The first covid report

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.

And how exactly, do we prepare for the right pandemic? No one knows what it might be, or where it might come from. Just like Covid. It was an unknown, novel virus.

I think the most damning outcome of the report was the ‘preparing for the wrong pandemic’ element. A lack of capacity in public health, and their advice being disregarded, led to complacency and the UK thinking it was well prepared when it wasn’t.

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!

An early initial lockdown acting as a "firebreak" whilst government and its various departments and agencies got its prepared pandemic-act together, might have made sense - followed by sensible precautions to control the spread so that industry, commerce and 'life' could continue to function.

But that didn't happen. Johnson was on holiday during the outbreak and even when he returned he avoided or 'missed' the first five COBRA meetings.

After that, and elderly people being returned with Covid to care homes, the PPE fiasco, the spread was inevitable. And all those later "bubbles" and assorted complicated restrictions which applied to some activities but not others, was IMO a farce. It's hardly surprising that people refused to obey government instructions, some of them just didn't make sense.

It was a public health matter - but in order to get people to comply with the restrictions that might be put in place - they have to have confidence in the government. And now they haven't so any future government will find it very difficult to get the public to comply with such restrictions.

If you add in those multitude of conspiracy theorists - some who believed that the pandemic was a world-wide plot by governments to control its nations people - or that the vaccine contained a 'chip' to track individual movements; and then there were those outraged individuals who thought the restrictions were an attack on their personal freedom... "no one's going to tell me what I can or can't do" , then God help us next time round!

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.

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.

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.

No one has a clue the form that the next pandemic will take, or how deadly it will be.

No one can therefore make announcements like “ I won’t support another lockdown”

It isn’t a question of support, it is a question of listening to the scientists and carrying out best practice.

maddyone

^I hope the current government starts immediately on the 10 recommendations^

That’s unlikely. There was nothing about it in the king’s speech.

😀😀

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.

I agree Galaxy I would absolutely not support a repeat of the lockdowns we endured. Not just children, but adolescents and even university students suffered severe and lasting damage.
There was little logic to some of "the rules". MPs and the like could be in close contact indoors for working, but a snowball fight on a common was considered a heinous breech of the rules? You could meet your mum up the local park in the morning and your dad in the afternoon, but not both together at the same time even though they shared the same house (and bed!). Public compliance would be a great deal more difficult in any future pandemic.

maddyone

^I hope the current government starts immediately on the 10 recommendations^

That’s unlikely. There was nothing about it in the king’s speech.

The King's Speech doesn't set out the only items on the government's agenda for the next year. There's nothing to stop the government acting on a report.

In any case, the report was only published today. Even if the government had prior access to it they would need time to consider its recommendations before formulating any response.

I suspect knee jerk reactions won't be the style of this administration...

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.

Smileless2012

£70 million!!! money better spent on the NHS.

Indeed.
The whole thing is/was a total waste of time and money.

I hope the current government starts immediately on the 10 recommendations

That’s unlikely. There was nothing about it in the king’s speech.

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.

It's worth it as it considers how best to be prepared and manage future incidents! Serious sets of recommendations for scientific and practical management. Isn't that a good idea? without it we could just blunder again into a similar situation. A lot of it is about the science.

Section 5 is particularly good, look at its recommendations.

Think it would have been more to the point to get a general view of the opinions of the public yes the public politicians love to say they know what they want Its only the public on mass who have different opinions so instead of presuming to speak for the public treat us like adults who can think just as well as a lot of mps Well after that bbc loving the pointless inquiry as it helps to continue their downing of the last goverment Personally i think the goverment did really well in an unpresidented situation They got money to people who had to be of work and vaccines out quickly

£70 million!!! money better spent on the NHS.

Aveline

I can only hope this review didn't cost too much. The main findings are blatantly obvious.

So far it's has cost £70 million in last financial year, so The Times reports. Still more to go.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-52440641

Here is a link from April 2020 that refers to PPE not being in stock at the start of the pandemic.

hey did have emergency stocks, David. Unfortunately the tories had handed it to a private company to manage and much of what they had was out of date, because it hadn't been properly managed...

I hope that a lot has been done already, one immediate problem was lack of PPE stocks, they knew there should have been emergency stocks but it had not been done.
No excuses the government has plenty of storage space on redundant military bases, it would be a question worth asking in parliament.

The next pandemic will be different so we can only provide general emergency provision, possibly a trained NHS Reserve Corps. It’s not possible to have a surplus of doctors and nurse's on standby continuously, or every conceivable medical device available instantly.

Baroness Hallett has said she will still be working on this report and its recommendations for the next 12 months at least to make sure her recommendations are being adhered to. Good to hear that she will not be thinking job done now the first report is out and it gradually gets forgotten about.

Aveline

I can only hope this review didn't cost too much. The main findings are blatantly obvious.

This is only the initial report, there are about half a dozen more to come.

I can only hope this review didn't cost too much. The main findings are blatantly obvious.

Thank you.