[ad_1]
Boris Johnson has been accused of “intergalactic incompetence” by Sir Keir Starmer, who urged the prime minister to publish the “scientific basis” for the 10 pm curfew.
Labor leader Sir Keir Starmer called to Prime Minister to lay out the reasons for the measure, which was introduced in England on September 24, before MPs vote on the issue next week.
During Prime Minister Questions On Wednesday, Sir Keir also questioned Johnson about the effectiveness of the local closures and the 16,000 COVID-19 cases skipped by the NHS test and trace scheme.
Live coronavirus updates from the UK and around the world
The Labor leader’s focus on the 10 p.m. curfew will increase pressure on Johnson over the measure, with several Tory MPs critical of the national restriction.
Next week’s expected vote in the House of Commons, which comes after the government was forced to give MPs a greater voice on COVID-19 rules, could see a conservative rebellion against the early shutdown. of the hospitality business, and follows warnings that it has been devastating to the industry.
Labor themselves have not yet pledged to support the curfew in next week’s vote.
Sky News learned that the restriction has contributed to one of Britain’s largest pub operators. moving to close 25 sites and eliminate 800 jobs.
Before the Commons vote next week, Sir Keir told Johnson: “The prime minister knows there are deeply held opinions across the country in different ways on this.
Now a question arises: is there a scientific basis for the 10 pm rule? The public deserves to know. Parliament deserves to know. If there is, why doesn’t the government do itself a favor and publish it?
“If not, why doesn’t the government review the rule?”
High-level local Labor politicians, including Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham and Liverpool Mayor Joe Anderson, are also among those who have criticized the 10 p.m. curfew for being ineffective in preventing the spread of COVID-19.
There have even been warnings that the move is making the situation worse, as it was encouraging house parties and forcing people to go outside and onto public transport at the same time.
Mr Johnson responded to Sir Keir that the basis for the curfew was the same as the one the Labor leader had “accepted two weeks ago”.
“That is to reduce the spread of the virus and that is our goal,” the prime minister said.
He also attacked Labor for abstaining in a The Commons vote Tuesday night on the restriction of the “rule of six” on social gatherings.
“What kind of signal does this send to the people of the country about the strength of the Labor Party and its willingness to enforce the restrictions?” Johnson said.
“That is not new leadership, that is not leadership.”
Sir Keir questioned Johnson about the effectiveness of local closures, and Labor analysis claimed that 19 of the 20 areas in England that have been under restrictions for two months have seen an increase in infection rates.
Johnson responded: “You have heard from me and repeatedly from the government why we are introducing differentiated local restrictions.”
The prime minister called for a “concerted national effort” to follow COVID-19 rules in the face of rising infections.
He also defended the government’s action as it arose almost 16,000 cases of coronavirus missed by the test and trace scheme.
“As soon as we became aware of the missing data, we brought in 800 people to pursue those index cases and we continue to search for their contacts,” the prime minister said.
:: Subscribe to Sophy Ridge Sunday on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Spotify, Spreaker
Sir Keir had asked Mr. Johnson if he accepted that the mistake had endangered people’s lives.
“Now it is much more difficult to contact people after such a long time, the contacts of the 16,000,” he said.
“Even if they are successfully contacted, for many the period of self-isolation has already expired.
“Third, important decisions about local restrictions were made using incorrect data.
“£ 12 billion has been invested in this system, but a basic Excel error brings it down – no wonder it has been described as intergalactic incompetence.”