How the government will be judged in its response to coronavirus

It is probably now impossible for the government to stop the spread of coronavirus. But decisions that Boris Johnson makes in these early stages could limit the spread and the hit to the economy and ordinary life. After a slow start, ministers are responding more quickly, drawing in expertise. “You don’t hear much from government at the moment about having had enough of experts,” said one leading statistician.

When the Covid-19 episode is finally over, the quality of decisions the government has taken and the way it has communicated them will be the basis on which it should be judged.

1. Rules of public engagement

The government is now trying to delay the spread of the virus and to mitigate the effects. This requires difficult choices. Some countries are closing schools and universities; China quarantined a megacity; others have stopped public gatherings. But all of these, and encouraging people to work from home, mean major disruption to people’s lives and damage to the economy. The government has made the argument that big restrictions would not be very effective and has instead focused on isolating those who may be infected and urging people to improve hygiene. However, there may be more public pressure for more intrusive action (regardless of what evidence suggests is justified) if the virus spreads and the UK appears to be doing less than other countries.

2. Communication

After early criticism for being slow to say anything, the government has moved into a brisker mode. It is trying to present simple information and to encourage people to take practical steps, hence the focus on hand-washing and avoiding touching your face. We will also hear calls to avoid panic-buying and stockpiling. Ministers will be calculating that the biggest risk to food and other supply chains is from consumer behaviour (as preparations last year for a no-deal Brexit suggested).

3. Crisis management

The government has a good crisis management response structure with the existing Civil Contingency architecture, the Cabinet Office Briefing Room (COBR) and the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE). There is no need to invent new processes; COBR will bring together all parts of government to assign responsibilities. Part of its value is in providing a visible sense that the prime minister and secretaries of state are in charge. It is important that other meetings to make decisions – including the cabinet itself – do not undermine or duplicate the crisis management structure.

4. NHS and social care

The government will need to ensure that hospitals have the staff and kit to respond. It has already fast-tracked applications for capital funding to build shielded areas in walk-in centres where potential patients can be safely assessed. There are reports that the government will ask recently retired doctors and nurses to return to work, but this will be hard. The government may have to change the rules on pension tax reliefs, which have disincentivised some clinicians from taking on more work.

The government will also soon need to set rules on priorities for the health services and make clear what non-urgent care to delay.

In social care, given the extra vulnerability of older people, the government will need to ensure that there are enough care workers and that staff receive sick pay if they feel too unwell to come into work. Given the financial pressures on social care – where there are already estimated to be 122,000 job vacancies – the government may have to provide emergency cash to care homes for recruitment or sick pay costs.

5. The economy

At the budget on 11 March, the government is likely to lay out some of its thinking on how to mitigate the economic damage of Covid-19 – and the extent to which its wider agenda is at risk.

Emergency money for health and social care is the easiest and most likely response. More difficult decisions surround the call by self-employed workers for help if they are not to keep working when they are contagious. There will also be difficult decisions about how to support businesses – the government might want to stop businesses going under simply as a result of short-term cash-flow problems or loss of demand (tourism, public entertainment and airlines), but it will not want to prop up businesses that are in long-term decline (as with Flybe).

The budget will be scrutinised closely to see whether the need for coronavirus spending is chipping into the government’s other pledges – including more money for the NHS, and for improving the relative prosperity of the UK outside the southeast.

The prime minister may also want to praise British science, universities, and researd and development (R&D); they will want to know in turn whether they can expect more help.

6. Policy trade-offs

There is speculation that if travel is restricted, trade talks with the EU will be delayed. Ministers will want to avoid that – and can always talk without meeting. But there will be tough decisions such as whether to go ahead with major events like COP26 (the climate change summit itself seems unlikely to be cancelled but preparations will be disrupted). It may also seem inappropriate to announce some initiatives in the midst of a crisis.

Boris Johnson is projecting authority – but the government cannot entirely control an epidemic

This is a chance for the prime minister to look like a national leader. He got off to a slow start, but this week has projected more sense of control through a speech to the country on basic precautions – including hygiene – and the publicising of the government’s emergency meetings. In donning protective clothing and exhorting the nation to sing ‘Happy Birthday twice’ while washing hands, he has found a way of deploying his ebullience in the coronavirus cause.

All the same, we are still probably a month or two off the peak impact of the virus and the tougher decisions lie ahead. An epidemic is something that government cannot entirely control; it can simply shape the national response. If the death toll rises, as seems inevitable, the risk for Johnson is that people will accuse him of having done too little. His best defence will be that he foresaw the need to take decisions, took them in time, and so limited the impact of the virus.