Daf,
I am not defending the indefensible,
I have to say however that I find this rush to condemn Boris to be somewhat unseemly and frankly. nothing more than politics.
If you put forward ‘supported ‘ evidence and data that shows what difference making some of the decisions would have made to the final death toll then fair enough. If not however how do you know ‘ what difference these decisions would have made.
As I have already said, the time for review and judgement of the performance in the UK is when the Pandemic is over, or at least is under control.
The time for looking for lessons from an International perspective is when many more countries have it under control.
Just because one approach has worked well for another country at any given time doesn’t mean it would have worked as well here.
As I have also said, the Government must be held to account , but based on a thorough examination of the detail , making sure the science of hindsight or emotional responses are not given an unacceptable level of importance.
What is most important about reducing or preventing the risks to us all in the future is that the practical lessons, for primarily the sciences, but also the political establishment is to ensure that the reviews are carried out in a proper,, objective, tested manner.
It may well be ,perhaps , better if the Government had acted sooner than they did, on certain matters, but then hindsight is a wonderful thing.
Had they acted sooner, which now the political expedients say would have been the right thing to do, I believe that the decision would not have been at all well received by the majority. It was only as the situation became increasingly desperate that the need for urgent action became increasingly apparent and thus, possibly, more acceptable to a greater number of people.
You may not have a great deal of confidence in this Government, but
I do not envy them the task of managing the Covid pandemic, and the economy, and Brexit.