Baroness Heather Hallett – The NEN

Covid Inquiry: Care sector “something of an afterthought” with NO so-called ‘protective ring’

The Chair of the UK Covid-19 Inquiry, Baroness (Heather) Hallett, has today published her sixth report. She concludes that, in the early stages of the pandemic, not enough was done to protect people in care settings and that the adult social care sector appeared to be “something of an afterthought”.

There were more than 43,000 recorded deaths involving Covid-19 in care homes between March 2020 and July 2022. A lack of proper planning, plus failures to implement lessons from earlier pandemic planning exercises, meant the UK government and devolved administrations took critical decisions in the early weeks without the information they needed. Action to protect carers and care users came too late, with devastating consequences.

Module 6, the sixth of the Inquiry’s 10 investigations, examined the impact of the pandemic on the publicly and privately funded adult social care sector in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, including infection prevention, visiting restrictions, the experiences of the care workforce and decisions on discharge from hospitals.

The ‘Care Sector’ (Module 6) report concludes that while the UK government and devolved administrations knew, prior to the pandemic, of the extreme vulnerability of care home residents to respiratory viruses, care homes received insufficient protection at the time they most needed it.

The claim that “a protective ring” had been put in place around care homes “right from the start” of the Covid-19 outbreak was unfounded.

Not enough was done to protect people in care settings between March and mid-April 2020. The decision to speed up the discharge of patients from hospitals into care homes was necessary to free up hospital beds. But the decision to do so was taken in March 2020 when there was not enough testing capacity to know patients’ Covid-19 status.

At the time, isolating discharged patients inside care settings was one of the few effective protections available. Yet, in March 2020, England, Wales and Northern Ireland did not initially advise this, a failure the Inquiry calls “a significant omission”.

Today’s report shows how, as the deadly virus spread rapidly, care home residents were left feeling isolated, abandoned and alone as visiting restrictions cut them off from loved ones, in some cases for months.

Some people were not allowed to be with dying friends or relatives in their final moments, leaving bereaved people grief-stricken.

They could not help their loved ones with daily tasks such as eating, drinking and washing, support which can be vital for some residents. As a result, Baroness Hallett concludes: “Many remain wracked by a guilt that they do not deserve to carry.”

Visiting restrictions did not begin to ease until the summer of 2020. The report concludes that the severity and duration of these restrictions caused “profound and enduring effects” inside care homes, particularly for residents with complex cognitive conditions such as dementia.

Many millions of people across the UK receive adult social care. This includes older people, people with dementia and people living with physical and learning disabilities. For them and the people who dedicate themselves to providing their care, the pandemic totally disrupted their daily lives and had a devastating impact.

Baroness (Heather) Hallett, Chair of the UK Covid-19 Inquiry said: “At the critical early stages of the pandemic, not enough was done to protect those living and working in care homes. The mantra at the time of ‘protecting the NHS’ sometimes came at the expense of the users and providers of care. The adult social care sector as a whole appeared to be something of an afterthought.

“The profound isolation and sense of abandonment felt by residents as a result of the visiting restrictions resulted in immense emotional harm. Most distressingly, some people were not permitted to be with their dying loved ones. Many remain wracked by a guilt that they do not deserve to carry.

“During the pandemic, the action taken by the UK government and devolved administrations to try and protect workers and users of adult social care came too late. The failures were the direct result of an absence of proper pandemic planning for the adult social care sector. It underlines why my recommendations in this report must be acted upon now before the next pandemic strikes.”

The Covid-19 pandemic exposed and exacerbated the underlying fragility of the adult social care workforce. A workforce of at least 1.5 million people – including care in the home (domiciliary care) – provided care during the pandemic. Many put their own lives at risk.

Severe shortages of personal protective equipment (PPE) meant that some care workers were left having to wear waterproof ponchos from festivals, painters’ overalls, or home-made PPE made from fabric, bin bags and bed linen.

The report describes this as “wholly unacceptable”, finding that care workers were left “without the protection they needed”. It concludes that while PPE shortages were a global problem, better planning could have ensured a much better supply from the outset.

Many care workers suffered burnout. Some left the profession entirely. Changes to sick pay were introduced in England, Scotland and Northern Ireland between March and May 2020, but not in Wales until November 2020.

The UK’s 5.8 million unpaid carers were also heavily relied upon, providing complex care for longer hours with little or no respite. The Inquiry concludes that support for unpaid carers came too late and that for too long the adult social care sector as a whole has been undervalued and under-recognised.

The Inquiry’s latest report also examines concerns about the use of Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) decisions, echoing concerns raised in its Module 3 report that some decisions were made inappropriately or without proper consultation, based on a person’s age, health condition or learning disability.

While finding no evidence of national policy encouraging blanket use of DNACPRs, the report recommends mandatory end-of-life care training for health and social care workers, who often lacked the skills to have these conversations thoughtfully and compassionately.

Ultimately, the report finds that these failures and others stemmed from an absence of proper pre-pandemic planning for the adult social care sector.

Exercise Cygnus, a pandemic preparedness exercise conducted in October 2016, recommended developing ways to assess social care and surge capacity, but this work had not been completed by the time the Covid-19 pandemic struck. As a result, ministers were left making decisions without the information they needed about the sector.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/xpqibzP6H5k?feature=oembed&enablejsapi=1&rel=0

The Chair makes eight key recommendations to ensure the adult social care sector is better protected and better equipped to respond to the next pandemic, including:

Improving arrangements for pandemic planning to ensure clearer structures, roles and responsibilities.
Better planning for the safe isolation of care home residents.
Implementing financial support schemes ready to be rolled out to support adult social care staff to self-isolate or to limit staff movement.
Publishing guidance on visiting restrictions.
Maintaining inspection and oversight by developing protocols to enable inspections to continue, including, where possible, on-site inspections.
Improving the collection of data about deaths in the adult social care sector.
Establishing mandatory end-of-life care training for relevant health and social care workers.
Introducing a voluntary register for the social care workforce in England, recognising and supporting a workforce that already benefits from such registers in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

A four-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.

In total, 57 witnesses gave oral evidence during Module 6 public hearings, held between 30 June and 31 July 2025. The Inquiry heard from care home residents and their families, unpaid carers, care workers and sector representatives, as well as healthcare professionals, policy-makers, regulators and relevant experts, including serving and former senior politicians and civil servants.

The Inquiry has already published reports for Modules 1 to 5, all of which are available on the Inquiry’s website. Baroness Hallett notes the action taken to date by the four governments of the UK and expects that all recommendations from all published reports will be implemented promptly and in full.

This follows the formal government responses to Module 3 published earlier this month by the UK Government, Scotland and Wales. Progress on the implementation of recommendations can be tracked on the Monitoring of Inquiry Recommendations page on the Inquiry’s website.

The Inquiry’s seventh report, Module 7 ‘Test, Trace and Isolate’, will be published on Thursday 19 November 2026. The remaining three reports – Module 8 ‘Children and Young People’, Module 9 ‘Economic Response’ and Module 10 ‘Impact on Society’ – will be published in the first half of 2027.

Read the full Module 6 report, the In Brief summary and other accessible formats on our website.

Hourglass has called for the Covid-19 Inquiry’s care sector report to lead to lasting changes in how older people are protected from abuse and neglect, after the Inquiry recorded that the UK government knew about rising demand for the charity’s helpline during the first lockdown.

The report states that government was aware calls to Hourglass had increased by at least 30%, including a sharp rise in reports of neglect, particularly in care homes. It also finds that the suspension and subsequent limitation of in-person inspections likely contributed to safeguarding concerns going unidentified and unreported.

Hourglass, the only UK-wide charity dedicated to ending the abuse of older people, has campaigned for scrutiny of the pandemic response since 2020, when it joined legal action seeking an urgent inquiry into PPE failures.

Chief Executive Richard Robinson subsequently gave both written and oral evidence to the Inquiry’s Module 10 domestic abuse and safeguarding roundtable in April 2025, describing how older victims were trapped with perpetrators and cut off from support.

Responding to today’s Module 6 report, Hourglass CEO Richard Robinson said: “This report records that government knew our helpline was receiving more calls, including a sharp rise in reports of neglect in care homes. The warning signs were there while the crisis was unfolding. Older people and their families are entitled to ask why that knowledge did not translate into better protection.

“The consequences described by the Inquiry are appalling: neglect, failures of basic care, suffering that went unseen and families prevented from being with someone they loved at the end of their life. These were people whose safety depended on systems that failed them.

“Hourglass warned during the pandemic that isolation could increase the risk of abuse and make it harder to seek help. When family visits were restricted and routine inspections suspended, vital opportunities to identify harm were lost. The Inquiry finds that reduced in-person inspections likely contributed to abuse and neglect going unidentified and unreported.”

“In our written evidence to the Inquiry, Hourglass described older victims as ‘locked in and left behind’. Today’s findings on the care sector reinforce the need to confront how easily older people’s voices, rights and safety can be overlooked when decisions are made on their behalf.

“The recommendations on visiting, inspection and end-of-life care training must now be implemented, with named responsibility, published deadlines and scrutiny of delivery. Older people must retain access to trusted people, independent oversight and a means of reporting abuse, including during an emergency.

“But our ambition must extend beyond preparing for another pandemic. We need a comprehensive Safer Ageing Strategy that tackles ageism and abuse, backed by sustained, ring-fenced funding for specialist services supporting older victim-survivors.

“For bereaved families and those who survived abuse or neglect, the test will be whether this report changes what happens when an older person needs protection. That is the responsibility governments must now fulfil.”

26-10-15-Final-M6-In-Brief-Easy-Read Download

Latest Covid-19 Inquiry report to be published today

MODULE 6 FOCUSES ON THE CARE SECTOR

The UK Covid-19 Inquiry will publish its sixth report, ‘Care Sector’ (Module 6), today (Tuesday 20 October 2026).

The report will be published on the Inquiry website at 12pm. The Chair of the Inquiry, Baroness Heather Hallett, will present her findings and recommendations in video statements on the Inquiry’s YouTube channel immediately after publication.

Module 6 public hearings took place from 30 June to 31 July 2025.

In total, 57 witnesses gave oral evidence during Module 6 public hearings. Module 6 investigated the impact of the pandemic on the publicly and privately funded adult social care sector in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

The report will consider the consequences of government decision-making – including restrictions imposed – on those living and working within the care sector, as well as decisions concerning capacity in hospitals and residents in adult care and residential homes.

It will also address the steps taken in adult care and residential homes to prevent the spread of Covid-19 and will examine the capacity of the adult care sector to respond to the pandemic.

Alongside this, the report will consider the human impact of the pandemic on residents and their families, including deaths in care settings, the use of Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) decisions and the restrictions placed on visits from loved ones.

The UK Covid-19 Inquiry will publish its seventh report, ‘Test, Trace and Isolate’ (Module 7), on Thursday 19 November 2026.

Secretary to the Inquiry, Ben Connah, said: “The Chair of the Inquiry, Baroness Heather Hallett, will set out her findings and recommendations in both reports. The publication of these reports marks swift progress for the Inquiry.

“All public hearings have concluded and seven of our planned 10 reports will be published by mid-November. All remaining reports will be published in the first half of next year.

“The Chair expects all recommendations to be implemented without delay and governments across all four nations will be asked to publish their responses within six months of publication.

“The swift implementation of the Chair’s recommendations is vital to make sure the UK is better prepared for the next pandemic.”

COVID verdict: Governments’ response was ‘too little, too late’

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:

Governments ‘failed citizens’ with flawed pandemic planning

Inquiry publishes first report and 10 recommendations focused on pandemic resilience and preparedness

The Chair of the UK Covid-19 Inquiry, Baroness Heather Hallett, is urging the new UK government and the governments of Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland to implement promptly her 10 key recommendations following publication of the Inquiry’s report of its first investigation into the nation’s resilience and preparedness for the pandemic.

These recommendations, made public on Thursday 18 July 2024, include a major overhaul of how the UK government prepares for civil emergencies such as the Covid-19 pandemic.

Key recommendations include a radical simplification of civil emergency preparedness and resilience systems, holding a UK-wide pandemic response exercise at least every three years and the creation of a single, independent statutory body responsible for whole system preparedness and response.

It is the first of several reports setting out the Inquiry’s recommendations and findings.

Today the Inquiry has published its first report after examining the resilience and preparedness of the United Kingdom to respond to a pandemic. My report recommends fundamental reform of the way in which the UK government and the devolved administrations prepare for whole-system civil emergencies.

If the reforms I recommend are implemented, the nation will be more resilient and better able to avoid the terrible losses and costs to society that the Covid-19 pandemic brought.

I expect all my recommendations to be acted on, with a timetable to be agreed with the respective administrations. I, and my team, will be monitoring this closely.

Baroness Hallett, Chair of the Inquiry

Module 1 examined the state of the UK’s structures and the procedures in place to prepare for and respond to a pandemic.

Hearings for Module 1 were held in London in June and July 2023 and the Chair heard from current and former politicians as well as key scientists, experts, civil servants and bereaved family members.

Following these hearings, the Inquiry’s findings and recommendations are set out in the report published today. The publication of the first report has been welcomed by some of those who lost loved ones during the pandemic. Dr Alan Wightman from North Yorkshire, lost his mother in early-May 2020 to Covid-19 that she had acquired in her care home in Fife, Scotland.

My Mum was an 88-year-old widow, a dementia sufferer and a cancer survivor. She had been settled and looked after in her well-run home for 11 months before Covid got in, despite the best efforts of the staff. A number of the home’s residents were taken by Covid.

I congratulate Baroness Hallett and her Inquiry team for reaching this substantive milestone of issuing findings and recommendations from Module 1. To be at this point a mere 13 months after witnesses started giving evidence in this Module is very impressive. To have achieved that whilst simultaneously completing Module 2 and its three satellite Modules, plus having Module 3 ready to launch within the next three months, is truly exemplary.

Dr Wightman

In her findings, the Chair concludes that the UK’s system of building preparedness for the pandemic suffered from several significant flaws.

These include a flawed approach to risk assessment, a failure to fully learn from past civil emergency exercises and outbreaks of disease, and Ministers not receiving a broad enough range of scientific advice and failing to challenge the advice they did get.

Baroness Hallett acknowledges the pressure on politicians and others to make tough decisions about how resources should be used. However, she also stresses that if the UK had been better prepared, the nation could have avoided some of the significant and long-lasting financial, economic and human costs of the Covid-19 pandemic.

In summary her recommendations are:

A radical simplification of the civil emergency preparedness and resilience systems. This includes rationalising and streamlining the current bureaucracy and providing better, simpler Ministerial and official structures and leadership;
A new approach to risk assessment that provides for a better and more comprehensive evaluation of a wider range of actual risks;
A new UK-wide approach to the development of strategy, which learns lessons from the past and from regular civil emergency exercises and takes proper account of existing inequalities and vulnerabilities;
Better systems of data collection and sharing in advance of future pandemics, and the commissioning of a wider range of research projects;
Holding a UK-wide pandemic response exercise at least every three years and publishing the outcome;
Bringing in external expertise from outside government and the Civil Service to challenge and guard against the known problem of ‘groupthink’;
Publication of regular reports on the system of civil emergency preparedness and resilience;
Lastly and most importantly, the creation of a single, independent statutory body responsible for whole system preparedness and response. It will consult widely, for example with experts in the field of preparedness and resilience and the voluntary, community and social sector, and provide strategic advice to government and make recommendations.

The Chair believes that all 10 recommendations are reasonable and deliverable and all must be implemented in a timely manner. The Inquiry and the Chair will be monitoring the implementation of the recommendations and will hold those in power to account.

The Chair has today restated her aim to conclude all public hearings by summer 2026, and to publish reports with findings and recommendations as the Inquiry progresses.

The Inquiry’s next report – focusing on Core UK decision-making and political governance – including in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland (Modules 2, 2A, 2B and 2C) – is expected to be published in 2025.

Future reports will focus on specific areas, including:

Modules 2, 2A, 2B, 2C: Core UK decision-making and political governance – including Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland
Module 3: Healthcare systems
Module 4: Vaccines and therapeutics
Module 5: Procurement – procurement and distribution of key equipment and supplies
Module 6: The care sector
Module 7: Test, trace, and isolate programmes
Module 8: Children and young people
Module 9: Economic response to the pandemic

For more details of these modules visit the Inquiry’s website.

The Chair is also examining the best way to fulfil her Terms of Reference and investigate the impact of the pandemic on the population of the UK. This will cover a wide range of those affected and include the impact on mental health.

TUC: Covid Inquiry Report is a “moment of truth for the country” as report confirms impact of austerity on UK preparedness and resilience

Report confirms that public services were under huge strain even before Covid struck

Baroness Hallett says public health, NHS and social care sector’s capacity to respond to pandemic was “constrained” by funding and negatively impacted by “severe staff shortages” and infrastructure “not fit for purpose”
Report warns that not investing “in systems of protection” will impact on the UK’s “preparedness and resilience” in a future pandemic

Responding to the UK Covid-19 Inquiry Module 1 report today (Thursday), TUC General Secretary Paul Nowak said: “This is a moment of truth and reflection for the country.

“Baroness Hallett’s report confirms that austerity left the UK underprepared for the pandemic.

“Faced with the biggest crisis since the Second World War our defences were down as a result of severe spending cuts.

“We owe it to those who lost their lives – and to those workers who put their lives at risk – to make sure this never happens again.

“Strong public services – and a properly supported workforce – are vital for the nation’s health. As Baroness Hallett rightly points out the cost of investing in ‘systems for our protection’ is ‘vastly outweighed’ by the cost of not doing so.”

Commenting on the report’s finding that inequality put certain communities at disproportionate risk during the pandemic, Paul added:

“This report lays bare how inequality fuelled the spread of Covid-19. Low-income, disabled and BME people were far more likely to be infected and die from the virus. As Baroness Hallett warns inequality is a huge risk to the whole of the UK.”

Impact of austerity

Baroness Hallett writes on page 2 of her report: ‘Public services, particularly health and social care, were running close to, if not beyond, capacity in normal times.

[…] in the area of preparedness and resilience, money spent on systems for our protection is vital and will be vastly outweighed by the cost of not doing so.’

Baroness Hallett writes on page 122 of her report: ‘The Inquiry also heard that there were severe staff shortages and that a significant amount of the hospital infrastructure was not fit for purpose. England’s social care sector faced similar issues. This combination of factors had a directly negative impact on infection control measures and on the ability of the NHS and the care sector to ‘surge up’ during a pandemic.’

Baroness Hallett writes on page 123 of her report: ‘Issues of funding are political decisions that properly fall to elected politicians. However, it remains the case that the surge capacity of the four nations’ public health and healthcare systems to respond to the pandemic was constrained by their funding.’

Baroness Hallett writes on page 127 of her report: ‘Some witnesses to the Inquiry described the prioritisation and reprioritisation of limited resources as a cause of inaction. This is a widely recurring theme in the evidence.’

Impact of inequality

Baroness Hallett writes on page 70 of her report: ‘Resilience depends on having a resilient population. The existence and persistence of vulnerability in the population is a long-term risk to the UK.’

‘[…] as the UK entered the Covid-19 pandemic, there were “substantial systematic health inequalities by socio-economic status, ethnicity, area-level deprivation, region, social excluded minority groups and inclusion health groups.”’

Baroness Hallett writes on page 71 of her report: ‘Covid-19 was not an ‘equality opportunity virus’. It resulted in a higher a likelihood of sickness and death for people who are most vulnerable in society. It was the views of Professors Bambra and Marmot that:

“In short, the UK entered the pandemic with its public services depleted, health improvement stalled, health inequalities increased and health among the poorest people in a state of decline.”’