died in the late 1990s!
🙂
Manchesterism is the end of neoliberalism according to Andy Burnham on the campaign trail.
Presumably the PM thinks that what he is doing now is ending neoliberalism so someone make sense of that. Different people have their own ideas about what things mean I guess.
“Manchesterism is the end of neoliberalism”
It seems more like the Manchester School to me.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manchester_Liberalism
Filling my inbox with comments
The LinkedIn post for this has the wrong blog post linked to it.
I have deleted it. It would not let me edit it. I have no idea why.