Today, November 21, nearly six years after Scotland entered its first lockdown, the UK Covid-19 Inquiry has released its final report. Brig reflects on this.
Its findings are mixed for Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland’s First Minister at the time, who led the country through an unprecedented crisis. The Inquiry describes her as a “serious and diligent” leader, in stark contrast to its assessment of the then UK Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, who it criticises for failing to show the level of Prime Ministerial leadership required and for allowing a chaotic culture to develop at the heart of the UK Government.
Although parts of the report may be viewed as positive for Sturgeon and her government, it also highlights significant flaws in how major decisions were made.
Schools
One of the biggest issues highlighted in the report is that the Scottish Government’s decision making became “too centralised” with Cabinet ministers often sidelined – one key example the report gave was the closure of schools in Scotland.
The report finds that John Swinney, then deputy first minister and education secretary, and Nicola Sturgeon discussed closing schools after a Cabinet meeting on the 17th of March 2020, on the 18th, the decision was made to close schools. However, Cabinet was not consulted. John Swinney has since said that there was “no time” to undertake any equality impact assessment.
At around 2pm on the March 18, Sturgeon announced that “schools will close at the end of this week” and that she could not promise that they would reopen before summer, something that will resonate in memory for many of our readers so vividly. The report also found that this announcement came before the Scientific Advisory Group on Emergencies (SAGE) met later that afternoon to agree its advice on school closures.
The inquiry concludes that this decision was taken by the First and Deputy First Minister alone, without cabinets involvement and that the Scottish Government did not fully assess the wider consequences.
Relations with the UK Government.
The report also highlights frequent tensions between both the UK and Scottish Governments throughout the pandemic, particularly around public messaging. One major clash the report cites is when Nicola Sturgeon refused to adopt the UK Governments “Stay Alert” slogan, calling it “vague and imprecise” and choosing to keep the clearer “Stay at Home” guidance here in Scotland.
While some UK ministers accused her of undermining a unified approach, the Inquiry makes clear that Scotland was under no obligation to follow England’s lead. The report states that although UK wide alignment had its benefit, Scottish Ministers were legally responsible for making decisions that were right for Scotland and those responsibilities “could not be outsourced.”
The report suggests that Sturgeon aimed for four nation cooperation where the evidence supported it, but did not hesitate to deviate when she felt Westminster’s approach lacked clarity or caution. In practice, Scotland often took a more measured path – something that the Inquiry’s findings subtly tells us and which supporters of Scottish Independence are likely to view as an argument for greater decision making powers in future crises.
The Inquiry’s findings offer a mixed but significant assessment of Scotland’s pandemic response. Nicola Sturgeon is credited with strong personal engagement and clear public communication, yet the report also raises concerns about how tightly decision making was help at the top of government. Key moments, from the rapid closure of schools to clashes with Westminster over messaging, show both the strengths and limits of Scotland’s approach.
While the inquiry doesn’t tell us whether Scotland handled the pandemic better or worse than the rest of the United Kingdom, it makes one point clear: Scottish ministers were responsible for making decisions in Scotland’s interests and often did so differently from their counterparts in London.
Featured image credit: Scottish Government via Wikimedia Commons
Second-year Politics student with a focus on news, current affairs and in-depth features. Passionate about exploring complex issues with clarity, balance and impact.
.jpg){kind=link}