EU virus failings

Grant Frazer (Letters, 2 May) tells us that the EU demonstrated how its existence and history enabled it to respond swiftly to coronavirus to the benefit of member states.

The exact opposite is the case. According to Prof Matthais Mattijs, professor of international political economy at the John Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, the EU initial response was very slow, uncoordinated and did not show much intra-eu solidarity.

Initially, because of its commitment to open borders Europe did not want quarantine restrictions to prevent people moving between countries. This became especially problematical when neighbouring countries had conflicting quarantine policies. For example, for a while Belgium had a ban on going to bars and restaurants but the Netherlands did not, resulting in people from Belgium crossing the border for a night out.

The inaction of the EU was so poor that it created a void that the Chinese and the Russians tried to fill by sending supplies and medical advisers. this created the perception that the EU couldn’t do it themselves.

Financially, the initial reluctance by the European Central Bank to intervene in Italian bond markets caused panic among financial market participants. Prof Matthijs said: “Austerity is literally killing Italian and Spanish citizens because they simply do not have the public health capacity to deal with the coronavirus outbreak.”

The coronavirus crisis has reinforced just how much Scotland benefits from the broad shoulders of the UK and how the decision to come out of the EU was the correct one.

DONALD LEWIS Gifford, East Lothian