[ad_1]
Even in a political year of enormously difficult decisions, the one looming next week looks particularly complicated and runs the risk of dividing the government: whether London should move to the top tier of coronavirus restrictions.
Boris Johnson told the public that “his level is not his destiny” when England came out of a four-week lockdown in November, hoping that the restrictions could be loosened when they are revised on December 16.
Instead, he may have no choice but to tighten the rules on 9 million people in the capital, a decision he fiercely resisted last month, with the backing of Chancellor Rishi Sunak and the secretary of business, Alok Sharma, fearing that up to 500,000 jobs could be lost.
With some districts registering more than double England’s average case rate, public health experts believe the virus has taken hold again in the city that suffered the first wave of the pandemic and the decision is clear. For areas of northern England that have endured months of Level 3 restrictions, it will seem deeply unfair if the capital avoids the same measures.
Some scientists from the government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) say privately that London should in fact have immediately moved to Level 3 in early December when the post-closure regime was introduced for England.
Aligned against this are those who warn of the dire consequences of effectively shutting down much of London’s hotel industry days before the traditionally busiest period, with people learning to lose their jobs days after Christmas.
The decision will be made at a government Covid-O committee meeting on Wednesday, which will be chaired by Johnson, unless he’s knee-deep in Brexit negotiations.
For London Mayor Sadiq Khan and his decentralized administration, this gives ministers a few days to show ministers that the trajectory of the infection has changed and that the decision could at least be postponed until January.
It seems that no decision has been made yet. Health Secretary Matt Hancock and Cabinet Office Minister Michael Gove are seen as pushing for a level 3 move, while the Treasury is concerned about the economic impact.
“There are definitely some people who think we should be level 3, and other people who are really concerned, not just about the financial repercussions, but whether hospitality is causing the broadcast,” said a London administration source.
Fundamentally, for a city economy that is particularly reliant on pubs, bars, restaurants and other hospitality venues, while these may open at level 2 if people eat food with alcohol, a shift to the upper level means they have to go alone to carry out.
Kate Nicholls, chief executive of trade body UKHospitality, said: “Hospitality has continued to take a disproportionate burden to allow other parts of the economy to reopen during this crisis. The prospect of London moving to Level 3 would be a fatal blow from which many hotel companies simply would not recover. “
She added: “The increase in infections being reported in London boroughs is also not the result of the recent reopening of the hospitality sector, as we know due to the incubation period of the disease. Consequently, any more severe restrictions imposed on the capital’s hospitality sector would have a questionable effect on reducing transmission and plunge the sector into an even deeper crisis. “
A Hancock ally played down the idea of a division between caged pigeons and hawks, insisting that, as a former adviser to George Osborne, he understood the economic risks of draconian restrictions. But they added: “Matt absolutely comes to this, as you would expect him to, as secretary of health – his job is to take the public health argument and present it.
What is clear is that, while infection rates vary significantly across London boroughs, in some areas the apparent threshold for level 3 has already been exceeded.
A number of districts have seven-day continuous infection rates close to or more than double the England average of 153 cases per 100,000 people, including Havering, in 379, as well as Barking and Dagenham, Redbridge and Waltham Forest.
Professor Steven Riley of Imperial College London, who is part of Sage’s Spi-M subgroup, said of the “concerning” infection data: “I think it suggests that transmission has increased in London.” It went from going down pretty consistently to now having a pretty consistent signal going up. “
On Friday, Public Health England made a public appeal for Londoners to “take urgent action to protect their loved ones during the holiday period,” with local public health chief Kevin Fenton using a tweeted video to urge people to abide by the rules.
Khan’s team expects infection rates to start to stabilize, and they are willing to argue that factors other than hospitality are the main drivers.
Most of the districts with high cases are on the outskirts of London, often areas with significant poverty. After Khan and other London leaders met with Communities Secretary Robert Jenrick on Thursday, the mayor’s office asked for more help so that people could afford to isolate themselves.
The city has already received additional support for Covid testing in high schools. On Friday, the government announced an additional 75,000 tests for seven severely affected London boroughs, and starting this weekend it will begin shipping 44,000 home test kits to school personnel before they return to work in January.
Some Conservative MPs in London have said privately that they would try to fight a move to Level 3, but as the decision does not require a vote in parliament, it is unclear what they could do.
Wes Streeting, a Labor MP from Ilford North, said he accepted that the decision had to be guided by evidence. He said: “The challenge we have in London is twofold: how to convey a message about being safe and responsible and potentially having more severe restrictions, while effectively telling people that there is a Christmas break.
“And also, while we are enormously relieved that a vaccine is being released, to convey the message that this is not a time to be complacent and that the virus is still taking hold and sadly killing people.”
Downing Street sources highlighted the fact that the decision would be based not only on case rates, which are rising rapidly in the capital, but on other factors, including local NHS capacity.
[ad_2]
