I think there are a few issues that need unpicking here.
1/ The government line that it doesn't spread in schools needs to go. It clearly is. There should be policy put in place to reflect that for staff and pupils who are clinically vulnerable or have household members who do.
2/ I know that there is a lot of outrage about how the north hasn't had this as an option but London is now getting it. This is slightly unfair criticism. The technology has only just been available and it has been being trialled in a number of schools - including some in the North West. I know that a local high school and primary have both had it in the last week. Where the problem might be is if thats not expanded to areas in the North which are currently experiencing a high number of cases and its only London and Kent that get it. Having said that, London and Kent do look like they are now the most problems so in theory they should be the priority. In that sense the North has been unlucky because they experienced the problem with schools before the means to deal with the problem was logistically a possibility.
3/ That then goes back to point 1, where it should have been recognised that there was a problem with schools and there wasn't a testing regime capable at the time to deal with the problem. There should have been a better policy in place to deal with it (in other words the bubble system needed to be much more strict and robust and the fact it wasn't probably caused part of the problem. And THATS where the controversy lies - not with the lack of mass testing nor the fact its only taken seriously when the issue gets to London.
I am also aware that there are schools that have been taking part not just in a covid test scheme but have also been tested for antibodies. So this may well yet reveal the extent of the problem there has been. At this point, when the result are known I think big questions about policy prior to half term in the North will start to look like the big disaster it has been....