Update Expected Soon

Update Expected Soon, Which Will Also Change Soon

Officials Promise Clarity Whilst Ensuring Continued Confusion

Government spokespersons have assured the public that a comprehensive update will be issued imminently, whilst simultaneously preparing revisions to that update before it’s been updated. The announcement about forthcoming announcements represents the latest iteration of promising promises about promises that will inevitably require promising different promises.

Definitive Statement to Replace Previous Definitive Statements

“We will be making a full statement shortly,” confirmed a minister who’s made seventeen full statements this month, each contradicting the previous sixteen. “This statement will provide the clarity people deserve, until we provide the different clarity they’ll deserve after we’ve reconsidered what clarity means.”

Press officers have prepared three versions of the upcoming update: the optimistic version, the realistic version, and the version they’ll actually use after the first two prove politically inconvenient. “We’re covering all bases,” explained communications directors. “Mainly by ensuring we can shift between bases depending on which base becomes untenable.”

“Government updates are like software updates,” said James Acaster. “They promise improvements, change everything you’re used to, and somehow make things worse.”

Timeline Established for Revising Timeline

A detailed schedule has been published showing when updates will occur, when those updates will be updated, and when the updated updates will require updating. “We’re committed to keeping people informed,” assured officials committed to keeping people confused. “The roadmap clearly shows we’ll reach our destination, even though the destination keeps moving and the map keeps being redrawn.”

Civil servants have compiled a comprehensive chronology of projected announcements, featuring dates ranging from “imminent” through “in due course” to the refreshingly honest “when we’ve figured out what to say.” The document spans forty-three pages despite conveying essentially zero information about anything specific.

“I love how ‘soon’ means anything from five minutes to five years,” said Ed Byrne. “It’s the most flexible word in government. Well, that and ‘robust.'”

Current Guidance Valid Until Replaced by Different Guidance

Citizens have been advised to follow existing protocols whilst preparing for new protocols that will replace existing protocols before being replaced themselves by newer protocols. “Stability is crucial,” stressed ministers whose average tenure is fourteen months. “Which is why we’re constantly changing everything to maintain stable instability.”

The government website now features a banner reading “Information on this page is accurate as of this morning and may be completely wrong by this afternoon,” representing unprecedented honesty about governmental dishonesty regarding governmental accuracy.

Stakeholders Consulted on Changes to Consultation Process

Extensive discussions have been held with interested parties about proposed modifications to how interested parties will be consulted about proposed modifications. “We value input,” confirmed officials valuing input into how input will be valued. “That’s why we’re seeking feedback on our feedback mechanisms for collecting feedback on feedback.”

“Consultations are brilliant,” said Sarah Millican. “The government asks what you think, ignores what you think, then does what they were going to do anyway but blames you for it.”

Community forums generated 8,000 responses suggesting the government stop constantly changing guidance. “Excellent feedback,” celebrated administrators preparing to change guidance. “This tells us people want consistency, which we’ll consistently ignore whilst consistently promising consistency.”

Emergency Meetings Scheduled to Reschedule Emergency Meetings

Crisis response teams have convened to determine optimal timing for future crisis response meetings about timing of crisis responses. “The situation is evolving,” noted officials whose situations are always evolving. “Which means our response must evolve to match the evolution, requiring evolved meetings about evolutionary responses to evolving evolutions.”

Ministerial diaries have been triple-booked with conflicting commitments to announce contradictory policies addressing incompatible priorities. “Time management is crucial,” stressed ministers managing time by being in three places simultaneously making three different promises to three different audiences.

“Cabinet meetings must be fun,” said Frankie Boyle. “Everyone pretending they know what’s happening whilst frantically checking their phones to find out what’s happening.”

Leaked Documents Reveal Plans to Leak Different Documents

Internal memos accidentally released to journalists detail strategies for selectively releasing different internal memos to different journalists at different times for different purposes. “These leaks are completely unauthorised,” declared officials who authorised the leaks. “The actual authorised leaks will come later, probably contradicting these unauthorised leaks we definitely didn’t authorise.”

The BBC reports having received seventeen different versions of upcoming policy announcements, none compatible with each other, all supposedly definitive. “We’re used to this,” sighed political editors. “We just publish all seventeen and let readers decide which contradictory version they prefer believing.”

“Journalism is writing history’s first draft,” said Russell Howard. “Except the government keeps editing the draft, then denying the draft existed, then releasing a different draft.”

Opposition Demands Updated Updates About Updating Updates

Shadow ministers have called for immediate clarity about when clarity will be provided regarding previous calls for clarity that were promised clarity which never materialised. “The public deserves answers,” declared opposition frontbenchers who’d provide equally evasive answers if given the opportunity, which they won’t be, so they can safely demand answers they’d never provide.

Parliamentary exchanges have devolved into circular arguments about circular arguments, with both sides accusing each other of going in circles whilst demonstrating perfect circular motion themselves. “The Honourable Member is avoiding the question,” accused MPs avoiding the question about avoiding questions.

Press Conference Announces Press Conference About Press Conferences

A hastily arranged media briefing revealed plans for a comprehensive media briefing about optimising media briefing schedules. “We recognise communication could be better,” communicated officials communicating poorly about better communication. “That’s why we’re communicating our commitment to improved communication via this communication about communications.”

“Press conferences are performance art,” said David Mitchell. “Bad performance art where the audience throws questions and the performer dodges them like bullets in The Matrix.”

Journalists have begun taking bets on how many times officials will say “in due course” before providing actual information. Current odds suggest infinity, with bookmakers refusing bets on the grounds that nobody would ever collect winnings because the answer will always be “in due course.”

International Partners Confused by British Commitment to Confusion

Foreign governments have expressed bewilderment at Westminster’s approach to policy consistency, which apparently involves consistently being inconsistent about consistency. “We ask for Britain’s position on matters,” noted one European diplomat, “and receive seven different positions by teatime, all contradicting each other, all supposedly official.”

The NATO Secretary General has reportedly given up seeking UK input on strategic planning, instead waiting to see what Britain says, then what Britain says about what Britain said, then what Britain actually does, which usually bears no resemblance to either statement.

“The British are very polite,” said Henning Wehn. “They’ll promise you everything, deliver nothing, apologise profusely, then promise to promise better promises next time.”

Public Advised to Check Updates for Updated Update Updates

Citizens have been instructed to regularly consult official channels for the latest guidance about when latest guidance will be issued regarding upcoming changes to guidance about guidance. “Information is power,” announced officials withholding information. “Which is why we’re empowering people by providing information about how we’ll provide information about information.”

Mobile apps have been developed to alert users about updates, with notifications arriving seventeen times daily confirming that no updates have occurred but updates about updates are forthcoming. Downloads exceeded three million, with users compulsively refreshing screens displaying messages confirming there’s nothing to refresh.

“We’re addicted to information,” said Katherine Ryan. “Specifically, addicted to being told information is coming, which is somehow more satisfying than actual information.”

Think Tanks Think About Thinking About Updates

Research institutions have published competing analyses of why governmental updates lack substance whilst generating substantial analysis of insubstantial updates. “Our findings are clear,” declared policy wonks whose findings are anything but clear. “The government needs to communicate better by communicating differently about communication, which we’ll analyse in our next report about reports about reports.”

Academic papers have examined the linguistic evolution of governmental evasion, tracing phrases like “in due course” back through centuries of British tradition avoiding answering questions. “It’s cultural,” explained historians. “We’ve been promising updates that change since medieval times. It’s practically our national sport, after queuing and complaining about weather.”

Technology Solutions Deployed to Automate Confusion

Artificial intelligence systems have been implemented to generate contradictory statements more efficiently than human ministers can manage. “The AI is remarkable,” celebrated developers. “It can produce seventeen incompatible policy positions before breakfast, freeing ministers to focus on denying they made any policy positions over breakfast.”

“AI in government is terrifying,” said Romesh Ranganathan. “Not because robots will take over. Because they might actually be more consistent than politicians, which sets an incredibly low bar.”

Blockchain enthusiasts have suggested distributed ledger technology could solve government accountability by creating immutable records of promises. Officials rejected the proposal on grounds that immutable records would prevent them from pretending previous promises never existed.

Next Steps Involve Stepping Toward Different Next Steps

Future plans include planning future plans about planning, with strategies focusing on strategic approaches to strategising strategic strategies. “We’re being very strategic,” confirmed strategists whose strategy involves avoiding commitment to any specific strategy. “The strategy is to remain strategically flexible about strategic flexibility.”

Implementation frameworks have been developed to implement frameworks for implementing implementation, with pilot programmes testing whether testing pilot programmes provides useful information about programmes needing pilots. Early results suggest more testing is needed, which will be tested via additional testing frameworks.

“Government planning is an oxymoron,” said Jo Brand. “Like ‘military intelligence’ or ‘civil service efficiency.’ The words sound professional but together mean absolutely nothing.”

Updates Will Continue Until Updates Improve

Officials have pledged to keep updating updates until updates no longer require updating, at which point they’ll update the update process to ensure updates continue being updated. “We’re committed to transparency,” declared ministers transparently committed to opacity. “Which means transparently committing to whatever commitment seems most transparently beneficial at any transparent moment.”

The cycle is expected to continue indefinitely, with each update generating need for further updates addressing issues created by previous updates that were supposed to address issues from earlier updates. “It’s sustainable,” argued sustainability advisers. “An infinite loop of promising and disappointing. Very British, very traditional, very pointless.”

“The definition of insanity is doing the same thing expecting different results,” said Dara Ó Briain. “Which makes British politics clinically insane, but at least we’re consistently insane about being inconsistent.”

In related developments, another update is expected shortly regarding when the next update will be updated, with that update expected to be updated soon after being issued, probably before anyone has time to read the update being updated. Citizens are advised to remain patient, remain confused, and remain unsurprised when promised updates change unexpectedly, which is the only thing that never changes unexpectedly.

Context: This satirical piece lampoons the governmental practice of perpetually promising imminent updates and guidance that invariably change before, during, or immediately after being issued. The phenomenon became particularly pronounced during pandemic communications, where shifting scientific understanding combined with political expediency created continuous cycles of revised guidance that undermined public confidence in official communications. The pattern reflects broader institutional tendencies toward reactive policymaking, inconsistent messaging, and the prioritisation of appearing responsive over providing consistent, reliable information to citizens navigating complex situations.

Auf Wiedersehen, amigo!