Spelling out the end of care?

THIS week I received a letter from the Department of Health and Social Security signed by the Rt Hon Sajid Javid, secretary of state.

Now I have to say at the outset that I have no doubt at all that this letter (Page One reproduced below) was sent in good faith, with honest intent to inform and reassure its audience. But...

It is five pages long (but three sheets double sided) and contains at a rough estimate 2,000 plus words. It is printed in about 10 point type, sans serif but at normal line spacing. It is easy to read but only if you have good eyesight and light.

It has been sent to all the vulnerable people on the NHS 'at risk' Covid-19 list. That is about 3 million people of which the majority will be over 70 years of age. 

Having been in the business years ago I know what the cost of such a letter can be and at today's prices and consultancy fees I am going to guess it at about £100 a word. No seriously! That's £200,000 just to create one copy....

But this is three pages of A4 and with a run length of maybe 3million - or 15million sheets of A4. To be honest, with the current shortage of wood, pulp and paper that is a lot of trees. 

Then there is the envelope, packaging, the franking process, the transportation to mailing depot, the cost of mail.

If each letter cost only £2 all in the total cost will be not far short of £10million. And the rest you may well say!

But my point is not even all of this - it is that the letter is an utter waste of time. It informs, but contains far too much information for any ordinary person to absorb. It is repetitive of past information already sent in earlier letters. It is over-inclined to justify earlier actions. And finally it actually ends up meaning just this:

YOU ARE NOW ON YOUR OWN.

In fact the last paragraph, almost certainly I will suggest, dictated by the political advisers, reads thus:

"I know the pandemic has been a  difficult time and recognise that it has been particularly hard if you have been advised to take extra precautions. The decision to include you as part of what was the clinically extremely vulnerable group was made to help keep you safe, based on the information we had at the time. I thank you for your efforts to keep yourself and others safe. Yours etc..."

I cannot help but draw attention to this line: The decision to include you as part of what was the clinically extremely vulnerable group...

"What was..."? So we are no longer clinically vulnerable? Rubbish. I may have been double jabbed and about to get a booster and had a 'flu jab but none of that changes my underlying and pre-existing conditions. At the last count that was 11 - of which three impact negatively on my immune system and two on my ability to weather a serious infection anyway.

Sorry Javid but this is wrong, extravagant and a politically unsound misuse of government funds and my identity. And it may leave far too many elderly, frail and, yes, vulnerable people living alone asking themselves.... why this? what next?