The first covid report

apart from worrying, i quite enjoyed being locked down

MaizieD

I think the problem with lockdown was that there was absolutely no planning in place for it.

This is what Hallet's report is saying.

The report recommends ongoing planning for all possible eventualities, with that planning being regularly monitored and updated with regard to the new knowledge which emerges over time. It also places great emphasis on considering and planning for the needs of the vulnerable, something which we know was only dealt with in a 'last minute' and ad hoc fashion.
Well considered and thorough advance planning could have mitigated a lot of the ill effects of lockdowns which posters are now drawing attention to (and doubtless did so at the time)

What struck me during the whole episode was the reluctance of the government to take note of countries which successfully mitigated the effects of the virus, partially, I suspect, as a result of the prevailing government belief in British exceptionalism and dislike of admitting that other countries might have a better understanding of mitigations than did the UK.

Added to the fact that Boris Johnson was determined to get Brexit done, at all cost.

I believe the EU offered us a 'grace' period in the negotiations to deal with the unprecedented, and then unknowable, effects of the emerging pandemic.

I'm sure any sane individual would have given the option some thoughtful consideration.

He didn't.

I think the problem with lockdown was that there was absolutely no planning in place for it.

This is what Hallet's report is saying.

The report recommends ongoing planning for all possible eventualities, with that planning being regularly monitored and updated with regard to the new knowledge which emerges over time. It also places great emphasis on considering and planning for the needs of the vulnerable, something which we know was only dealt with in a 'last minute' and ad hoc fashion.
Well considered and thorough advance planning could have mitigated a lot of the ill effects of lockdowns which posters are now drawing attention to (and doubtless did so at the time)

What struck me during the whole episode was the reluctance of the government to take note of countries which successfully mitigated the effects of the virus, partially, I suspect, as a result of the prevailing government belief in British exceptionalism and dislike of admitting that other countries might have a better understanding of mitigations than did the UK.

Yes I went along with it. I would not do that again. I think it's understandable that people reacted with fear, what is important is to reflect now that fear is over. I also dont know how you look at the risk/cost ratio, some of the things are quantifiable domestic violence, safeguarding incidents, even excess deaths caused by delays to treatment (although admittedly that's more complex) but some things such as societal behaviour are difficult if not impossible to measure.

There is always a danger if countries allow a totally unelected body to take control of the situation in their country. Many of the members of the WHO represent countries which are far from democratic themselves and to put the UK and other democratic countries under their control would be dangerous. We only need to look at the support the WHO gave to China, despite emerging evidence that the virus came from China and in all likelihood escaped inadvertently from a laboratory in Wuhan.

Cadenza123

I went along with everything that was asked of us. However with hindsight I think that lockdowns were far too damaging and we gave up our freedom too easily. Government should advise, we live in a free society, well ostensibly. People should be responsible for their own decision making, armed with credible information.

Like you, I agree, we all went along with it because of the sheer panicked state that prevailed, but with hindsight, I think lock downs were very damaging. I do hope that our government will not acquiesce to WHO's proposals to preside over any prospective pandemics. There is such a danger, to morph into a controlled police state if we surrender powers to un elected bodies.

Cadenza
That’s why I never went along with it.
I would never have deliberately been near anyone with health problems.
I carried on doing the gardens of 2 elderly people after the men who did their gardens wouldn’t go there.
I still had 2 elderly neighbours who lived on their own for Sunday dinner. One of these ladies I had to sort out stuff on a daily basis because of early onset dementia.
I never stopped seeing my daughters or grandchildren.
I had neighbours and friends into my garden if they were anxious re covid.
The absolute bollocks of the lockdown was highlighted by my next door neighbour. She was a nurse on a covid ward.
To enable her to do her job she had to have 4 grandparents taking turns to look after the children.
I could cry at the damage ( hidden) that the lockdown caused.

I went along with everything that was asked of us. However with hindsight I think that lockdowns were far too damaging and we gave up our freedom too easily. Government should advise, we live in a free society, well ostensibly. People should be responsible for their own decision making, armed with credible information.

Yes those are the children I am thinking of and other groups of children, those from difficult families, low income, etc etc.

Covid has had a devastating and ongoing impact on my dd with LD and autism. Everything was so damaging for her and her peers.

Casdon

The societal impact of different courses of action for different types of pandemic is part of emergency planning if it is done properly though Galaxy, so your concerns would be factored in. It’s quite possible that the next pandemic could result in children dying in large numbers, and the option of lockdowns can never be entirely ruled out, because we don’t know what’s coming next.

It’s quite possible that the next pandemic could result in children dying in large numbers, and the option of lockdowns can never be entirely ruled out, because we don’t know what’s coming next.

... that's a point.

What if it is an infection that hits the very young hardest? Perish the thought.

If, theoretically, lockdowns are a way of preventing catastrophic spread, then surely they cannot be ruled out as a principle?

If the alternative is millions dying at breakneck speed - how does that compare with the admitted miseries of lockdown? How does a nation cope with such a catastrophe?

I think it's the way they are implemented, the duration, and the way they are handled that's important.

You can't allow a pandemic to decimate so many people that society is unable to function properly afterward?

I agree, other countries took much more appropriate steps than the UK did, different approaches with better outcomes. That’s why scenario planning in advance is so important.

Dickens
If this inquiry and subsequent reports can establish the failings of the handling of the episode - dealing with facts and forgetting personalities, establish the basics of what - in the form of equipment and supplies - will be needed, exactly how the various health organisations must be mustered and utilised, and not least the level of funding required to keep the country functioning, then I think these reports will be worthwhile.

You make some very valid points there. I hope they’ll be addressed.

Nothing will deal with the you can’t tell me what to do group.

But they didnt die in this one did they and the impact was enormous, lockdowns for children in this pandemic were in my view a mistake. Now mistakes are understandable in a crisis but at some point we need to look at that.

maddyone

Quite correct petra.
I wondered if Maybee had ever actually been to New Zealand. I have, several times. There is absolutely no comparison between the UK and New Zealand, particularly between England and New Zealand. No comparison at all.

I do know that NZ had a leader whose first thought was for the safety of its people not one that was too busy getting his divorce done and getting Brexit done to pay attention to what was happening elsewhere in the world. Whatever the size of NZ or it’s population density it’s hard swift lockdown stopped people from dying.

The societal impact of different courses of action for different types of pandemic is part of emergency planning if it is done properly though Galaxy, so your concerns would be factored in. It’s quite possible that the next pandemic could result in children dying in large numbers, and the option of lockdowns can never be entirely ruled out, because we don’t know what’s coming next.

Yes they may be but I doubt it. I have been very clear, the damage of lockdowns compared to their benefit, my focus is children as that is where I am seeing the damage but there were other very serious societal impacts.

Galaxy

Because it doesnt seem to be asking any of the questions that would help us to do that. It's not looking at whether the collateral damage was worth it although they actually list the damage in great detail.

What are you referring to here?

You do realise that this is the first of a whole series of reports to be based on each of the inquiry modules? Perhaps your concerns (which are unclear in your post) will be addressed at a later date.

TerriBull

I agree with you Galaxy, I'm not sure younger people would be as compliant next time. I read a while back WHO, would like to control lockdowns if governments allow them to do so,. I hope we won't be going down that totalitarian road.

Aveline I'm of the same opinion, hardly anty revelations, tell us something we don't know!

I read a while back WHO, would like to control lockdowns if governments allow them to do so

That'll be the same WHO that didn't think there was a reason to stop international travel at the start of the pandemic, even from countries with an established Covid outbreak? I wouldn't like to think of them having such control.

Because it doesnt seem to be asking any of the questions that would help us to do that. It's not looking at whether the collateral damage was worth it although they actually list the damage in great detail.

maddyone

Casdon

As I understood it, the knowledge about the potential impact of SARs type viruses being the cause of a pandemic had not been factored in sufficiently to the national preparedness work, which concentrated on a flu pandemic, as had been the case in previous situations. The lesson is to cover planning for a much wider range of possible causes.

It’s possible to plan sufficient PPE, to think in advance about lockdowns etc, but without knowledge of what will cause the pandemic, it is only possible to make generalised plans.

Each type of pandemic has different implications though. It’s not about PPE specifically, although that clearly was an issue. It’s about how services respond. So, if the situation was the fallout from a nuclear attack for example, the response requirements and mechanisms would be completely different to if it was a novel flu, or a novel coronavirus, or another cause. I’m not sure why anybody would argue with a finding of a committee that would enable the country to better prepare for whatever hits us next.

Galaxy

But the advice the last time was as has been mentioned contradictory and often ridiculous, and as no one is addressing the balance of risk i.e the damage to children versus a very low risk to their health I am afraid their best practice worries me. If the future analysis does not examine the impact of lockdowns on children, on societal behaviour, and even something on authoritarian approach then that's not a complete analysis. I suspect as a society we arent ready to understand the impact of the pandemic and lockdowns.
I supported lockdowns and I appreciate governments were facing a complex frightening situation where mistakes were made, but to ignore the 'costs' of lockdown is shameful.

That is one reason for the covid enquiry - to ensure best practice from the start.

Casdon

As I understood it, the knowledge about the potential impact of SARs type viruses being the cause of a pandemic had not been factored in sufficiently to the national preparedness work, which concentrated on a flu pandemic, as had been the case in previous situations. The lesson is to cover planning for a much wider range of possible causes.

It’s possible to plan sufficient PPE, to think in advance about lockdowns etc, but without knowledge of what will cause the pandemic, it is only possible to make generalised plans.

Quite correct petra.
I wondered if Maybee had ever actually been to New Zealand. I have, several times. There is absolutely no comparison between the UK and New Zealand, particularly between England and New Zealand. No comparison at all.

MayBee70

Galaxy

I am sorry but does it consider that the public response has also probably changed forever. I dont think I would support future lockdowns for example, the damage lockdowns have done to children is immeasurable. It will be highly unlikely that people are going to follow government advice in the event of another pandemic.

Even if we look at many people died in New Zealand compared to the UK? Both I and my family locked down before we were told to and would do so again.

New Zealand is 10% larger in land area than the uk and with a population of 5 mil whereas ours is 68mil I’m not surprised 🤷‍♀️