Tonight:
4°c
Let's not panic - at least, not yet
29 Apr 2009The very possibility that swine fever has reached Clapham has brought the global scare uncomfortably close to home in London. But although the threat of contracting the virus is real and must be provided against and the very word "pandemic" arouses alarm, we should keep the level of risk in perspective.
In Mexico, the official tally of deaths is about 160. As yet there have been no recorded deaths elsewhere from the virus, though this is likely to change in the near future.
The Government's job, then, as it prepares to issue explanatory leaflets about the virus to households throughout the country, is both to encourage prudent precautions against swine flu and to discourage hysterical over-reaction to it, a reaction likely to be intensified by the bulk order of millions of blue anti-infection masks.
Nonetheless, the country is well-prepared to deal with large numbers of cases in terms of its stock of anti-viral treatments. One area where the public awareness campaigns will do real good is in airports: the virus may be carried by travellers from infected areas, including the US.
In fact, swine flu may not have derived primarily from pigs at all - scientists talk of a virus containing strains from birds and humans as well as swine - though if it causes us to look again at industrial methods of pork production that would be a benefit.
The real risk now is that humans may infect pigs. Still, a name matters: the information campaign should make clear that eating British pork is safe.
But it is up to us, the public, to limit the threat from the disease: by monitoring travellers from overseas, by keeping trips to Mexico to a minimum, by following Department of Health guidelines regarding symptoms.
Here, the fact that the national flu helpline is not yet ready is vexatious. Still, the truth is that we are far more likely to die in a road accident than of swine flu. Keep calm, and carry on.
Gurkhas' deserts
There are a number of fights that no sane government should take on. One is with the Gurkhas.
They not only have a formidable fighting record, having served with the British army since 1815, they also enjoy remarkable public support for their bid to be allowed to live here. They are perhaps the only popular group of would-be immigrants. The Liberal Democrats have tabled a Commons motion today to debate the question.
The issue concerns the right of Gurkhas to settle in Britain; so far, those who served in the Army before 1997 have been denied the possibility of living here unless they meet stringent criteria including long service and bravery medals. The Immigration Minister, Phil Woolas, has said that any further liberalisation would allow perhaps as many as 100,000 people, including families, to come here. The Gurkhas dispute that figure.
The Government's shambolic record on immigration has radically changed the demography of the UK in a decade. The 36,000 Gurkhas who would be affected by changing the rules is a trivial number by comparison. The Gurkhas fought and died for Britain. They deserve to live here if they want to. Simple as that.
A new Laureate?
The rumpus about the appointment of a new Poet Laureate - which, as we report today, has resulted from a premature Whitehall leak that the post is to be offered to Carol Ann Duffy - has made the appointment even more controversial than it was.
The present Poet Laureate, Andrew Motion, is stepping down after 10 years and there is a consensus, which he shares, that the official births-deaths-and-state occasions poetry he wrote in the job were not his best work.
Yet the post is worth preserving simply because it shows that, as a nation, we value poetry and wish to honour its best practitioners. That makes it worthwhile.
