At 7pm last Friday, I was enjoying a pint with friends when, suddenly, and very loudly, everybody’s phone began blaring out the emergency alert tone.
It was a strange and surreal moment. There was genuine concern on people’s faces. They recognised the sound, but what was happening? Was Russia declaring war? Was there a terrorist attack? Was there an immediate threat to our safety that required us to stop whatever we were doing?
Then concern quickly turned to raised eyebrows and lots of mutterings in the pub of ‘how ridiculous’ as it became clear that the national emergency alert system was being used to tell us not to have barbecues or light unnecessary fires.
I am not, for one moment, minimising the risk. Britain has endured exceptionally hot and dry conditions. Serious fires elsewhere have destroyed homes, while our firefighters and emergency services have faced enormous pressure.
Although Fylde has fortunately not experienced wildfires, the effects of the dry weather across our area are obvious. Farmers are struggling as crops and grass fail to grow, with serious consequences for livestock, food production and rural livelihoods.
People must act responsibly. Disposable barbecues, bonfires and carelessly discarded cigarettes can start devastating fires in these conditions. That message has already been communicated.
Frankly, anyone who uses a disposable barbecue in tinder-dry conditions is behaving like an idiot. But an emergency alert will not stop those people from being idiots. Those reckless enough to ignore repeated warnings from fire services, councils and the media are unlikely to change because everybody’s phone suddenly makes a terrifying noise.
This is not what the system was introduced for. Emergency alerts are deliberately loud and frightening because they should signal an immediate, potentially life-threatening danger requiring urgent action, not provide another channel for general public-safety advice.
Some cynics have suggested the Government used the alert to divert attention from failures elsewhere, including illegal immigration and early prisoner releases. I cannot know whether that influenced the decision. However, the fact that many people find the suggestion plausible demonstrates how badly public trust has deteriorated.
Whatever the motivation, using the system in this way carries real risks. People may become accustomed to the siren, dismiss future warnings or disable alerts altogether. The next message could concern a terrorist attack, catastrophic flooding, a chemical leak or anything that poses a direct and immediate threat to life.
This is the classic danger of crying wolf. Once confidence in an emergency warning system is lost, rebuilding it will be extremely difficult.
