The Covid-19 Inquiry, the UK’s probe into the handling of the pandemic has officially begun its public hearings and has heard from its lead lawyer that the “potentially massive impact” of lockdowns was not considered.
On Tuesday, the first full hearings started into the inquiry, which will be split into six areas, looking first into the UK’s handling of the coronavirus.
The aims of the COVID Inquiry will be to “examine, consider, and report on preparations and the response” to the pandemic in England, Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland.”
‘Forever Seared’
The inquiry’s lead counsel, Hugo Keith KC said there was very “little thought” given to lockdowns.“Extraordinary though it may seem, given that it’s a word that’s forever seared in the nation’s consciousness, there was very little debate pre-pandemic of whether a lockdown might prove to be necessary in the event of a runaway virus, let alone how a lockdown could be avoided.
“Very little thought was given to how, if it proved to be necessary, something as complex, difficult and damaging as a national lockdown could be put in place at all.
“Equally, there appears to have been a failure to think through the potentially massive impact on education and on the economy in trying to control a runaway virus in this way.”
Addressing inquiry chairwoman Baroness Heather Hallett, he said: “My lady, no amount of foresight or planning can guarantee that a country will not make mistakes when a disease strikes, but that does not mean that we should not strive to be as ready as we sensibly can be.
“No country can be perfectly prepared, but it can certainly be under-prepared.”
”Did the attention therefore paid to the risks of a no-deal exit - Operation Yellowhammer as it was known - drain the resources and capacity that should have been continuing the fight against the next pandemic, that should have been utilised in preparing the United Kingdom for civil emergency?
”Or did all that generic and operational planning in fact lead to people being better trained and well-marshalled and, in fact, better prepared to deal with Covid and also to the existence of improved trade, medicine and supply links?
”My lady, on the evidence so far - but it will be a matter for you - we very much fear that it was the former.”
The inquiry also heard testimonies from families in a video who said that they did not hug each other at funerals because they followed government Covid social distancing rules.
Favour Lockdown Fears
In Nov. MPs criticised the COVID Inquiry will be weighted towards organisations and individuals“which can fairly be presumed either to favour lockdowns as a pandemic policy or else to have ”understandable personal reasons to advocate for earlier and/or harder lockdowns — for example, core Government Departments, Covid-19 Bereaved Families for Justice and Imperial College of Science, Tech, and Medicine.”The organisation UsforThem, a campaigning group that advocated for children to be prioritised during the COVID-19 pandemic, and continues to lobby for children’s well-being, was also cautious.
“The response involved an unprecedented infringement of personal liberties and children’s rights to an education, and raised serious, and as yet unanswered questions, about breaches of medical ethics including coercive and censorious public health strategies,” UsforThem co-founder Molly Kingsley told The Eppch Times at the time.
Interim reports are scheduled to be published before public hearings conclude by summer of 2026.
