The Guardian view on responding to the Covid-19 surge: not enough
The contrast between the good news and the bleak could not have been starker. The UK’s approval of the lowcost, highly efficacious Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine represents a shining moment of hope. Never has it been more needed.
The announcement came as ambulances queued for hours outside overwhelmed hospitals in London and Birmingham, and Essex declared a major incident due to the pressure on health services. For a second day, more than 50,000 cases were recorded, along with 981 deaths. The number of hospitalised patients, at 23,771, has surpassed the first-wave peak and is almost certainly still rising; the impact of the reckless Christmas relaxation has yet to be felt. As grim as the picture is, it could soon become much worse: this is, as Professor Jonathan Van-Tam warned, a very dangerous situation.
The acceleration of vaccination made possible by the rollout of the Oxford/AstraZeneca product is essential to protect frontline medics. It offers a broader opportunity to escape the nightmarish cycle of delayed lockdowns, premature easing and resurging cases – if we are willing to seize it. It makes the case for the strongest action to restrict transmission more, rather than less, compelling.
The extension of tier 4 to areas including Greater Manchester, the northeast, Midlands and south-west is a start – but still too timid. Tier 4 will now cover three-quarters of the English population, with almost everyone else in tier 3. The government appears to be edging towards a national lockdown when it should be implementing it now, as the group of experts calling themselves Independent Sage has urged. The reluctance may reflect Matt Hancock’s promise that MPs would have a vote on such measures “where possible”, and an unwillingness to spend any more to offset the inevitably punitive effects on local economies. But when areas in tier 4 are still seeing cases rise sharply, and an analysis by experts at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine has predicted that even weeks of tier 4 restrictions across the whole of England would not bring the R value below 1, it cannot stand.
Delaying the return to school comes at an immense cost to the wellbeing of children, particularly poorer ones, as well as affecting the ability of their parents to work, with women bearing the brunt. The government said that it would prioritise keeping schools open. It did not. The result is that closing primaries in badly hit areas to most pupils for the next fortnight is necessary, especially given suggestions that the new variant may be more transmissible among children; it should have been done more broadly. Even if the mass-testing programme for secondary pupils goes smoothly, their return by 18 January (and for exam years by 11 January) is a hugely ambitious undertaking. Testing will have to be repeated weekly. Much more must be given to support online learning: the Department for Education’s performance in the first lockdown was dismal.
The longer the government delays, the harder it will be to bring the virus back under control and the greater the price paid in lives and health – as the UK’s record to date demonstrates. Better by far to act swiftly and then relax measures if possible. A lockdown would also bring clarity when many are befuddled by constantly changing tiers, rules and advice. Decisive, timely measures are needed, clearly communicated to the public, and with explanations of why they are necessary and the provision of resources to allow people to comply. As welcome as the new vaccine is, scientists and medics can only help us if we help ourselves.