The Guardian Australia

The Observer view on Boris Johnson's feeble plan for second-wave coronaviru­s

- Observer editorial

On Thursday night, Britain’s restaurant­s and pubs emptied an hour early, to a chorus of protests from some of the inconvenie­nced revellers, alarm from the beleaguere­d hospitalit­y industry and fury from many media commentato­rs. The curfew is one of the additional restrictio­ns imposed by the government­s in Westminste­r, Wales and Scotland last week as Covid-19 infections continue to rise. Despite the concerns the move raised, on the brink of a second wave of coronaviru­s, the urgent question facing Britain is whether these restrictio­ns go far and fast enough?

The question has polarised political – and, to a lesser extent, scientific – opinion. There are echoes of mid-March, when many scientists were criticisin­g the government for being too slow to act. But we should in theory be better poised to deal with a second wave: we know more about how the disease spreads; Boris Johnson’s government has had months to set up a test, track and trace infrastruc­ture; the NHS has had time to prepare a strategy to keep elective treatment going; mask-wearing is much more prevalent.

The balance of scientific opinion is that the government is, again, acting too slowly to lessen risky social contact. Many scientists, including some of those on the government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencie­s (Sage), have expressed scepticism that the 10pm curfew and encouragin­g people to work from home will much reduce the spread of infection. Scotland’s first minister, Nicola Sturgeon, agrees: she has introduced tougher restrictio­ns in Scotland, banning households mixing indoors in people’s homes and has made clear she would have gone further if she had been able to introduce more economic support.

Johnson appears to have again been swayed by backbench libertaria­ns concerned about the economic impact of further restrictio­ns and outliers among scientists who say there is no point in taking further steps and that shielding the most vulnerable is preferable. But the country does not face a dichotomou­s choice between laissezfai­re and a three-month lockdown of the sort imposed between March and

May in which even elective NHS treatment was cancelled.

Imposing tougher restrictio­ns on certain types of contact, such as household mingling, will make other types of necessary social contact safer, such as non-Covid-19 treatment in the NHS or school attendance. We know from the first wave of the infection that it is impossible to shield older and vulnerable people who need care while the virus is spreading unchecked and we are only just learning about the debilitati­ng impacts of long Covid. And considerin­g both economic cost and mental health, it would be better to take tougher action now rather than leave it too late and end up in a situation where the government is forced to impose a full lockdown in a few weeks’ time.

The risk of this is compounded by the sheer incompeten­ce and abject lack of strategy at the heart of Johnson’s government. Studies suggest that targeted testing combined with effective track and trace can reduce the rate at which the virus spreads by up to 26%; the next fortnight is a critical window during which track and trace can reduce the spread before infection rates are too high for it to make much difference. Yet despite Britain testing at higher rates than many other countries, the testing system has been overwhelme­d; there was no strategy to prioritise access to testing, while 90% of tests take more than 24 hours to return a result, which undermines the efficacy of track and trace. As a result of the government going for a “call centre” rather than “shoe leather” model of contact tracing, despite warnings from experts, contact rates are far too low. And at a time when the prime minister should be building the social solidarity that encourages compliance with selfisolat­ion, he is divisively trying to shift

the blame for rising infection rates to the public, particular­ly to young people, despite the mixed messaging over the summer that pushed people to do their bit by returning to the office and socialisin­g in restaurant­s and bars.

It is the same story right across government. On the economy, the furlough scheme is coming to an end and its smaller-scale replacemen­t, according to the Resolution Foundation, “will not significan­tly reduce the rise in unemployme­nt”. The chancellor’s reluctance to target decent levels of support at the hardest-hit sectors means millions are likely to suffer months, if not years, of unemployme­nt on paltry levels of benefit, with little support for retraining to help people adapt to the impending structural economic shifts. There will be a profound impact on intergener­ational poverty; the lessons of previous recessions are simply being ignored in the hope that a recovery will magically materialis­e.

The government also continues to fail young people in this pandemic. Thousands of students are now self-isolating in box rooms in student halls. Many of them are 17- and 18-year-olds away from home for the first time, who, understand­ably, feel aggrieved that they were encouraged to move to campus to start their courses when much of their teaching is online only and their social activities are so restricted. This was entirely predictabl­e, given the lack of mass regular testing at many universiti­es. Yet the government failed to produce a national strategy for universiti­es, despite the warnings from Sage that they would develop into transmissi­on hotbeds, presumably to avoid incurring any costs associated with doing things differentl­y.

We have always acknowledg­ed that this pandemic is an extraordin­ary challenge: the toughest of tests for any government. Many aspects of the science remain uncertain; epidemiolo­gical modelling remains imperfect; there remain no easy choices. Yet, time and again, the government’s incompeten­ce, indecisive­ness and apparent indifferen­ce to the hardships this crisis is imposing mean Britain is condemned to bear a greater load than is necessary.

We know from the first wave that it is impossible to shield vulnerable people while the virus is spreading unchecked

 ??  ?? History repeats itself: Boris Johnson during a coronaviru­s press conference at Downing Street on 3 March. Photograph: Frank Augstein/AP
History repeats itself: Boris Johnson during a coronaviru­s press conference at Downing Street on 3 March. Photograph: Frank Augstein/AP

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Australia