Covid-19 Inquiry: Is It Necessary?

by Sam Head

Over the last 2 years, the world has been hit by a catastrophic event, the coronavirus pandemic. Worldwide there have been over 3.2 million deaths and many more are still dying from this horrendous disease. In the UK, over 150,000 people have unfortunately lost their lives and with such a high death toll, many have been affected. With vaccines being administered at an astounding rate and lockdown easing many believe the effects will slowly pass. However, recently pressure has been mounting for Boris Johnson, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom to launch an inquiry into the actions the Government has taken during the Covid-19 pandemic. Senior doctors, government scientific advisors, and political rivals, as well as thousands of bereaved family and friends, whose beloved ones have passed away, have supported the inquiry. In this piece, I will discuss the pros and cons of the inquiry and the true intentions of those promoting it.

On the one hand, the inquiry would be notably valuable. In the medical arena, many areas would benefit from a national review. For example, parts of the UK were less affected by Covid-19 than others. By investigating the reasons underpinning this, the medical landscape can use it to better prepare if another pandemic arrives. To give a case example, the older generation was found to be at more risk than any other generation. If another viral disease begins to spread, prioritising this age group and keeping them isolated would be a huge first step to preventing a lot of mortality. Another area that could bereft from an in-depth review was the failed track and trace system. Firstly, there were technical issues as it failed to work on many different phone types. Further, not enough people participated in its use and thus hindered it from being fully functional. In addition, the system had many glitches, such as if an infection was registered in a household and another member of the house had a different surname, the system didn’t link such cases together, even though at the same address. As a result, the app didn’t inform people, businesses, and venues of the potential infection risk. Finally, another area to evaluate and which would be hugely beneficial is the vaccine programme itself. Although the vaccine was developed in record time, still large numbers of deaths were recorded during this period. Maybe new ways can now be discovered to make and manufacture vaccines for variants of the virus on a faster timescale. In addition, the inoculation process while efficient relied on swaths of volunteers. Perhaps a National Service regime could help such needs in society in the future.

On the other hand, the inquiry could be seen as disadvantageous and causing potential political unrest. In England, lockdown three is easing with schools having been opened on the 8th of March and businesses on the 12th of April. However, cases are still being found every day and any disruption to Covid-19 measures could be critical to a new resurgence of cases. It is a fine balance between living life and containing the pandemic. Further, many are grieving from their loved ones passing away in the first or second wave. Those who have been hidden away, shielding are scared to venture out, and the health and well-being of the population is at an all-time low. Political adversaries of Boris Johnson could use this instability in the country to their benefit. With the economy spiralling down into a recession a political upheaval at this time would be disastrous.

Overall, I think that while an inquiry could disrupt the proceedings involving the second lockdown easing, an inquiry should take place despite government's concerns. People deserve to know where the government failed and at what points, these moments occurred. However, while the investigation is needed it should begin once all measures have been lifted, and when the country and society has begun to stabilise.