Reaction – The Prime Ministerial Statement 10/05/20

Sunday, May 10th 2020

Another Ministerial Broadcast from the Prime Minister. Memories evoked of a similar time on 23 March where the country was plunged into a lockdown that changed our lives. Boris Johnson once again gave a lengthy speech. This time, on how far the country had come, imminent small changes and possible long term plans for the UK’s Covid-19 strategy.

In the coming hours after the broadcast, I reached out to the WIJ Project community for their thoughts, here’s what they told me.

Some felt the discussion about lifting restrictions was coming too soon after the UK death toll for Covid-19 related deaths hit 30,000 earlier this week:

Jane Corscadden — How can you even consider lifting restrictions when the country has the second-highest death toll in the world? The new message is too vague.

I’m worried that people in Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales will think it applies to them when each nation has a different response. The central UK government is changing stances too soon, and I personally wouldn’t trust their judgement.

Madeleine Raine — A lot said without anything really being said. Boris Johnson succeeds again in providing a slightly confusing account of what we can and can’t do in lockdown. Despite death rates still remaining high, it is now acceptable to sit outside in local parks. How is this going to affect existing social distancing measures? Will it really be social distancing?

Elle Woods-Marshall — Boris’ speech was lacking clarity at a time when we need it the most. Although television addresses are perhaps more personal, they mean we have to wait longer to ask questions and more importantly, get crucial answers. Allowing people to travel by car, walk more and exercise in unlimited amounts will encourage less social distancing and convey that this is not nearly as serious as it is.
The press conference will have a lot to answer for.

Is a new approach perhaps worth noting?

Amy Holliday — I thought it was particularly interesting that potential best-case scenarios later down the line for June and July were made public. Whilst this may boost morale in the short term with us all having something to hope for, if the rate of infection does increase and such measures are not able to come to fruition when expected, will this damage morale and affect public cooperation later on?

This scenario may be likely if people are confused by the new ‘Stay Alert’ message and don’t adhere to social distancing as strictly as they have been.

And for some, further detail from the government is needed:

Meghna Amin — Using graphs and equations to display simple concepts makes the government seem more advanced than they are. Everything said in that anticlimactic speech was already known. Adding fancy graphics doesn’t change anything. It won’t change the fact that the government’s guidance is too little too late with 30,000 dead that the government failed to address.

More importantly, the apparent clarity isn’t there. The most obvious example being: Do we go to the park or not?

Isabelle Raikes — I believe that the right decision was made tonight regarding the next move in tackling the coronavirus however, I believe the PM’s speech lacked overall clarity. I feel as if he confirmed the stages which had been rumoured in the media, yet we did not receive much more information than we already knew from hearsay.

I also felt he laid out points the government aimed to achieve without explaining how they would do it e.g. reducing coronavirus in care homes. This contributed to the overall lack of transparency.

An exacerbated class divide was a sticking point for several:

Lucy Martin — Encouraging those working in industries that can’t work from home to go back to work if they can avoid public transport seems irresponsible, especially if the safety of these workers cannot be guaranteed. When middle- and upper-class jobs can often be done from home – I worry that more of the working classes are risking their lives for economic security as they already have done throughout the pandemic. This is more concerning when we consider which groups are disproportionately losing their lives.

Florence Herlihy — Yet another blundering and harmful update from Johnson. The modifications will serve only to exacerbate the already stark class divide shown in the impact of the virus, leaving those less fortunate with no choice but to return to work, putting themselves and others in danger.

Psychologically, too, it missed the mark. Tonight’s message had the opportunity to provide a sensible end goal for the country to push towards and hope for: once the death rate dramatically declines, lockdown can be eased, and life can continue. Regrettably, no such hope has been given.

Jessica Sharkey — There’s no doubt that Boris is a good speaker. He’s passionate and eloquent, however, it feels like he’s aware of people losing interest in lockdown and targeting their annoyance at him. So he will be making these statements about future adjustments despite not knowing how this is going to change in the long term. Take the changes he announced, in working-class areas hardly any builders and scaffolders stopped working. This isn’t addressed.

He also briefly mentions how some areas of the UK have been worse affected than others – he does not explain the link between deprived areas and a lack of support from the Government. The whole set up seems like the result of a mid-week panic and a promised special statement. He realised he couldn’t ease lockdown but had to say something.

A very energetic, eloquent speech nevertheless. Interesting.

Some also considered fears of the situation worsening:

Niamh Doyle — A passionate speech from the Prime Minister but there is quite a lot of pressure relying on one particular factor that aims to reduce the overall spread of the virus, which is the instruction of avoiding public transport and instead, travelling to work by walking, cycling or by car, which a lot of people don’t have time for or can’t afford. Most, I can imagine, won’t be able to consider this an option and therefore won’t’ follow this guidance.

I understand the efforts that have been made to be as flexible as possible to make it easier for all of us, but considering how accessible public transport is, I can’t imagine the way people choose to travel to work will change.

Isabelle Walker — Boris’ speech shows how out of touch he is with his audience. It lacked the clarity that people desperately need in these concerning times. People who can’t work from home, such as manual labourers who are typically associated with the working class, will be forced to risk their lives whilst people who can i.e those with office jobs may safely continue and will have the added luxury of more varied leisure activities. Any waiver of the lockdown rules at a time where we are yet to see a significant decline in daily death rate is irresponsible and only adds to the risk of a second wave.

For some, the predicament the PM is facing was a factor:

Lauren Mcgaun — Boris Johnson’s speech offered no real clarity on this whole situation. On the one hand, he was urging people to stay at home and on the other, he seemed to be encouraging mass excursions to beauty spots like the Lake District for exercise.

Whilst the death toll still seems to be far too high to be taking the sort of measures he has outlined, Johnson is in a very difficult place indeed as businesses are desperate to get the economy up and running again.

Lucy Williamson— I thought Boris spoke passionately and eloquently. However, he did a lot of talking without a lot of saying anything. His speech has clearly caused mass confusion. He essentially said ‘stay home but go out as much as you want for exercise. Go to work if you can, but also whatever you do stay home’. I think this is the result of trying to avoid criticism from two opposing parties.

On one side, those who’d see the loosening of restrictions as completely irresponsible due to persistently high death tolls. On the other, those that the government feels need more freedom otherwise mass hysteria may ensure. The result; a middle of the line, non-committal, unclear plan. Equally, I don’t envy Boris Johnson’s job right now.