Theoretical question - would the UK have handled pandemic better if we have voted to Remain in 2016?

[Luke McDonnell]

Hi,

I am I fan of alternative history so I am just asking for your thoughts on how the UK would have handled Covid 19 if we had voted for Remain rather than Brexit in 2016? From my POV 2 side of the argument to consider:

- From the POV of remainers the argument is sometimes made that BJs government was chosen on the basis of loyalty to Brexit rather than expertise and therefore they were very poorly equipped to handle a major national emergency like Covid?
- Brexit itself coincided with the beginning of the pandemic coming out of China in January 2020 could it be said that government were to focused on Brexit and its planning to handle the pandemic and prepare early for what was to come?
- A remain vote would probably meant no Johnson premiership - more competent government able to handle the pandemic better? Without the upheaval of Brexit

On the other side of the argument
- The success of the vaccine roll out and our early procurement of the vaccine

It will be interesting to here your thoughts on this one tell me what you think?

 

[bramling]

Hi,

I am I fan of alternative history so I am just asking for your thoughts on how the UK would have handled Covid 19 if we had voted for Remain rather than Brexit in 2016? From my POV 2 side of the argument to consider:

- From the POV of remainers the argument is sometimes made that BJs government was chosen on the basis of loyalty to Brexit rather than expertise and therefore they were very poorly equipped to handle a major national emergency like Covid?
- Brexit itself coincided with the beginning of the pandemic coming out of China in January 2020 could it be said that government were to focused on Brexit and its planning to handle the pandemic and prepare early for what was to come?
- A remain vote would probably meant no Johnson premiership - more competent government able to handle the pandemic better? Without the upheaval of Brexit

On the other side of the argument
- The success of the vaccine roll out and our early procurement of the vaccine

It will be interesting to here your thoughts on this one tell me what you think?

This is a difficult question as there's a lot of variables.

My hunch is Cameron would have been better, and certainly he would have been a *lot* better on the comms front.

May would have probably been a bit dithersome, but possibly her decisions would have been better thought through.

I'd say on balance I think I'd rather have had Cameron / Osborne running the show than Johnson / Sunak.

 

[greyman42]

This is a difficult question as there's a lot of variables.

My hunch is Cameron would have been better, and certainly he would have been a *lot* better on the comms front.

May would have probably been a bit dithersome, but possibly her decisions would have been better thought through.

I'd say on balance I think I'd rather have had Cameron / Osborne running the show than Johnson / Sunak.

I don't think you can really fault Sunak.

 

[brad465]

Hi,

I am I fan of alternative history so I am just asking for your thoughts on how the UK would have handled Covid 19 if we had voted for Remain rather than Brexit in 2016? From my POV 2 side of the argument to consider:

- From the POV of remainers the argument is sometimes made that BJs government was chosen on the basis of loyalty to Brexit rather than expertise and therefore they were very poorly equipped to handle a major national emergency like Covid?
- Brexit itself coincided with the beginning of the pandemic coming out of China in January 2020 could it be said that government were to focused on Brexit and its planning to handle the pandemic and prepare early for what was to come?
- A remain vote would probably meant no Johnson premiership - more competent government able to handle the pandemic better? Without the upheaval of Brexit

On the other side of the argument
- The success of the vaccine roll out and our early procurement of the vaccine

It will be interesting to here your thoughts on this one tell me what you think?

What's worth remembering is had remain won, it's highly likely no general election would have happened until 2020 (of course 2 elections happened before one was due after 2015). That could have created an interesting dilemma where a campaign would have got underway but then postponed and maybe even Parliament being "undissolved", if that's a thing, in order to do much of what was done in covid's early stages. Cameron also said he'd not seek a third term as PM, which could have created a situation like Merkel being Chancellor, but not party leader, in the covid response.

If we want to go even further into the realms of alternative reality, I wonder what the probability would have been of the US's covid response being led by Trump, who capitalised strongly on the Brexit vote and Farage in his Presidential campaign. That said had Hilary won she'd have still faced a large libertarian backlash in key parts of the country, and state responses may not have varied much compared to now. However, we definitely would not have had as much "anti-China" rhetoric and/or injecting bleach suggestions.

 

[bramling]

I don't think you can really fault Sunak.

That's a matter for debate!

Personally I think Sunak has been happy to pee money up the wall whilst happy to build up a brand for himself. Personally I'd have been happier for support to be targeted towards businesses (especially small ones) rather than employees. It's also plainly apparent that furlough should have ended much sooner than it did.

However, the flip side of the coin is how much of this is down to Sunak and how much down to Boris. We don't really know the answer to that. Indeed it does seem there is anecdotal evidence to suggest Sunak has been urging restraint at various times (but then signing the blank cheque anyway).

What's worth remembering is had remain won, it's highly likely no general election would have happened until 2020 (of course 2 elections happened before one was due after 2015). That could have created an interesting dilemma where a campaign would have got underway but then postponed and maybe even Parliament being "undissolved", if that's a thing, in order to do much of what was done in covid's early stages. Cameron also said he'd not seek a third term as PM, which could have created a situation like Merkel being Chancellor, but not party leader, in the covid response.

If we want to go even further into the realms of alternative reality, I wonder what the probability would have been of the US's covid response being led by Trump, who capitalised strongly on the Brexit vote and Farage in his Presidential campaign. That said had Hilary won she'd have still faced a large libertarian backlash in key parts of the country, and state responses may not have varied much compared to now. However, we definitely would not have had as much "anti-China" rhetoric and/or injecting bleach suggestions.

This is a very interesting point, as one wonders how things might have played out differently if we hadn't had a government who had just won an election and therefore didn't have to worry about upsetting the electorate for 4-5 years. Like you say, in certain circumstances we might well have had an election in May 2020, which would certainly have been an interesting scenario.

Perhaps the best case would have been if the Conservatives had managed a majority in 2017, as we'd now be looking at reaching the end of the term. I suspect that would have led to some differences, especially right now, though the tax bombshell could then have happened straight after the election.

 

[Cdd89]

Even with fairly dramatic changes to who was in power, I think about the same number of people would have died — with the waves maybe a few months later or sooner than they would have happened otherwise, and of course different specific people, since Covid is inherently random.

I think this holds true even if the U.K. was a couple of months slower on vaccines, as the vaccine rollout coincided with a natural decline in infections, assuming a similar duration of lockdown (Jan-May approx) as we released lockdown too late to save many lives anyway, in a misguided attempt to “get cases as low as possible”.

 

[cuccir]

Like you say, in certain circumstances we might well have had an election in May 2020, which would certainly have been an interesting scenario

I think any election would have been postponed to summer. Go back to March/April 2020 and there was fairly universal support for lockdown etc, based as much on uncertainty as anything else.

Equally, people would have been very suspicious of any party looking to try and cling on to power illegitimately. So there'd have been a lot of pressure to not delay too long. I suspect a late July/early August election would have happened.

The next question is whether Cameron and Corbyn would still have been leaders? If Cameron had intended to stand down then presumably he would have done so in 2018/19, to give his successor a chance to lead into the election. There's a good chance I think that George Osborne would have gone into a 2020 election as Tory party leader, and would therefore have been in charge for the initial response.

 

[GrimsbyPacer]

No difference at all, politicians and medical experts would of came to same conclusion.
If we hadn't left, people would be saying we should have, as we could stop it getting here.

 

[MikeWM]

That could have created an interesting dilemma where a campaign would have got underway but then postponed and maybe even Parliament being "undissolved", if that's a thing, in order to do much of what was done in covid's early stages.

Putting my 'constitutional nerd' hat on for a moment, I don't think there is literally any way that a Parliament can be undissolved once it has dissolved. The election could be postponed, even after dissolution, by using the Civil Contingencies Act (at which point its Parliamentary safeguards would not apply, so such postponement could theoretically be indefinite - one may argue that's rather a flaw in the Civil Contingencies Act...)

The election would have been due on 7th May 2020, so the dissolution would have been - I think - on 30th March (25 working days before). So in this case there would have been time to pass emergency legislation extending the life of the existing Parliament. But it is indeed an interesting question.

 

[greyman42]

That's a matter for debate!

Personally I think Sunak has been happy to pee money up the wall whilst happy to build up a brand for himself. Personally I'd have been happier for support to be targeted towards businesses (especially small ones) rather than employees. It's also plainly apparent that furlough should have ended much sooner than it did.

That's a fair point about furlough which should of been wrapped up earlier.

 

[Yew]

The election would have been due on 7th May 2020, so the dissolution would have been - I think - on 30th March (25 working days before). So in this case there would have been time to pass emergency legislation extending the life of the existing Parliament. But it is indeed an interesting question.

It wouldn't have taken much of a advancement for the whole thing to kick off during a period of dissolution; I don't think the fixed-term parliament act has ever seen 5 year term.

 

[simonw]

It wouldn't have taken much of a advancement for the whole thing to kick off during a period of dissolution; I don't think the fixed-term parliament act has ever seen 5 year term.

2010 to 2015 wAs a five year term

 

[Yew]

2010 to 2015 wAs a five year term

Still, it's been generally disobeyed, and if we want to go into super-pedantry, the act only came in in 2011, so since it's came into force, there has not been a full 5 year term.

 

[HSTEd]

We would have been forced into the EU vaccination programme and it would have been an utter disaster as a result.

Endless lockdown or 200,000+ dead.

I think any election would have been postponed to summer. Go back to March/April 2020 and there was fairly universal support for lockdown etc, based as much on uncertainty as anything else.

Worth noting that the Commons cannot force an extension of a parliamentary term beyond five years without the approval of the Lords..... The Parliament Acts cannot be used to do so.

That would have been an interesting political debate

 

[AlterEgo]

I don't think you can really fault Sunak.

Other than the time he got millions of people into restaurants by giving them a tenner off their bills per head. That was bonkers.

 

[greyman42]

Other than the time he got millions of people into restaurants by giving them a tenner off their bills per head. That was bonkers.

Not if you were in the hospitality business. And i never heard the customers complaining either so not that bonkers.

 

[brad465]

We would have been forced into the EU vaccination programme and it would have been an utter disaster as a result.

Endless lockdown or 200,000+ dead.

We were not forced to, Hungary didn't partake IIRC, but I expect we would have been part of it anyway.

 

[AlterEgo]

Not if you were in the hospitality business. And i never heard the customers complaining either so not that bonkers.

That was fine if you wanted to make money, not so fine if you wanted to dampen spread. There was no need to *actively encourage* people with £10 vouchers to cram into pubs and restaurants, that was stupid.

I say that as someone who used EOHO a lot in 2020!

 

[bramling]

Not if you were in the hospitality business. And i never heard the customers complaining either so not that bonkers.

Given how much the scheme cost, and the fact that during August school holidays I suspect there would have been high demand for restaurants irrespective of the scheme, one can only conclude it was a waste of money. Those hospitality businesses I'm familiar with weren't too pleased with it either - their view was it caused more problems then it solved by creating an artificial peak on those days, which completely disrupted their supply and staffing arrangements.

Then there's the issue of whether it was particularly wise to cram unvaccinated people into hospitality venues.

Of course, one could be cynical and take the view the scheme was very successful in achieving it's real objective, promoting "brand Rishi".

 

[greyman42]

That was fine if you wanted to make money, not so fine if you wanted to dampen spread. There was no need to *actively encourage* people with £10 vouchers to cram into pubs and restaurants, that was stupid.

I say that as someone who used EOHO a lot in 2020!

There is no evidence that it made a significant difference to Covid infections.

 

[AlterEgo]

There is no evidence that it made a significant difference to Covid infections.

This was published last month and got a fair bit of pickup online. https://academic.oup.com/ej/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ej/ueab074/6382847

 

[yorksrob]

As a policy, EOHO was still preferable to lockdown, the tiers, the scotch egg law. Hopefully someone will do a critical evaluation of these policies.

This is a difficult question as there's a lot of variables.

My hunch is Cameron would have been better, and certainly he would have been a *lot* better on the comms front.

May would have probably been a bit dithersome, but possibly her decisions would have been better thought through.

I'd say on balance I think I'd rather have had Cameron / Osborne running the show than Johnson / Sunak.

I wouldn't trust Osborne tending the anaglypta in his fathers wallpaper factory.

 

[bramling]

As a policy, EOHO was still preferable to lockdown, the tiers, the scotch egg law. Hopefully someone will do a critical evaluation of these policies.



I wouldn't trust Osborne tending the anaglypta in his fathers wallpaper factory.

Can't be any worse than we have at the moment. Yesterday's Peppa Pig car-crash really did set a new low, even for Johnson!

 

[yorksrob]

Can't be any worse than we have at the moment. Yesterday's Peppa Pig car-crash really did set a new low, even for Johnson!

I'm more interested in him holding his nerve over covid than his after dinner speaking abilities !

 

[bramling]

I'm more interested in him holding his nerve over covid than his after dinner speaking abilities !

If he can't articulate a basic scripted speech to the CBI, one can't really hold out much hope on anything else, sadly.

 

[brad465]

If he can't articulate a basic scripted speech to the CBI, one can't really hold out much hope on anything else, sadly.

Incidentally Johnson is actually a remainer at heart, but supported leave for believing, correctly it turns out, it was a better route to becoming PM (he wrote two polar opposite Telegraph articles on the EU to backup this behaviour). Had he believed Remain was the best route and in turn remain won, it's not beyond the bounds he'd have become PM once Cameron stepped down, which would have meant he was in charge of the covid response anyway.

 

[DustyBin]

This was published last month and got a fair bit of pickup online. https://academic.oup.com/ej/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ej/ueab074/6382847

Was increased transmission in summer necessarily a bad thing though, strategically? Whilst there was obviously no EOHO in 2021, England has been (almost) restriction free since July and appears to now be approaching the endemic stage, well ahead of those countries who decided to suppress the spread and are now being hit by a winter wave.

 

[yorksrob]

It's worth noticing that under EOHO we were still following our social distancing, rule of six etc guidelines, which suggests that if transmission rose as much as they say it did, these measures were somewhat ephemeral and not much point.

 

[greyman42]

If he can't articulate a basic scripted speech to the CBI, one can't really hold out much hope on anything else, sadly.

I don't think it will impact on his handling of Covid.

 

[bramling]

I don't think it will impact on his handling of Covid.

It's impacted his handling of Covid all the way through, in the form of dire communications and an inability to defend a position.