COVID-19: a public inquiry in hard times?

Abstract

The case for a public inquiry is clear, says Ashley Clift.¹ From personal protective equipment to the epidemic in care homes, from social determinants of health to primary care, the government has each and every case to answer.^2–4 The UK’s response to COVID-19 seemed initially calm and collected but as measures were delayed and contact tracing abandoned, to be replaced by political spin and bluster, the reality of deaths in hospitals and care homes looked entirely disconnected from government COVID-19 briefings.

These are hard times for any politician faced with a novel pandemic and unable to learn from a near miss with SARS, as East Asian nations were able to do. Harder than they should be, thanks to many years of running down public health and running the NHS at its limit. Harder still for the baseline deterioration in the health of vulnerable populations caused by austerity and the distractions of Brexit. This is not a hard or loaded political analysis. This is a simple road map to disaster.

Some people argue that the time for an inquiry is once the epidemic is under control but what if it isn’t under control for years? How do we learn the lessons for the next wave and the wave after that if we defer the questioning and accountability until the end? We also might learn now from our international friends.⁵ So too from pandemic history.⁶

As we emerge from the first wave of COVID-19 infections, a process of accountability can run alongside and optimise the UK’s ongoing response. Politicians are realising that uncertainties in medicine are old and new.^7,8 Some better approaches, for example in managing patients in intensive care, emerge as the pandemic unfolds.⁹

Others say that an inquiry will be a waste of time, an exercise in dodging blame and, more importantly, a way to avoid deep-rooted structural change. Why fall for the diversion of an inquiry when legislation is needed now? An inquiry with the express remit to recommend legislative reform, ensuring the UK is better prepared for existential threats like pandemics and climate change, may be the only route to success. Legislation without an inquiry requires political will, and that political will seems absent.

References

Clift AK. Anatomising failure: there should be a statutory public inquiry into the UK Government's handling of COVID-19. J R Soc Med 2020; 113: 230–231.

Jani A. Preparing for COVID-19's aftermath: simple steps to address social determinants of health. J R Soc Med 2020; 113: 205–207.

Majeed A, Maile EJ and Bindman AB. The primary care response to COVID-19 in England's National Health Service. J R Soc Med 2020; 113: 208–210.

Devakumar D, Bhopal SS and Geordan S. COVID-19: the great unequaliser. J R Soc Med 2020; 113: 234–235.

Kakar A and Nundy S. COVID-19 in India. J R Soc Med 2020; 113: 232–233.

Ashton J. Writing about the plague. J R Soc Med 2020; 113: 236–237.

Matthews RAJ. The origins of the treatment of uncertainty in clinical medicine–Part 2: the emergence of probability theory and its limitations. J R Soc Med 2020; 113: 225–229.

Koffman J, Gross J, Etkind SN and Selman L. Uncertainty and COVID-19: how are we to respond? J R Soc Med 2020; 113: 211–216.

Sun L, Joshi M, Khan SN, Ashrafian H and Darzi A. Clinical impact of multi-parameter continuous non-invasive monitoring in hospital wards: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J R Soc Med 2020; 113: 217–224.