Janet DALEY

Lockdown was already collapsing, so Boris had to act to save his own authority Did he take back control (to adapt a slogan) or is he scrambling to keep up with public opinion? There is an odd paradox here which makes for a political dilemma: the better the news gets about declining rates of cases and falling numbers of deaths, the more people come to their own conclusion about the true degree of danger.

It is clear from those famous queues at the newly opened shops, the crowds at beaches and the sense of normality that is returning to the streets that the population is simply not buying the theme of mortal dread and universal doom any longer. Had the Prime Minister insisted on persevering with the lockdown, it is very likely that it would have gradually − or perhaps suddenly − collapsed under the weight of its contradictions. So many of the rules seemed arbitrary, illogical and, most importantly, inhumane that the system could not be sustained for anything but the shortest time in which the crisis could be convincingly depicted as a critical emergency.

So here we are with a moderated easing of the lockdown in which a good many of the most unpleasant rules will vanish. Families will now be able to meet both sets of grandparents − but not at the same time.

The predicted venues will also be back in business even if their staff do have to look like visiting aliens for the purpose. But interestingly, Mr Johnson did, quite emphatically, not rule out the possibility of a return to the full monty of total national lockdown, which was something it was expected he would avoid. Little local lockdowns to deal with little local flare-ups were what was thought to be the reasonable alternative.

But no, he sounded like a schoolteacher saying: “I won’t hesitate to put the whole class in detention if there is even the slightest hint of trouble in any corner of the classroom.” I wonder if he really believes that this would be feasible, either socially or economically. It seems more like a desperate attempt to insist that he is still in charge when that is precisely what is in question.