In Brief

Government’s reliance on ‘following the science’ in Covid response cost lives, says report

Think tank finds that ministers’ refusal to take responsibility for decisions resulted in UK going into lockdown too late

The UK government’s failure to act in the “absence of scientific certainty” during the initial coronavirus outbreak cost a “significant” number of lives, a new report claims.

Researchers from the Institute for Government (IfG) who analysed the UK’s early response to the pandemic found that ministers “lacked a wider sense of strategy” and failed to take responsibility for the national response.

As the Daily Mail reports, “ministers repeatedly claimed they were being ‘led by the science’ after making tough and controversial decisions from closing schools to advising against face masks”.

Another such decision was not to test 25,000 hospital patients who were discharged into care homes. Downing Street “said it did not test them because the ‘scientific advice’ was that asymptomatic transmission was uncommon”, but “critics accused the government of trying to shift blame and abdicate their political duty”, the newspaper adds. 

Those claims appear to be backed up by the IfG report, which also criticises the government’s “heavy reliance” on the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) and notes that the group “frequently pointed out the limits of their knowledge”.  

“Gaps in the evidence base, some of Sage’s operating methods and the impact of politics on Sage’s work all inhibited earlier school closures and lockdown,” the report says.

The think tank “also claimed the government’s response to the pandemic had a lack of foresight”, says The Telegraph.

Although plans for schools closures and social distancing were discussed in February, the government did not work out “key aspects of making them work” such as remote-learning for schoolchildren, the IfG found.

The newly published report is equally damning about Health Secretary Matt Hancock’s ambition of reaching 100,000 tests per day by the end of April. 

According to the London Evening Standard, the think tank concluded that the plan “had not been well thought through as the diagnostics industry and the NHS were not consulted before the decision was made”.

Recommended

The favourites to replace Boris Johnson
Boris Johnson, Rishi Sunak, Sajid Javid
In Depth

The favourites to replace Boris Johnson

Johnson’s premiership ‘on the brink’ as Sunak and Javid resign
​Sajid Javid and Rishi Sunak have quit Boris Johnson’s government
In Depth

Johnson’s premiership ‘on the brink’ as Sunak and Javid resign

Boris Johnson and his trouble with the truth
Boris Johnson at the weekly cabinet meeting today
Why we’re talking about . . .

Boris Johnson and his trouble with the truth

‘Go-slow’ protesters: who they are and what they want
Traffic on an a-road
Fact file

‘Go-slow’ protesters: who they are and what they want

Popular articles

Are we heading for World War Three?
Ukrainian soldiers patrol on the frontline in Zolote, Ukraine
In Depth

Are we heading for World War Three?

What happened to Logan Mwangi?
Tributes left to Logan Mwangi
Today’s big question

What happened to Logan Mwangi?

Nato vs. Russia: who would win in a war?
Nato troops
Today’s big question

Nato vs. Russia: who would win in a war?

The Week Footer Banner