It is no use the government blaming people for demanding coronavirus tests

Editorial: Boris Johnson has to be honest with people about the hard choices that he has to make

(The Independent )

Baroness Harding, the head of NHS Test and Trace, appeared to blame the failings of her service on people demanding tests when they did not need them. She said that nearly one-third of people being tested had no symptoms, and that while this was “understandable”, it was not what people are supposed to do.  

She thus exposed one of the many confusions in the government’s messages. Matt Hancock, the health secretary, has told people repeatedly that, if in doubt, they should get a test. That was briefly possible when the number of cases was low, and the expansion of testing capacity had finally got ahead of Mr Hancock’s targets.  

Lady Harding fought her corner in evidence to the science and technology committee yesterday, against penetrating questions from Greg Clark, the former cabinet minister who is the committee’s chair. She insisted that she had expected an increase in demand for tests after schools reopened, but that the increase had been far greater than suggested by the modelling provided by Sage, the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies.  

In other words, the shortage of tests is everyone’s fault but hers. It is the fault of people wanting tests they do not need; the fault of ministers for urging people to get tested; and the fault of Sage for failing to predict the rise in demand as lockdown is lifted.  

Each of her arguments has some justification, and the priority is to do something about the shortfall in capacity, but the passing of the buck does not exactly inspire confidence.  

People’s anxieties are not eased by Mr Hancock’s confirmation yesterday of new restrictions in northeast England, including a 10pm closure of pubs and restaurants that has inevitably been dubbed a “curfew”. This is broadly supported by people and local authorities in the area, who are concerned about the virus getting out of control, but the rise in cases requires a recalibration of the government’s messaging.  

This is difficult for the prime minister, whose handling of the crisis has been characterised throughout, even when he was suffering the illness himself, by a relentless optimism. Every time he has had to deliver bad news he has tried to accompany it with ambitious promises of “world-beating” systems, “moonshot” technology and the hope that everything will be back to normal by Christmas.

It is time for realism and being straight with people about the hard choices ahead. Jeremy Hunt, another former cabinet minister who has, like Mr Clark, turned into a formidable select committee chair, made the point yesterday that “we need a plan based on existing technologies”. It may be that easy new tests might be developed that could produce results within a few minutes, but they are not reliable yet, and policy cannot be designed on a hope and a prayer.  

That means, as The Independent has consistently argued, that the government must be more rigorous about priorities. It cannot ration tests by slowing down turnaround times – which Lady Harding admitted had happened – or by sending people to test centres hundreds of miles away. It must make some tough decisions about who can and cannot have a test. It has already, rightly, prioritised health and care workers, but schools need to be prioritised too.  

The public support for new restrictions in areas of rising coronavirus hospitalisations suggests that people will accept difficult decisions if they are made on the right grounds. The government must stop blaming people for trying to do the best for themselves and their families, and be open about the limitations of the testing system if it wants to regain public confidence.