LETTER -It was the 'do-nothing' spirit, behind Boris Johnson’s "take it on the chin" approach

At the present time, the main focus is on the pandemic and calls for an inquiry to establish what went wrong and what lessons can be learned.

At the outset, the government were always going to be in difficulty. In 2018, it formed Supply Chain Coordination Limited, controlled by the health secretary.

The key objective was to save £2.4bn a year by “providing strong commercial capability, relentlessly create value, gain competitive advantage and become the strategic procurement partner of choice for the NHS’’.

This is a part of the conservatism ideology to ‘do nothing’ and allow the market and society to regulate itself.

The ideology or more specifically the anti-state conservatism, based on Friedman, Oakshott and Hayak was rekindled by the Thatcherite right in the 1970s and subsequently learned at Oxbridge by politicians such as Dominic Raab, Rishi Sunak and Matt Hancock.

At the early stages of pandemic, the ideology was apparent, it was the 'do-nothing' spirit, behind Boris Johnson’s "take it on the chin" approach, the initial direction of the “herd immunity”, the decision to allow events such as Cheltenham and at Liverpool FC to go ahead, and ridiculously holding a competition to see who can come up with the most suitable ventilatory technology.

In order to respond to the impact of the pandemic, the government had to put the ‘do-nothing’ ideology on hold, allocated £350 billion for business and covered 80% of worker’s wages to prevent the collapse of capitalism.

Many Tory MPs and cabinet ministers are thinking along the lines of a renewed austerity once the presumed “V-shaped recovery” happens.

The prolonged nature of the crisis, on a global scale means a return to normality is impossible.

Other European countries like Germany and France, intend pouring trillions of Euros into their industries, while the UK has earmarked 80 billion Euros (£71 billion).

We are on the threshold of the biggest depression for three hundred years and the obvious solution would be a programme containing massive borrowing and spending, state control of the medical-supply sector, the monetisation of debt by central banks, and the creation of a comprehensive, universal welfare state, providing everything from health and social care to food and housing.

The problem is modern day conservatives will find this prospect unthinkable and not in keeping with the cherished conservatism ideology.

The response will probably take the form of attacking diversity targets, decarbonisation policies and other “onerous” regulations.

If the Brexit transition period is extended, the target will become Europe and the pro-European, cosmopolitan urban classes.

Will an inquiry achieve anything for the better?

They very rarely do and by the time findings are revealed, the world and the people responsible will have moved on and the focus will be the pending economic catastrophe starting gather momentum..

W.B. Moore

Through website