With its stable majority Government, Britain can make calm decisions about coronavirus
sir – We are able to respond to this epidemic in the way we are because, unlike most of the rest of Europe, we have a Government with a strong majority and five years still to run.
This means that it can make a decision, has ownership of that decision and will pay the penalty if it turns out to be wrong.
Far better this than to be at the mercy a weak Government that has to pander to all sorts of internal and external pressures.
Anthony Singlehurst
London SE11
sir – Let’s have a daily briefing from the chief scientific adviser, Sir Patrick Vallance. Rather like Ian Mcdonald (the MOD press spokesman) during the Falklands War, he would calm anxieties with reassuring, matter-offact bulletins.
Joanna Whatley
Charing, Kent
sir – Martin Hibberd, professor of emerging infectious disease at the
London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, is quoted saying: “We know from China that aggressive curtailment policies can work to reduce numbers [of those infected]” (Paul Nuki, Analysis, March 13).
How can we trust China’s assurances that its measures were effective, and that those who are now going back to work are truly safe? It is a country of total surveillance and information control, and any figures it publishes are suspect.
This pandemic started because the Chinese government first attempted to suppress news of the coronavirus outbreak. The rest of the world is now suffering as a result.
Robert Frazer
Salford, Lancashire
sir – As an 80-year-old with underlying health problems and living on my own, I’m in the most vulnerable bracket.
I therefore find it really unnerving and disheartening to learn that the only course of action I can take should
I contract coronavirus is to self-isolate – and face the prospect of dying alone.
Jeremy Somers
Chipping Norton, Oxfordshire
sir – As a 90-year-old doctor who qualified in 1953, I have been reflecting on how we would have reacted to a coronavirus epidemic in those days. The answer is not at all, for three main reasons.
The Covid-19 virus could not have been identified rapidly enough, if at all. Most cases would have been too mild to attract attention in this season of coughs and sneezes. And the small proportion of deaths among elderly people with chronic respiratory disease would have remained much as usual for the time of year.
It follows that there would have been no alarm or countermeasures. International trade and travel would have carried on as usual. World stock markets would not have collapsed. And governments would not have needed to get involved.
As it is today, we know too much about the coronavirus for our own good, but almost nothing about treating its victims or preventing its spread.
Dr George Birdwood
Shipton Moyne, Gloucestershire
sir – Nick Rose (Letters, March 13) is right to highlight the deficiencies of train lavatories during the coronavirus pandemic. Last week I travelled from Sheffield to London first class on East Midlands Railway. The soap dispenser was empty and the tap water was cold. Need I say more?
Dr J HF Smith
Sheffield, South Yorkshire
sir – I am delighted that French politicians have eschewed handshaking. I’m not so pleased that the local baker in our ski resort is handling both baguettes and money with the same unprotected, unwashed hands. But the bread is so delicious that it is easy to overcome one’s scruples
Jane Cullinan
Padstow, Cornwall