That Boris Johnson and Matt Hancock should be prosecuted for the avoidable Covid deaths

[LlynTegid]

The part 2 report of the Covid inquiry finds that at least 20,000 deaths were avoidable, had restrictions come in a week earlier.

Various other findings confirming the failures of Mr Johnson and Mr Hancock.

I think they should face criminal charges, such as corporate manslaughter given government is an employer. AIBU

I couldn't stand Boris Johnson and I think the government definitely got things wrong, but hindsight is a wonderful thing. Different countries tried various tactics - some worked and some didn't. The enquiry said people died because the first lockdown was too late, but perhaps those people would have died later on in the pandemic? Nobody could predict all the outcomes or how people would behave.

Maybe they would have but their loved ones would have spent some extra time with them.
Would you like to die a few months early?

Johnson prioritised the economy over our health but in doing so, cost us even more.
We have more debt, more sickness, lower productivity than almost all European countries that experienced similar.

I’m slightly mollified that the enquiry is mentioning that lockdown was harmful: it’s practically the first time we’ve heard it from the public sector, and to say so in 2020 was strictly forbidden, because nothing mattered apart not killing granny, even if she had to die frightened and alone.

I also want to hear something being said about the government ruthlessly frightening the pants off the public (their words, not mine), and the effect this will have on trust in government.

Perhaps our current dire situation isn't because of the pandemic? I'm not saying that they did the right thing. It's just that nobody knows what would have happened if we'd taken a different course. It's all easy in hindsight but there could have been other unforeseen pitfalls if we'd done differently.

Well, we have very high death rates compared to similar sized countries and economies in Europe.

We all experienced the same things, so if it isn't Covid, what is it?

We certainly did over our kids, both in schools and uni's, many of whom still have on line learning.

If you mean death rates during Covid, it could be due to different types of housing or transport, different levels of obedience to rules, different cultural norms or ways of working, average age of population. Maybe even climate, diet, lifestyle and so on could affect vulnerability?

They do mention the latter, but not in nearly enough detail considering how important it was. Maybe not the remit of the enquiry, which would be telling in itself if so. Starts at page 162:

https://covid19.public-inquiry.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/18102920/1435-HH-E03296643_UK-Covid-19-M2-%E2%80%A2V2%E2%80%A2-Inquiry_Volume-II_Accessible.pdf

Had there been greater consultation in thedevelopment of the campaign – with the NHS, with behavioural science advisers and with those representing affected groups who were likely to need help – the UK government might have struck a better balance at an earlier stage between (on the one hand) the clarity and simplicity of messaging, and (on the other) the need for the public to have some regard to the detail of the restrictions and the exceptions.

Talk about understatement. I would have liked to see more explicit addressing of the deliberate decision to try and make lower risk people more afraid, and the downstream impacts of this. That's an incredibly important issue.

In chapter 15, they also briefly talk about the need for better communication in a future pandemic. No doubt we all agree with that, but as a recommendation it's not enough.

I agree that it's great they looked at the harm from lockdowns too, but again it's still quite restricted. The section on vulnerable people, for example, defines this as vulnerable to covid. It notes that many people were vulnerable to lockdown as well, and that's correct, but there's still a gap when it comes to the people who were made vulnerable because of restrictions alone.

The section I linked to above mentions that people should've been made more aware the restrictions allowed them to flee DV. And that's true. But it also skirts around the bigger point, which is that we chose policies that locked them in with their abusers in the first place.

Thanks for this. The enquiry sounds skewed away from addressing these issues.

Exactly, labour would have done it differently my arse.

They'd have acted on the exact same advice and also no doubt had sandwiches at work. In fact it would have been worse as starmer was bithering on about locking down again.

This dusty old panel with their 'we should've locked down sooner/lock down was very harmful' nonsense need to get a different day job.

China next if anyone dares .

Never mind Labour - I think just about any senior Conservative figure in my lifetime would have been less frivolous, irresponsible and damaging than Johnson was. He was always totally unfit for public office.

I believe the pandemic would have been handled better under a different Tory leader- say if Theresa May was still PM, or Michael Gove or Jeremy Hunt. Whatever you think of their political views, they were diligent in their respective ministerial roles.

Jeremy Corbyn was never going to be Prime Minister. If he had not got enough nominations to stand, then Andy Burnham who came second would have been leader, and if then Prime Minister from 2017 would certainly have done better than Boris Johnson.

I think because any Labour leader would have had better relations with key groups outside Downing Street, restrictions would have come in earlier.

But Jeremy Corbyn 😂

The bloke wasn't PM

Johnson was.

I completely agree. Any living PM of any political persuasion would have been better. Johnson was the worst possible PM we could have had. Major, Cameron or May would have taken the situation seriously and made sensible decisions for the country instead we got sombreros and singing Happy Birthday while washing your hands.

Absolutely. Won't stop the "but Labour" posters though

I despise Cameron for the referendum business but he'd have been more diligent than Johnson. Major and May would have worked hard and acted responsibly. Johnson did neither . For me this isn't a party political issue. It's about Johnson's unfitness for office.

Exactly as @lazyarse123says.

I think by ‘we’ it’s meant the UK as a whole, working together with Scotland and wales it would have been possible , aside from NI the UK is an island. You could have temporarily restricted movement between the mainland and NI, or insisted on testing and seven days quarantine for people travelling between the two areas, but I think it would just have prolonged the inevitable.

I agree

Johnson has no real interest in the work of a PM he loves the title and the prestige

he was utterly shameful as a PM. Cameron and May would have been far better leading the country during Covid and I believe Starmer would have been too

The lack of working together between the UK government and the devolved administrations (and London's Mayor) did not help. I blame 99% of this on Boris Johnson and Downing Street. There was a level of pettiness from them, such as funding transport in London on a very short term basis.

Absolutely. FWIW I believe Thatcher would have been as well.

This isn't down to party politics. It's down to Johnson's personal and professional inadequacy.

Folk keep bringing up 'yeah but no but <insert any old name> would've done better' hence the responses thst no they wouldn't. Infact 'But Jeremy Corbyn' was having a jolly time breaking rules left right and centre and lovely respectable suggestions like May amd Cameron are irrelevant too if you're suggesting only actual PMs at that time count which narrows the musings somewhat.

The blame lays with China.

The government in at that time did exactly the same as <checks notes> Cameron, May, Hunt or even Thatcher would have.

We can all be grateful BJ was in charge and got the place up and running a damn sight quicker than any of the other hapless suggestions would have. Even if he did have a sarnie at work.

Grateful for having BJ in charge, never change Janiie

It was a lot more than a sarnie at work

A Johnson apologist isn't going to shift their stance I suppose.

We should have gone the Swedish route. The problem is, we don’t have Sweden’s population, so the result probably wouldn’t have been the same.

No, Nadine is highly unlikely to move an inch in her hopeless devotion.