It is important to understand the gap between the Prime Minister and the scientists on the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) because it is huge.
On 21 September, when evidence was accumulating that infections were on the rise, Sage recommended a series of national measures. These included the closures of pubs and restaurants or an even more severe restriction on our freedoms in short sharp national ‘circuit breakers’.
Instead, Boris Johnson has adopted a regional approach to stamping out coronavirus. And even the ‘baseline’ measures he is imposing on ‘very high risk’ areas such as Merseyside are seen as inadequate by his scientific advisers — as his chief medical officer, Chris Whitty, told me at the press conference yesterday.
If the second wave becomes a reality, it is not obvious that the Prime Minister’s authority would ever recover
What I can’t judge is whether the Prime Minister has made a brave judgement that the economic costs of following his scientists’ advice will do more net harm — including to health — than following what they recommend.
Britain’s best politics newsletters
You get two free articles each week when you sign up to The Spectator’s emails.
Already a subscriber? Log in
Comments
Join the debate, free for a month
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first month free.
UNLOCK ACCESS Try a month freeAlready a subscriber? Log in