The new Health Secretary Sajid Javid has been forced to apologise for saying that it's good we no longer have to cower from the coronavirus.
The Labour Party, and some other groups connected with virus victims, have taken offence at the word 'cower'. And yet, considering how deadly the original and subsequent strains of this virus have turned out to be, I absolutely do feel that it's on par with bubonic plague and ebola and other diseases one might literally run from. Somehow the acute danger of death has been brushed aside. But this is a virus to fear, and I for one would still be frightened if it came too close. And until I was double-jabbed, I would have cowered. Even now, I would risk abuse in order to avoid contact with a person who foolishly thought the virus wasn't a problem. And I would shun any person who proudly declared that they had refused vaccination. They can court serious illness or death if they wish; I'm not going to be dragged down with them.
So I don't at all feel that 'cower' was an inappropriate word. And I think it's unfair and wrong that Mr Javid should have had to apologise for speaking the truth. Yes, he could have said a whole lot of more euphemistic and less explicit words that meant the same thing. But I prefer plain speaking. The virus was - and remains - potentially deadly. Of course you might cower. It's no insult to anyone to say so.
As for those who have been quick to pounce on anything a government politician might say, I feel only contempt. I am digusted with anyone who feigns offence, or who takes offence where clearly none was intended. Such tactics are akin to 'no-platforming' public speakers, and seem deliberately designed to pull down officials and others who have an important job to do, and important messages to get across. It's no good claiming hyper-sensitivity, and demanding fuzzy, soft-pillow language all the time. A politician - on duty on our behalf 24/7 - has to be given scope to use concise expressions and powerful imagery. Without any apology. As was needed during wartime. And the struggle against this coronavirus has been a modern war.
A pity that so many moaning, selfish members of the public haven't seen that a war is on, and that there will be civilian casualties if they don't do their bit. Indifference isn't an option. And carping about the inevitable discomforts, deprivations and inconveniences is so unhelpful. Nor is pained criticism of the war effort, in ways that gradually destroy the leadership team, a sensible and constructive response.
There have been so many warnings and predictions from trade lobbies and pressure groups. Pleas to get back to normal without further delay. All directed at the government. And yet these stern warnings and heartfelt pleas should be directed at all the anonymous people who are still spreading the virus by the way they behave. Or worse, discouraging others from doing the right thing.
But of course no member of the general public is ever to blame. Only the government is, with the focus illogically on its figurehead. As if Mr Johnson personally and gleefully sprays the streets nightly with fresh batches of Covid-19. Or uses cabinet meetings to think up new ways to blunder. (Some silly people might think he really does)
I keep wanting to ask who else could have done better in this pandemic. Seriously. Who, for instance, in the Labour Party? Who do they have? Which obvious Labour Dream Team has been waiting to go, with a ready-made, super-effective programme that would have avoided all those mistakes, all those 'U-turns', and all the waste of money and resources?
Of course, there is no such team. Only a partisan thirst to get back into power and then bumble along under a different logo. Or rather, resume factional in-fighting, the real business of a government in power.
I am confident that (a) the public will be weary enough of the Conservative Party at the next General Election to embrace an alternative government; and (b) every criticism justly levelled at this present government will be justly levelled at the next. Mark my words.
