England Locks Down To Prevent ‘Medical and Moral Disaster’

Pictured above: Big Ben in London, England. Photo courtesy of WikiMedia.

By Sophie Soloway ’23 and Aditi Parashar ’22  

Global Editor & Staff Writer

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson announced on Oct. 31 that England will be going into its second national lockdown to help limit the spread of COVID-19. The lockdown began on Nov. 5 and is set to end on Dec. 2. According to the BBC, England had 21,915 confirmed COVID-19 cases as of Oct. 31, bringing the total since the beginning of the pandemic to 1,011,660.

In his press conference, Johnson announced that the second national lockdown was the only way England could prevent a “medical and moral disaster” for the British National Health Service, reported the BBC. 

Johnson also said “no responsible prime minister” could ignore figures that suggested deaths would reach “several thousand a day,” with a “‘peak of mortality’ worse than the country saw in April.” Without the lockdown in place, members of the NHS would have been forced to choose which patients would live and which would die, Johnson said. 

This lockdown is similar to Britain’s first national lockdown in the spring, with spaces like pubs, restaurants, gyms and nonessential shops closing for four weeks. People have also been asked to work from home if their jobs allow. However, unlike in the spring, educational institutions like schools, colleges and universities are allowed to stay open during this lockdown. 

Leader of the Labour Party Sir Keir Starmer supported the second lockdown while emphasizing the fact that this is a decision the Tory government “should have taken weeks ago.” The Labour Party had been pushing for a shorter lockdown weeks earlier to no avail, reported The New York Times. 

The Print, an Indian publication, reported that Johnson was resisting introducing nationwide restrictions, even with growing pressure. Johnson cited “disastrous” consequences for the U.K.’s finances, calling it the “nuclear” option and instead suggesting a three-tiered system targeting local areas in England before announcing the new lockdown.

Shanze Hasan ’21, an international relations major, said, “While the second lockdown is important to reduce the burgeoning number of coronavirus cases, the delay due to the Johnson government’s resistance will mean a longer lockdown to counteract the rise in cases England has seen recently.”

The second lockdown also has economic implications. According to The New York Times, even in the spring lockdown, Britain was much slower than its neighbors in shutting down its economy, which led to the lockdown lasting longer than initially intended. It also saw one of the worst second quarter recessions in Europe. Many opposition leaders and economists believe this delayed lockdown is the government making the same mistake again. 

Amman Syed ’22, an economics major, said, “The projected unemployment peak numbers have gone up and economic growth has gone down. However, a lockdown in any country would see the same results. What the U.K. needs to do is focus on how long they continue to supplement loss of income so that when the economy opens up again, the jolt to the economy is not massive.” 

The U.K. is not the only country in Europe with rising cases. According to NBC News, Germany and France have both documented record numbers of daily COVID-19 cases within the past week. Italy, one of the countries worst hit by the pandemic in its early stages, has also placed new restrictions on citizens in an effort to curb rising cases. 

The New York Times reported that the Czech Republic, Belgium, Hungary and Poland have also seen a steady increase in hospitalizations, placing Europe’s hospitals at a shortage of healthcare providers and supplies. As the U.K. enters its new lockdown, many of its neighboring countries must contend with very similar realities. 

How the World Has Handled COVID-19

By Corrine Celupica-Liu ’23

Global Writer

Over the past nine months, coronavirus case levels have fluctuated around the world. In the United States, life during a global pandemic looks strikingly different than it did back in March. The U.S. has seen both community compliance and resistance in efforts implemented to suppress the virus. 

According to a New York Times report on Sept. 6, 2020, there are 26.9 million confirmed cases worldwide and the virus is spreading at its fastest recorded speed, with a global cumulative of 200,000 daily new cases. As of early September, there are rising surges in many parts of Europe, including Germany, Spain and France. Similar patterns are also occurring in North America, where geographically-diverse hotspots have sporadically developed over the past six months. 

Megan Horner ’23 lives in Herrin, Illinois, and has experienced the state’s response to each new hotspot of the coronavirus. 

“In the beginning, the state was able to slow the spread, but once things began opening, a lot of people stopped adhering to rules,” Horner said. “The state instituted pretty strict measures, and it was pretty effective but has since been rescinded.” 

As of Sept. 6, 2020, Herrin has recorded 1,024 confirmed coronavirus cases, which is up from 530 total confirmed cases reported on Aug. 9, 2020. 

Due to the lack of standardized federal testing and containment protocol in the United States, the reported number of cases has varied from region to region. Abroad, countries’ various strategies mixed with a more collaborative community response have been more effective in controlling the spread of the virus. 

Rachel Kang ’23, who has been living in Seoul, South Korea, since March, noted the effectiveness of the South Korean government’s response. 

“From the beginning, [the government] made it mandatory for everyone entering from abroad to quarantine for 14 days and get tested for COVID-19,” Kang said. “If there is someone who caught the virus in your neighborhood, the government sends emergency alerts to their county [and] track[s] ... where the anonymous individual has been since they started showing symptoms.” Kang also praised South Korea for its citizen safety requirements, such as wearing a mask in certain buildings and on public transit and participating in regular temperature checks. 

In South Korea, there is a 1.1 percent positivity rate from coronavirus testing. Additionally, the country has been able to maintain lower rates of contraction. From April 1 to August 12, it reported less than 100 cases daily. 

Across all the different strategies regions have attempted to control the coronavirus, one truth remains: keeping the spread suppressed requires a sense of intentionality. As Kang noted, “As much as the idea of a virus is terrifying, if the correct precautions are being taken at the right moment, it is possible to control the numbers of cases.”