The NEN – North Edinburgh News

Inquiry publishes second report and 19 recommendations, examining ‘Core UK decision-making and political governance’

The Chair of the UK Covid Inquiry, Baroness Heather Hallett, has today published her second report which concludes that the response to the pandemic by the United Kingdom’s four governments was often a case of ‘too little, too late’.

The report, ‘Core UK decision-making and political governance’ (Module 2), also concludes that while the various lockdowns of 2020 and 2021 undoubtedly saved lives, they only became inevitable because of the acts and omissions of all governments.

The devolved administrations were too reliant on the UK government to lead the response. 

Baroness Hallett is calling for the prompt and thorough implementation of 19 key recommendations. The recommendations must be considered during the development of all future pandemic preparedness strategies. 

They include the need for urgent reform and clarification of the structures for decision-making during emergencies within each of the four governments.

Other key recommendations include ensuring that decisions and their implications are clearly communicated to the public – laws and guidance must be easy to understand. There should be greater Parliamentary scrutiny of the use of emergency powers as well as improved consideration in an emergency of the impact that decisions might have on those most at risk.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1991544622355451990

Baroness Hallett, Chair of the UK Covid-19 Inquiry, said: “Today I published my second report. It follows an investigation into the responses of the four governments of the UK to the Covid-19 pandemic.

“In early 2020, Covid-19 was a novel and deadly virus spreading rapidly around the country. All four governments failed to appreciate the scale of the threat or the urgency of response it demanded.

“When they did realise the scale of the threat, politicians and administrators in the UK government and the devolved administrations were presented with unenviable choices as to how to respond. Whatever decision they took there was often no right answer or good outcome. They also had to make decisions in conditions of extreme pressure. Nonetheless, I can summarise my findings of the response as ‘too little, too late’.

“The Inquiry has therefore identified a number of key lessons learned to inform the response to a future pandemic.

“In all, I make 19 key recommendations that I believe will better protect the UK in any future pandemic and improve decision-making in a crisis.”

A eight page brief summary of the report can be found on the Inquiry’s website and is available in a variety of languages and accessible formats.

Module 2 of the UK Covid-19 Inquiry, the second of its 10 investigations, focuses on the UK’s governance and political decision-making during the Covid-19 pandemic.

Its investigation covers the actions and performance of the UK government in Westminster, as well as the devolved administrations in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, the focus of Modules 2A, 2B and 2C.

In total, 166 witnesses gave oral evidence. Nine weeks of public hearings featuring 80 witnesses were held in London in autumn and winter 2023.

A further 90 witnesses gave evidence in public hearings in Edinburgh, Cardiff and Belfast in the first half of 2024.

The Inquiry heard from serving and former senior politicians – including former Prime and First Ministers – leading scientists, key medical professionals, civil servants, relevant experts and others.

Following these hearings, conclusions have been reached and recommendations for changes carefully developed – all are published in today’s report which will be laid in Parliament.

Module 2 report: Key findings

• All four governments failed to appreciate the scale of the threat or the urgency of response it demanded in the early part of 2020.
  • This was compounded, in part, by misleading assurances from the Department of Health and Social Care and the widely held view that the UK was well prepared for a pandemic. 
• By the time the possibility of a mandatory lockdown was first considered, it was already too late and a lockdown had become unavoidable.The lockdowns in 2020 and 2021 undoubtedly saved lives, but only became inevitable because of the acts and omissions of the four governments.
• The UK government introduced advisory restrictions on 16 March 2020, including self-isolation, household quarantine and social distancing. Had restrictions been introduced sooner, the mandatory lockdown from 23 March might have been shorter or not necessary at all.
• This lack of urgency and the huge rise in infections made a mandatory lockdown inevitable. It should have been introduced one week earlier.
  • Had a mandatory lockdown been imposed on or immediately after 16 March 2020, modelling shows that in England alone there would have been approximately 23,000 fewer deaths in the first wave up until 1 July 2020. 
• When entering the first lockdown, none of the four governments had a strategy for when or how they would exit the lockdown. None of the four governments gave enough attention to the possibility of a second wave, meaning there was very little contingency planning in place.
• None of governments in the UK had adequately prepared for the challenges and risks of a national lockdown. They did not scrutinise sufficiently seriously its wider societal, workforce and economic impacts, in particular, the impact on the vulnerable and disadvantaged and impact of school closures on children’s education and their physical and mental health.
• The Inquiry rejects the criticism that the four governments were wrong to impose a mandatory lockdown on 23 March 2020. All four governments received clear and compelling advice to do so. Without it, the growth in transmission would have led to an unacceptable loss of life. However, their failure to act promptly and effectively had put them in this position.
• They all must now learn the lessons of the Covid-19 pandemic if they are to avoid lockdowns in future pandemics.

Baroness Hallett acknowledges the pressure on politicians and others during the pandemic to make tough decisions about how resources should be used. However, the Chair of the Inquiry also stresses that if the UK had been better prepared – as per the Module 1 report published July 2024 – the nation could have avoided some of the significant and long-lasting financial, economic and human costs of the Covid-19 pandemic. 

The Chair considers that all Module 2 report recommendations should be implemented in a timely manner. The Inquiry and the Chair will be monitoring the implementation of the recommendations.

The Inquiry’s next report – focusing on the Impact of Covid-19 pandemic on healthcare systems in the four nations of the UK (Module 3) will be published next year. A further six reports will follow in quick succession covering Modules 6 to 10, with the final report scheduled to be published no later than summer 2027.

The Inquiry’s next public hearings begin next week, Monday 24 November, with four weeks of oral evidence concerning the Module 9 investigation ‘Economic response’. The Inquiry will conclude all public hearings by March 2026 after hearing evidence across three weeks for ‘Impact on society’ (Module 10). 

The Covid-19 Bereaved Families for Justice campaign issued the following statement: