WE'RE becoming accustomed to apologies from politicians that aren't really apologies.
For the benefit of those who adopt this approach – and in the process take the public for fools – regret is not the same as contrition.
A proper apology is acknowledging what you said or did had consequences and that you're sorry not just for those consequences but for the initial remarks or actions.
The statement issued yesterday by the DUP press office on behalf of Edwin Poots, five days after he first suggested there was a link between high instances of Covid-19 and the nationalist community, was sophistry, a convoluted collection of words in which he sought to blame everybody but himself for the reaction to what were unfounded and offensive comments.
He attempted to pass the buck onto Sinn Féin, claiming republicans "tried to distort and twist" what he said, ignoring the fact that representatives from all the other executive parties condemned his words, while the basis of his claim was debunked by scientists.
It's also worth highlighting that it was Mr Poots who introduced Sinn Féin representatives' attendance at Mass into the conversation unprompted, after being quizzed on the basis for his remarks by The Irish News.
Signing off his statement by again mentioning the Bobby Storey funeral was churlish and unnecessary, merely devaluing any sincerity he may have wished to convey. He couldn't put the spade down without digging a little deeper.
Meanwhile, Arlene Foster, who has been conspicuous by her absence as this row has raged for almost a week, said it was right that Mr Poots had "clarified" his comments.
So by saying he didn't "attribute the spread of Covid-19 to religion" it would appear he still contends that the virus is more prevalent in nationalist areas on the simple basis of who the largest party is
in any particular council area. A schoolboy error in which he confused a correlation with causation.
Mrs Foster has rightly stressed that the virus does not recognise religion or political affiliation but she hasn't said the agriculture minister's comments were plain wrong and that he shouldn't have made them. Her authority once again undermined by light touch leadership.
She hopes that Mr Poots' statement will be the "end of the matter" and perhaps after today we may hear no more of his amateur epidemiology.
Yet combined with other dissent from within her party and scepticism around the efficacy of the latest restrictions, the cumulative effect is to dilute the executive's public health message and the DUP leader's ability to reiterate that message convincingly.
The genie can never be put back in the bottle but there has been a clear failure on Mrs Foster's part to act quickly and decisively.
