[ad_1]
The ministers did not take responsibility for decisions made during the initial response to the coronavirus pandemic, a group of experts claimed.
A report from the Institute of Government said leaders “lacked a broader sense of strategy” at times and relied too heavily on scientific advice.
It concluded that the Government should have been prepared to act in the “absence of scientific certainty” about the disease, which, at the time, was shrouded in mystery.
The ministers repeatedly claimed they were being “led by science” after making difficult and controversial decisions, from closing schools to advising against masks.
One that cost thousands of lives was the decision not to test 25,000 hospital patients who were discharged from nursing homes.
The government said it did not test them because the “scientific advice” was that asymptomatic transmission was rare.
But critics accused the government of trying to lay the blame and abdicate its political duty.
Other questionable measures include the decision not to restrict travel from high-risk countries in Europe in February or to test travelers at UK airports.
An immeasurable number of cases were imported to British shores from Spain and Italy, which were the first countries in Europe to be hit by the disease, at the time.
Ministers did not hold themselves accountable for decisions made during the initial response to the coronavirus pandemic, a group of experts has claimed (archive)
The lfG accused Health Secretary Matt Hancock of committing to the tests ‘without having a sufficiently clear idea of how the government would use the additional capacity’
The report said: “The ministers did a lot to ‘follow the science’, but it is not enough to use evidence.
“Ministers and public officials must also understand the limitations of both the evidence base and the forums through which it is channeled and, however difficult, ministers must be prepared to act in the absence of scientific certainty.
“Failure to do so now appears to have cost a significant number of additional lives and contributed to the UK experiencing the highest death rate in Europe during the period to the end of May.”
The report also said that while school closures and social distancing measures were contemplated in February, some “ key aspects of making them work, such as remote learning arrangements for schools and orientation for police, were not considered until later. decisions were made. ”
The IfG also criticized the government’s ambition to reach 100,000 tests per day by the end of April.
He said the ministers had not been well thought out, as the diagnostics industry and the NHS were not consulted before making the decision.
The lfG accused Health Secretary Matt Hancock of committing to testing “without having a sufficiently clear idea of how the government would use the additional capacity.”
However, the report praised the successful implementation of economic support measures.
He said the licensing scheme demonstrated that ministers and officials “can find quick ways to consult with those who will be affected by a policy or program and think about how it will be carried out, before making a decision.”
Sarah Nickson, a researcher at IfG, said: ‘Poor decision-making is not an inevitable consequence of a crisis. But in a fast-moving situation, there may be little time or opportunity to correct early mistakes.
“That means consulting quickly and considering implementation early on is even more crucial.”
Alex Thomas, the agency’s program director, said: ‘The best decisions are made when the government knows not only what it wants to do, but why it wants to do it.
At times, during its initial response to the pandemic, the Government lacked a broader sense of strategy. A greater focus on why he was making decisions, ultimately saving lives, would have led to better results across the board. ‘
It is the second major report on the government’s handling of the Covid-19 crisis.
The National Audit Office released its findings in June and was highly critical of ministers’ handling of the pandemic.
It found that NHS hospitals discharged 25,000 people from nursing homes during the peak of the Covid-19 crisis in Britain without testing them for the coronavirus.
The NAO said residences were bypassed to protect the NHS.
The NAO report also revealed that plans to distribute personal protective equipment (PPE) were hampered because officials ignored warnings in 2019 to stock gowns and visors, not having enough when the need arose.
This resulted in less than half the necessary equipment being available to health workers on the front lines of the crisis.
