Update on the conversation with Philip
The Goon in charge of Opoho
Go here for the context of this “conversation”.
Suggestions for how to react to this in the comments, thanks.
Dear Richard,
I'm sorry to say that the mask mandate both for council candidates and others coming along is strict. The mask mandate is the policy for the meeting and the present policy for the church's parish council, the church's governing body.
Confirmation in writing that the mask mandate will be followed is required as part of the response to the invitation to candidates.
What that now means is the invitation is withdrawn for you, and we will not be seeing you at the election meeting.
I'm happy to put an apology for you should wish.
Regards
Philip.
Update: I have sent a missive.
I have no idea why you would think that I'd want to get you to give an apology for me, Philip. Maybe you should apologise for yourself considering that you don't care too much for your potential audience.
But I am planning a more substantive response.
Even the COVID-19 Public Health Response (Protection Framework) Order 2021 (SL 2021/386), [sofar as it is lawful, but it is what the likes of Phlip rely on, not having read it] recognises (Section 11. 3(a)(ii)) that wearing a mask may not suit, so doesn't need to be done, cannot be demanded.
Exemptions to masks are broad and wide-ranging in the current legislation. (I expect that's by design because the half-wits enforcing it have some idea of the legal liabilities if they didn't.)
Not being a lawyer I can't comment on any legal warfare that may be appropriate, but that's the angle I'd press here.
Banning a candidate from a debate leading up to an election by refusing to honor a mask exemption would be pretty silly of Philip and lead to lots of bad publicity.