- Lockdowns’ potential impact on society was not considered in 2020.
- The UK may not have been adequately prepared for the pandemic.
- Little thought was given to the consequences for education and the economy.
The “potentially massive impact” of lockdowns on society was not considered in 2020, according to the Covid inquiry’s principal attorney.
Hugo Keith KC told the government’s pandemic response inquiry that the UK may not have been “at all” prepared.
He added that it was “extraordinary” that lockdowns had received so little consideration.
According to government data, 227,321 British citizens have perished with Covid mentioned on their death certificates.
Mr. Keith stated at the initial public hearing that the virus was responsible for “death, misery, and unfathomable loss.”
While Covid was unavoidable, the key question was whether its impact on the UK was inevitable.
Mr. Keith told the inquiry that there was “very little debate” about whether a national lockdown would be necessary in advance of the pandemic or whether it could be avoided and that there was a failure to consider the consequences for education and the economy.
Mr. Keith addressed the inquiry on Tuesday before its first witnesses testified later in the week.
Its first topic, or module, will assess the readiness of the United Kingdom for Covid as of January 2020.
Mr. Keith stated, “Even at this point, before hearing the evidence. It is evident that we may not have been particularly well-prepared.”
Baroness Hallett, the inquiry’s chair, vowed that the investigation into the coronavirus pandemic response would be the “thorough investigation” that the public deserves.
The former High Court judge hailed the “dignified vigil” of bereaved family members who silently protested outside the building.
Lady Hallett stated that the “millions of people who have suffered and continue to suffer” need answers to the following three questions:
- Was the United Kingdom adequately ready for a pandemic?
- Was the response a suitable one?
- And are there lessons we can learn for the future?
In this initial phase of the investigation, prominent politicians, civil servants, scientists, unions, health and care organizations, groups representing victims and their families, and others, will provide testimony.
Covid-19 Bereaved Families for Justice has criticized the inquiry’s schedule, claiming that crucial evidence has been withheld from certain parties.
They deemed the Every Story Matters initiative, in which members of the public can share their experiences with the inquiry via a website, to be “inadequate” because stories will be anonymized and summarised, leaving them “vulnerable to bias and interpretation by third parties.”
Lady Hallett told critics of the investigation that she hoped they would appreciate the delicate balance she had to strike.
“I am listening to them, their loss will be acknowledged. And they will have the opportunity to contribute to the investigation.”
Investigative counsel Mr. Keith said the UK was “caught off guard” by “significant aspects” of the pandemic, including lockdowns.
“Even though the word ‘lockdown’ is eternally etched into the national psyche, there was little debate before the pandemic about whether a lockdown would be necessary in the event of a rogue virus, let alone how it could be avoided”.
If required, a national lockdown was not considered.
Equally, it appears that there was neglect to consider the potentially massive impact on education and the economy.
He questioned the NHS’s finances and preparedness for a pandemic like influenza in the UK.
Mr. Keith stated, “No amount of planning or foresight can guarantee that a country will not make mistakes when a disease strikes. But that does not mean we should not strive to be as prepared as is reasonable.”
“No country can be perfectly prepared, but it can certainly be underprepared.”
Mr. Keith highlighted “shocking” data indicating that Covid mortality was two-and-a-half times higher in some of the most deprived areas of the United Kingdom than in the richest, with people from certain ethnic minority groups or with a disability being significantly more likely to contract or perish from the disease.
He said the first module’s “big question” will be whether these events might have been predicted and prevented.
The broader political environment, including the potential impact of Brexit on emergency planning, will also be considered.
“Did the focus on the risks of a no-deal Brexit – known as Operation Yellowhammer – divert resources and capacity that should have been devoted to fighting the next pandemic?” Mr. Keith inquired.
“Or did that generic and operational planning result in individuals better schooled, marshalled, and equipped to cope with Covid?
“Based on the available evidence, we strongly suspect it was the former.”
The investigation will also determine whether the collapse of the power-sharing agreement in Northern Ireland hindered the government’s ability to plan and respond to the pandemic.
Mr. Keith said Covid’s origin, whether from a laboratory breach or Wuhan-sold captive wild animals, is unlikely to be found. Neither when the initial human infection occurred, he stated.
For the objectives of this inquiry, this knowledge is irrelevant.
In his opening remarks, Pete Weatherby KC, counsel for the Covid-19 Bereaved Families for Justice group, stated that a 2011 document drafted to safeguard the United Kingdom from an influenza outbreak was “closest to an overall plan” for dealing with Covid in 2020.
“With a pandemic, time is of the essence, and time lost is measured in lives,” he said.
“The families anticipate that the evidence will demonstrate… little or no ministerial leadership and the chaos of committees that led to poor planning and, ultimately, a reactive as opposed to a proactive response to the virus,”
In response to Brexit claims, a prime ministerial spokesperson said the government would not address all investigation issues.
He added that the government would be responsible for responding at the opportune time.
