ALBA - Unofficial Forum

I should probably write something on the Covid Inquiry second report today but I’m going on leave next week (bloody Christmas DIY), rushed off my feet and most of what I want to say went in the Common Weal daily briefing which is copied below (if you’re not signed up, how do you know what’s going on??).

Let me add a few additional points:

– As the briefing points out, there was no reason to have to wait for an inquiry to see what was wrong – Common Weal told you what was going wrong in real time. Almost everything we wrote or published during and about the pandemic is vindicated by this report. So why did no-one listen?

– I’ll tell you why; it was the combination of genuine shock and worry (the establishment worries too) and the fact that the chattering class was totally conned by Nicola Sturgeon. They were so convinced that she was a good leader that they really didn’t question her decisions. It wasn’t because our policy work was wrong that it was ignored, it was a culture of ‘unless it’s from an official it must be misinformation’.

– That was a real problem right across civic Scotland at the time. We were working on pandemic issues every day and every day we looked to see what others were saying. The answer was ‘next to nothing’. Particularly during the first lockdown, most of civic Scotland seems to have had little to say or self-censored. This is not healthy.

– Scotland was not well led during this period. I really urge you to remember that ‘diligent’ and ‘competent’ mean completely different things. You should see me diligently using a sewing machine…

– There must (I mean must) be a reckoning over care homes. I’m tied of feeling like the only person in Scotland who always remembers that unlike every other nation on the planet, Scotland didn’t only send untested elderly patients to care homes, they actually tested a number of people, found they had covid – but sent them anyway. There is something deeply wrong in a democracy that can’t address this question five years later.

– How come everyone now knows that Sturgeon ran a dangerously narrow decision-making process that cut out almost anyone who wasn’t her? How come they didn’t see it at the time? How come I got regular kickings for pointing it out as it was happening?

– But above all, the Scottish ruling class’s conviction that lessons should be learned (one day…) is corrosive to democracy in all occasions. It is a clear moral hazard, the knowledge that you can do bad stuff but then effectively cover it up long enough to sort yourself a comfortable exit strategy. This time it killed people.

Common Weal looks at the second report of the UK Covid Inquiry with some frustration. It’s not that we don’t agree with the findings, its that we were reporting on these issues in real time. There is no finding in this report that Common Weal did not raise at the time.

We believe there is a conclusion to be drawn from this; society needs more than a small political class talking to a small community of corporate and public sector leaders in private and a small media class in public. We need national debate to include many more voices and perspectives and for those to be taken seriously.

Let’s look at three of the key findings. First, that we were lax to begin the lockdown and poorly prepared for it when we did. This is something Common Weal identified early. We were warning that we should have moved to lock-down early in March 2020 and had already been raising fears the previous month.

By 16 March 2020 we were utterly bemused at the decision to allow 9,400 people to attend a Lewis Capaldi concert in Aberdeen less than a week before we were in full lockdown. We were issuing almost daily warnings in the week running up to lockdown. And then, when lockdown started, Common Weal warned that the UK Government was making a mess of it and that Scotland’s determination to stick to a ‘four nations’ approach was a mistake.

So when Scotland gradually started to diverge, we warned that it was too little too late. Again, as we approached the end of the first lockdown we warned that nothing like sufficient preparation had been made to suppress the virus once we were (partially) reopened.

But it is perhaps the second main conclusion that is most important here – the failure of testing. The difference between needing one lockdown and needing multiple lockdowns was the extent to which we could suppress the virus in the interim period via a testing regime. The entire first lockdown should have been focussed on developing a comprehensive approach. We warned this at the time.

Yet against all the global public health advice, the official Scottish Government position was that "testing is a distraction". This was inexplicable and we were so concerned that Common Weal strayed out of our comfort zone to produce a public health policy paper in which we set out a testing regime we thought had the best chance of successfully suppressing Covid.

We published it as Ending Lockdown. The Scottish Government ignored it and so as the second lockdown approached we produced a more detailed version. Eventually a watered-down version of our proposals was belatedly put in place. We continue to believe that there remains a chance that the second lockdown could have been avoided altogether if a more rigorous approach was taken.

It is also worth noting that while Common Weal suggested that an elimination strategy was the only one that had actually worked (in New Zealand), it would take steps the Scottish Government would see as too radical to achieve that – closing roads outside airports, ports and the border and putting ‘testing borders’ in place.

For some reason the then First Minister thought it was possible to start talking about a strategy of elimination without taking any of these measures. That she did anyway certainly justifies the criticism of this stance in the report. It was vainglorious rather than credible.

And that leads to the third main conclusion – that there was a narrow and closed-off leadership approach which harmed policy creation, and that the First Minister spent too much time doing television briefings which should have been shared among other senior figures.

Again, this problem was quite clear at the time and something that we commented on a number of times but was not picked up in wider media debate. This resulted in a failure to scrutinise what was actually happening.

There are other issues we expect the Scottish inquiry to cover, including the cover-up of the first outbreak of Covid which took place in a large corporate hotel ans policy of sending Covid-positive patients into care homes. Certainly there is no doubt that in Scotland we did not see the utter chaos and rampant corruption that we saw at Westminster, but this is a low bar.

While this report is welcome, we believe that there remains insufficient scrutiny of the extent to which civic Scotland stopped asking questions and stopped challenging decisions for months on end. Common Weal managed to derive policy positions which are now being vindicated from publicly available source material and we did it at the time. Nothing in the inquiry report published yesterday cannot be found from the content in the links above.

The problem is that the sense of national emergency, the political culture of the Sturgeon court, the legitimate universal fear and uncertainty that the lockdown induced and unhelpful and uninformed social media commentary combined to suspend politics and reduce scrutiny at a point where it was never more needed.

What is the lesson we should really learn from the pandemic? Don’t wait for lessons to be learned, pay attention at the time and ask difficult questions. It leads to better decisions. Then again, we did warn about this in the first week of lockdown...