Doesn't stand up for one second. In today's world members of the government can't even have an affair, or look at porn on their PC (Damien Green) without it being leaked and turned into a national story - to think they can just casually pull this sort of thing off, is tantamount to impossible, it doesn't stand up for a second and never has.
For some reason you haven't understood. I'll repeat - they are briefed and do as they are told. They aren't running the show or writing the script. So there's nothing outwardly conspiratorial about the government "taking the advice of the experts". It's quite easy to steer politicians that have no qualms about going with what they feel will be popular, instead of determining the truth, isn't it? Look at the reaction to May's statement on March 12th in the Commons. Right, there's the truth, now nobody say anything different or question it. With it involving chemical weapons and few experts on the subject, it's even easier. None of them know anything about it, but being politicians, don't want to admit ignorance by questioning the experts. Thing is, they don't get direct access to the experts, or all the experts, either. Only what's filtered through to them.
Do you get daily briefs about ongoing operations in MI5 through media/other source?
Did you get the transcripts of the Cobra meetings where spy chiefs will have briefed the cabinet on best course of action/reaction?
Or do you just get what they want the public to believe through the public relations people (politicians) who know nothing about chemical weapons or the full extent of Sergei Skripal's activities, like the majority of us?
Hope you get my point now, so you can choose to agree or disagree with what I'm actually saying, instead of continuing to argue that the government couldn't be writing the script or conspiring because they'd be caught out by media, which is neither here nor there.
Put it this way; If you hated Russia so much, were in possession of Novichok and wanted to cause a false flag attack, with the intention of making Russia look very bad, causing serious implications and a major incident - why just attempt to kill a former spy and his daughter? It would make far more sense to poison 500 people to death randomly, that would do the job far more effectively than just killing a former spy.. That would wreck everything.
First of all, how did it turn out? Does Russia look good in your eyes? Did it not cause serious implications? Was it not a major incident?
Secondly, too many people, or children, and someone might object and spill the beans. It would be very risky, even if none of the required handful of players voiced objections, because they might inwardly object, keep it to themselves, and then leak the intended plan so that it wouldn't happen.
If Sergei was planning on switching sides (again), someone else would have reason to target him and send a message to others. Or if he was the, or one of the, Russian sources, that Christopher Steele obtained information from for that Trump dossier. Or if he was investigating Russian mafia operations in the UK (which would make both Russian mafia and any UK collaborators/beneficiaries, suspects).
You wish to believe Putin ordered it is likelier. Cool. You may even be right. It's just not the only possibility, no matter how much you want to narrow it down to Putin.