What is right is sadly often lost to political convenience

This is the first Sunday in three weeks where I’ve been able to write my blog, without the aid of a box of tissues, paracetamol, and cough medicine. Yes, I’m feeling much better, and thank you to all the readers of this blog who have sent their kind wishes over the past couple of weeks. Hopefully that is me done with cough and colds this winter! Not feeling 100% has meant however that I’ve had time to engage more deeply in things that perhaps normally I would not pay so much attention to.

One of these has been to listen to the reports of the Covid Inquiry. I haven’t been interested in the tittle tattle mudslinging that characterised some of the evidence presented around the performance of our politicians. Their incompetence and selfishness have been widely reported before the Covid Inquiry even started. No, I have been more interested in the more considered and reflective contributions that have begun to show a completely different side to the decision-making and the impact on individuals involved in making these decisions on our behalf.  

Sir Patrick Vallance’s testimony was wide-ranging, but two elements in particular caught my attention. The first was his thoughts about the ‘eat out to help out’ scheme. He claimed he knew nothing about this before it was announced. We never took part in this scheme, as my thoughts were the same as his, it would lead to the spread of more infections, something we now know to be true. The second point was the admission that we had introduced the first lockdown a week later than perhaps we should have done. Whilst a week doesn’t sound long, at the time, the rate of infections was doubling every three days.

The delay in introducing the first lockdown also concerned Jonathan Van-Tam, the former Deputy Chief Medical Officer. He felt it should have been introduced 7-14 days before it was. He also incredibly found out about the ‘eat out to help out’ scheme via the TV. What was more shocking to hear was that his family had been threatened both online and physically, in response to decisions he had been a party to. Nobody should have to experience such threats, especially those who are working for the greater good of society.

Sadly, he wasn’t alone. Other members of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) were also threatened, and their families too. As was Professor Chris Whitty, Van-Tam’s boss and Chief Medical Officer. His evidence was presented in a calm, thoughtful and yet penetrating way. Among the many challenging points he made, was the important observation about those taking policy decisions. He noted that often these were people making decisions about issues in which they had little knowledge and as such, the decisions were often flawed or taken too late.

For example, despite the government’s protestations that they were ‘following the science’ when it came to making decisions, this was a completely erroneous claim. The scientific evidence was incomplete and the political interpretation of what evidence was available appeared driven by economic and political factors, rather than on the basis of protecting the public. This was something that probably led to the delay in the first lockdown. Those taking that decision appeared to have little understanding of the way people would react and behave by being told to stay in their homes for a prolonged period.

The reality was interesting. In that first lockdown, millions of folk volunteered to help others. The NHS benefited from some one million people volunteering and there were over 12 million volunteers helping either individually (within neighbourhoods) or more collectively as part of established community groups. Whilst I’m sure there were people who were lonely, isolated, frail or simply ill during this time, the reaching out to others by these volunteers will have helped many of these people. I know on my street, people helped with shopping, dog walking and socially-distanced garden gate conversations. The community spirit, or rather the spirit of the community was powerful and potent. Sadly, in many ways, that supportive sense of community and being there for others has disappeared.

This was brought home to me last week during my visit to our School Nurse team. They are a great group of people, and I was staggered by the sheer volume of work they are engaged in. When I hear from colleagues such as these and gain an understanding of the difference they make, it reinforces my irritation of the Daily Mail type of commentary that the NHS has a much bigger workforce, but is not seeing as many patients, as it did pre-Covid.

One of the differences the School Nurse team make is with their parent drop-in sessions they run in schools. In a recent two-week snapshot of activity, they saw 51 families (including 14 follow ups from previous sessions). Eleven of the issues on which parents wanted advice were to do with continence – children who were not toilet-trained, before they started school. I think this reflects the way in which, for many people, the community support for families, provided by the communities themselves has been lost.     

Finally, the current phase of the Covid Inquiry is not about holding anyone to account or attributing blame, it is about trying to understand the decisions taken. Reading last week’s testimonies, and thinking about the family concerns that our School Nurses were dealing with, I was reminded of the words of Leo Tolstoy - In order to change the nature of things, either within yourself or in others, one should change not the events, but the thoughts which created those events. They seem appropriate somehow.