2H76
Well-Known Member
At first you can't blame them for shutting everything down. The only argument in the UK was they were too slow to do that, the defence being they are dealing with an unknown and businesses/tax incomes would suffer if places were closed unnecessarily.I agree that the basic model "lockdown" is not a one size fits all model, despite what EU governments think.
It all depends what you call a "lockdown".
There is already scientific research done where the outcome is that the basic measures are the most effective, washing hands, social distancing, working from home, facemasks in public transport. I think governments went full panic mode went they closed shops, schools, hospitality sector as a whole (not talking about nightclubs or big events).
All those economy-wrecking extra measures are not in proportion to the small extra effect. Actually...what we are seeing now is that the mayors of big cities want the terraces open as soon as possible, cause now people are mass gathering in parks on good weather days.
All-in-all I reckon the first wave they did well and we got some freedom back reasonably quickly. We were back in the pubs within 14 weeks! But since then when things could have been learned they didn't.
Three examples spring to mind - letting the schools, unis and colleges return all in one go with limited (if any) testing, Starmer (leader of the opposition) calling for a fire-break lockdown obvr the October half-term, which he was ignored and we continued with the tiers, and hitting the wrong targets with lockdown without evidence that they were causing a spike....eg bars being service with food only, closing places at 10 (so people gathered around take-aways) and ridiculous things like charging two friends for having a coffee together...outdoors.
They said there will be a