A lot has changed since the first confirmed case of coronavirus in the UK. Both the pace and scale of change have been remarkable; perhaps beyond what many of us would have imagined possible.
In the space of weeks the UK closed all its schools, businesses and bars, entirely reprogrammed a health service of 1.5 million workers and developed the infrastructure to provide food and medicines to the most vulnerable who have ‘shielded’ themselves for an astonishing 12 weeks.
Throughout the process many of us have wondered in what ways, if any, the world will be recognisable once this is over. Just ask those who have lost loved ones, or those who have lost their jobs or their businesses. In April the UK’s GDP fell by 20.4% in one month, leaving the country in a critical position economically from which it may take decades to recover. But what does this mean for public affairs, considering the Government, and country, have come to a standstill?
Throughout the past few weeks, there has been one interesting observation for those of us engaging in the political process. This is that in politics, Government and public debate, very little has changed at all. Save for a fleeting moment where people came together to ‘stay at home, protect the NHS, and save lives’, conversations are fundamentally the same as they always have been.
Coronavirus has simply heightened the urgency required to influence politics and policy, and forced those who already shouted to shout even louder. Let’s take a few examples.
At the end of March Jeremy Corbyn claimed that the coronavirus crisis proved the need for a radical socialist agenda. He stated that the Government’s willingness to spend vast sums of money to support the economy proved him right, and coronavirus highlighted the urgent need to address inequalities which have been a scourge of British society for too long. Supporters on the left were quick to jump on these comments and claim that whilst Labour may have lost the battle, they won the war.
Meanwhile, Corbyn’s critics would tell you that in fact, the Government’s plan to rescue the economy from certain failure through a huge stimulus package is an idea only fit for the direst of economic situations. In normal times, no rational Government would dream of such a thing. The debt which has been saddled on future generations has shown that, actually, Corbyn was wrong.
What about matters more recently? Take the Black Lives Matter protests. To those who have been marching peacefully in the UK and around the world, coronavirus shows just how important these protests really are. The risk of contracting or spreading coronavirus is secondary to showing solidarity against racism. People are putting themselves in harm’s way to campaign for a better future.
But those on the other side of the debate say coronavirus is a deterrent for protesting. The country has spent weeks in lockdown, with children unable to go to school or see their grandparents. Why should people be allowed to break social distancing rules to protest? The likely spread of the disease means these protests are wrong.
How about the NHS? At PB Consulting we have spent many a year trying to help the NHS get the best from every ‘health pound’ spent and maximise the benefits of innovation. With limited resources the key challenge for lobbyists is convincing the NHS that certain conditions are the most important and merit a certain level of resource.
Coronavirus brought the NHS to a standstill. But now that the system is beginning to look at what resources to spend and where, the problem we face remains the same. The NHS has a certain level of resource and it’s our job to convince those in charge that certain conditions should be prioritised.
However, there is now more urgency. Conditions don’t just need to be prioritised, they need to be prioritised now. Whereas it was important to treat heart conditions before, or to find a solution in social care, now it is even more important. Before, the NHS needed to optimise patient pathways, and now it needs to do that faster.
These are conversations which have been around for years: more Government spending vs less Government spending, what is the best way to defeat racism, and how can the NHS provide care more effectively? The effect of coronavirus is simply to reduce the space in which we can pitch our ideas, to limit the resource available for certain conditions, and therefore to encourage those engaging with the system to engage harder and with more urgency.
Influencing, disagreement and finding consensus are vital parts of public life and of our political system. The past few years have seen a steady trend of heightened political engagement, debate and emotion, to the point of vitriol and toxicity. Coronavirus, initially, seemed to put an end to the madness. But if I was right before, it is likely I will think I am even more right now.
As we come through this pandemic, it is becoming increasingly clear that coronavirus has simply added weight and justification to previously held positions on all sides. It is a lens which could only serve to polarise debate further. The world has changed, but before long, don’t be surprised if our politics finds itself right back where it was before.
by Tom Doughty, Account Manager