“When crisis hits, effective governments do two things. The first is obvious: they deal with the immediate challenge. The second is harder: they anticipate the fallout and then set about working out to how to tackle the consequences, looking months sometimes even years ahead.”
- Gordon Brown (former Prime Minister – June 2020)
What does the ending of the following events have in common: World War I, the flu pandemic of 1918/19, the Great Depression, World War II and the 2008 financial crash? Well, they were all marked by grand speeches from politicians about “new beginnings”, “learning the lessons”, “never again”, “homes fit for heroes”, “punishing those responsible”, “levelling up” etc etc.
Sadly, few of these words amounted to much. Some might argue that the promise of “homes fit for heroes” made in 1918 is still yet to come to pass. Most of the homes built in the 1920s were in the suburbs of the big cities mainly for the expanding middle classes. For hundred of thousands home was still an inner-city slum. Most have been demolished now but it is worth a visit to the National Trust’s preserved “back-to-backs” in Birmingham to see the conditions so many lived in until well after World War II. Arguably the only government to deliver on its fine words was the Atlee administration from 1945-51 which actually put in place health and welfare reforms which, mostly, last until this day. In contrast, the Cameron government post-2010 promised no more shenanigans in the financial markets placing in peril of the savings and mortgages of ordinary people; the guilty would be punished; the financial markets would be regulated more effectively etc. None of this came to pass and in place we have ongoing austerity. Few, if any, financiers went to jail - instead public servants suffered a near 10-year wage freeze, public services were cut (and this in ongoing) and those dependent on welfare were hit. Instead of reform, Cameron gave us division, hatred and blame shifting to those least able to defend themselves.
However, hope springs eternal and after the first pandemic for just over 100 years perhaps there are some things to learnt from the many months of lockdown. Here is my list.
The World of Work: is it really necessary for millions of us to crowd on to motorways, trains, buses and subways every day to travel to work? Is it really necessary for so many of us to, in essence, waste two to four hours five days a week just to travel to work? Many were able to work from home during the lockdowns. The myths about working from home being unproductive because of the distractions of home life were found to be just that. In fact, I have read some evidence which suggests working in this way is more productive. It helps to deliver a better work/life balance for so many and there is just simply not the distractions of walking the dog, feeding the baby or the games console. So how about incentivising home working with tax breaks and employer grants? Perhaps hybrid working for many will be the future – 3 days at home and 2 in the office. The benefits could be happier workers, happier families, less traffic congestion, less crowded transport, less pollution.
Business Travel: UK based and international business transactions did not ground to a halt during the pandemic simply because an executive could not pop into business class on a plane or first class on a train. Zoom provided us with a consistent way of talking. So perhaps corporations need to be more critical when examining the need for business travel. Can the same result be achieved via conference calling? Perhaps the status that often accompanies business travel needs to be reconsidered. Again hours sitting on a train or plane can be dead time which could be deployed more effectively. Clearly a critical look at business travel delivers many of same benefits as home working.
The Low Paid: the knock on the door from the van delivery driver usually meant we were more interested in the box handed over than the driver. He or she, who we might grudgingly say a thank you to, was usually invisible. The refuse collectors were equally invisible, only getting our attention if they forgot our bin or spilt the contents on the ground. They were just part of the nation’s army of low paid but willing workers cleaning, delivering and clearing up after the rest of us. While the rest of us ran for lockdown, this army kept going and were often the only link to a world we once took for granted.
The fact that the low paid, who had overnight been redesignated as essential workers, kept going during lockdown challenged our assumptions about the relative importance of roles in society. It also challenged our assumptions about relative reward. Cleaners on minimum pay risked their lives to clean the hospital wards caring for those with Covid-19. Was that the appropriate reward for that risk? For many shielding they were dependent on supermarket delivery drivers to survive. Was their traditional reward an adequate recognition of the importance of the task they were doing?
My personal view is that the government should intervene in the labour market to adjust our assumptions about what are the most important roles. We need to be clear about what jobs keep society running even when most of it closes down for its own safety. Too many jobs for too long have been taken for granted. The government needs to help us determine what really is important and pass legislation which recognises those roles and the importance of adequate reward and protection of working conditions. The importance of this is highlighted by the number of London bus drivers who have died after contracting the virus from those boarding their vehicles.
I fear the government is more than happy for the old order to return but I am willing to be surprised.
Connectivity: Surely one lesson of the pandemic has been the importance of access to a speedy and reliable internet service. News stories of adults struggling to work from home and children struggling to learn online just made lockdown even more difficult and often for those who were already struggling because of job losses or low income. Now we know one of Johnson’s often quoted levelling up slogans relates to roll out of high-speed internet. To be delivered it will require an attention to detail to ensure high speed broadband reaches the remotest island and rural locations as well as the 20th floor of east London high rises. There should be no sense of privilege attached to broadband access. The fastest speeds should not be reserved for the most wealthy. Internet access should become somewhat like the NHS – freely and easily available to all those who need it. Broadband should be supplied in public areas such as parks and high streets. It remains to be seen if Johnson has the patience for the detailed planning required to deliver this or the desire to see it flowing to the most deprived areas of society.
Devices: Now having access to the internet is one thing - having a device that enables you to use it quite another. Again, one of the distressing sights of lockdown was seeing children unable to study at home for lack of a device or having to wait for a parent to return from work so they could use their cell phone. As with access to the web, access to a device should be a right not a privilege. The government should appoint a charity to collect second-hand devices for upgrading and handing out to those who cannot afford a trip to the Apple store or PC World. It goes without saying this work should go to an organisation with the right moral compass which means avoiding the management consultants and service providers usually preferred by Johnson which often, by coincidence I am sure, are owned by Tory Party donors.
The pandemic has shown us that lack of access to broadband and devices is clearly one of the dividing lines between the haves and have nots. Does the government have desire and commitment to close this divide? I personally doubt it but time will tell.
Housing: if you want to die from Covid-19 than your chances are much enhanced if you are poor and, as a consequence, live in poor housing. The highest infection rates were in those big city suburbs where the poorest sections of society live in the most crowded accommodation.
One of the reasons for this is that renters are viewed as second class citizens. Levelling up is all about owning your home. You are some kind of failure if you have to rely on the rental sector. There is no logic to this. It is an invented perception and has been imposed on us without challenge.
In cities like Paris and Montreal, renting is popular. Renters are not second-class citizens. You are not undeserving simply because you are not saving for a house deposit. Renting is a respected life-style choice. Some people do not want to be saddled with the downsides of ownership – the long-term commitment to a mortgage and house repairs and maintenance.
So again, we need government to lead a change to society’s perception of renting. We should be building more and better for renters and the law should protect their rights as tenants. They should have equal status with buyers.
Foundations: one of lessons from the pandemic relate to the importance of a safety net that holds society together and operating in the interests of all its citizens at times of crisis. This kind of planning and investment has been frowned upon for years. An area worth attacking when policy is all about cutting public expenditure.
This chicken came home to roost when the NHS, public health, social care and local planning services were suddenly faced with an event they were ill equipped to cope with. The reason the government gave up on Covid testing was because it did not have the resources in place to do it. Public health departments had been decimated, deemed not to be important. As a result, for months the government was clueless as to where the virus was spreading. Its only guide was the number of ambulances lined up outside A and E Departments.
The devastation visited on social care is well documented. That need not have happened. The lack of planning and investment had left the sector hanging out to dry.
It is twaddle to suggest Covid-19 has been the “great leveller”. As Gordon Brown said “far from their being equality of sacrifice, the permanently low paid, the already workless families and the zero-hours contract workers have suffered most.”
The NHS and social care sectors need the capacity, planning and investment to cope in future. It needs them to be recognised as one of essential pillars of a society that works well by looking after its most vulnerable. Local authorities need the resources to plan for and deliver at times of national emergency. Public health needs to be recognised for the essential service it is and not just turned to when disaster arrives and the hot potato is passed to them.
Vested Interests: Already the pressure is on for a return to the normal as it was. There are political and business vested interests in ensuring we just go back to the way things were. We need politicians to stand up and say that lessons have been learned about how our society is structured and operates. That our society currently does not operate well for all its citizens.
The portents for major change are not good – WWI gave us the Great Depression and 2008 gave us endless austerity but there is cause for hope.
No More “Old” Normal: last year a poll carried out for the strategy consultancy BritainThinks revealed that just 12% of people want life to return to normal “exactly as it was before” once the pandemic passes.
The research highlighted three priorities: better funding for the NHS, better treatment and pay for essential workers and an economic recovery that just did not focus on London. The research revealed an appetite for a kinder society that prioritises better support for people struggling with mental and physical health problems, allows workers more time off with family and friends, cares about the environment and ensures high levels of employment.
60% of respondents said they were willing to pay more tax to better fund the NHS, only 17% wanted to see public service cuts to pay back the national debt.
The Government has fertile ground to work on. However, it has made political capital out of division as Brexit demonstrates and its current attack on what it considers political correctness and “wokeness” have little to do with bringing people together. It has made progress with its populist agenda driven by grievance politics. Their current approach is a world away from the BritainThinks respondents.
Only time will tell if Johnson will steer us in a different direction. A wider economic plan aimed at eliminating child poverty, food banks and homelessness would be good but currently the newspaper he used to write for thinks a new Royal Yacht Britannia is most important.
History tells us governments are reluctant to embark on major, long term reform but perhaps the public mood is different this time. I doubt this will come from a Prime Minister like Boris Johnson, who is more interested in short term political gain through his focus on culture wars and the politics of grievance and the pork barrel, but one can only hope, and the wish list above would be a good place to start.
Comments