As predicted – Owl: 

Ministers have been warned by NHS bosses that advising people to wear facemasks to slow the spread of coronavirus risks jeopardising critical supplies to the health service.

Chris Smyth, Whitehall Editor | Steven Swinford, Deputy Political Editor | Kat Lay, Health Correspondent www.thetimes.co.uk

Government scientists will examine the evidence about masks today before making a formal recommendation on whether the public should wear them.

The World Health Organisation is understood to be ready to issue fresh guidance on wearing masks in shops, on public transport and in other crowded spaces as part of measures to exit the lockdown.

NHS chiefs have raised concerns that advising people to wear masks as restrictions are eased could put their staff at risk amid a continued shortage of personal protective equipment.

Ministers have been urged not to recommend them to the public unless there is “clear evidence” that benefits outweigh the risk to the health service.

Chris Hopson, chief executive of the hospitals group NHS Providers, said: “If the government is going to consider advising the general public to wear facemasks it must fully assess the impact on the NHS. Fluid repellent masks for health and care staff are key to safety and to avoid the spread of coronavirus.

“Securing the supply of masks, when there is huge global demand, is crucial. This must be a key consideration. There needs to be clear evidence that wearing masks, along with other measures, will deliver significant enough benefits to take us out of lockdown to potentially jeopardise NHS mask supply.”

Last night Public Health England said that staff had the right to refuse to work in circumstances where they did not have safe equipment. At the daily Downing Street briefing, Yvonne Doyle, the agency’s medical director, was asked if she would “support their decision not to go in” if they did not feel safe.

She replied that people “have to make their decisions based on whether they are in a risky situation or not”. Scientists and doctors have called on ministers to back the use of homemade masks or non-clinical ones to avoid supply problems, something already recommended by US health authorities. However, there is concern that any endorsement of masks would encourage people to buy medical versions, which could send prices soaring.

While masks are not in short supply in hospitals, there are fears that that would change if they were recommended more widely. Hospitals are reported to be laundering and reusing single-use gowns up to three times and there are issues with the supply of other items such as respirator facemasks.

A government source said: “We are being guided by the science and there is an ongoing review of evidence, but the safety of the NHS and our NHS staff is our top priority.”

Sir Patrick Vallance, No 10’s chief scientific adviser, said last week that while there was “variable” evidence on whether masks slow the spread of the virus, it was “absolutely crucial that masks are available in hospitals”.

There is little good evidence that people can protect themselves by wearing masks, particularly without training in how to put them on and remove safely. However, there is better evidence that wearing masks can stop respiratory droplets reaching other people, leading to hopes that encouraging mass use could slow the spread.

Focus on the potential role of masks is likely to intensify as the WHO prepares to shift position and say that masks, including homemade ones, could have a role in tackling the virus as countries allow people to leave their homes.

The WHO presently says that “the wide use of masks by healthy people in the community setting is not supported by current evidence and carries uncertainties and critical risks” including “diversion of mask supplies and consequent shortage of masks for healthcare workers”. It is due to soften its tone and accept a potential role for masks given they are being widely used as a way out of lockdown.

The updated WHO advice will stop short of urging people to wear masks but will offer more detailed advice on using them.

Professor Trish Greenhalgh, of Oxford University, who has published an evidence review on masks, said homemade masks should be compulsory on public transport and in offices and shops. “Your mask doesn’t protect you but it protects other people,” she said. “A mask needs to be an item of clothing. It’s like a T-shirt, wear it and chuck it in the wash. Detergent kills Covid.”

She urged people to “make your own”, insisting: “No one should be wearing medical masks.”

While in Asian countries it has long been common to wear masks, they are increasingly being used as part of European exit strategies. The German state of Saxony has made them compulsory in shops and on public transport, and Spain is giving them out to commuters. In Italy 85 per cent of people say they wear masks in public, up from 26 per cent six weeks ago.

In Spain the figure has gone up from 5 per cent to 65 per cent, and in France from 5 per cent to 43 per cent, according to YouGov. In Britain 11 per cent are wearing masks, up from 1 per cent in early March.

At the beginning of April Owl wrote:

Owl thinks this [wearing of face masks] will become an active debate within the next few days. Maybe academic because we don’t have a stockpile. 

“It is a matter of orthodoxy at the UK Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) that surgical facemasks are a no-no as far as the public are concerned. Officials have long taken the view that paper masks do not protect against viruses and do not hold emergency stocks of them.”

This debate is starting in earnest now and shortage of masks is being cited as a reason for not advising them, so as not to deplete stock of clinical masks. (Clinical masks are not required for personal use)

Owl thinks that this is the sort of measure that will have to be considered as part of an exit strategy, particularly on public transport.

Coronavirus: Should we all be wearing masks now? – BBC …www.bbc.co.uk › news › health-51205344

Coronavirus is spread by droplets that can spray into the air when those infected talk, cough and sneeze. These can enter the body through the eyes, nose and mouth, either directly or after touching a contaminated object.

The UK government is not currently advising most people to wear masks. However, its chief scientific adviser Sir Patrick Vallance has a review is ongoing.

At the weekend, a group of more than 100 doctors wrote an open letter to The Times saying they were “alarmed at official inaction over the need for the public to wear homemade face masks”, which could be made by volunteer groups.

They said it was “illogical” to advise people to wear masks if they are showing symptoms, but not if they appear symptom-free.

London Mayor Sadiq Khan is among those who want people to wear masks outside when social distancing is not possible. He said this would reduce the chances of passing on the virus.

The WHO has not changed its advice, but its special envoy Dr David Nabarro believes that in society, “some form of facial protection is going to become the norm”. 

Parliament’s spending watchdog has launched an inquiry into purchases of commercial property by local authorities, amid fears that the coronavirus pandemic will expose councils to a drop in income from their investments.

Owl is particularly interested.

Joanna Partridge  www.theguardian.com 

The public accounts committee will look into whether local government officials have the commercial skills required for such transactions, which have rocketed over the past four years. MPs will also question officials from the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government over how much they monitor commercial activity among local authorities and their exposure to risk.

Local authorities have been on a shopping spree in recent years, buying up property such as shopping centres and office buildings as a means of increasing their revenues and to offset the impact of austerity measures introduced in 2010.

A recent report from the National Audit Office (NAO), which scrutinises government spending, found that local authorities spent an estimated £6.6bn on commercial property from 2016-17 to 2018-19, compared with £460m during the preceding three years.

The pandemic is expected to create a hole in councils’ budgets due to a huge shortfall in council tax income, along with lost revenues from missed parking and leisure fees during the coronavirus lockdown.

Ministers are expected to provide English councils with a £1bn bailout to prevent several of them from collapsing into insolvency due to soaring costs related to the coronavirus crisis, such as for providing extra social care and housing rough sleepers during the lockdown.

Even before the government lockdown created uncertainty about local authorities’ income, the NAO report warned of the risks associated with commercial property, which could leave councils badly exposed by a recession or property crash.

“Income from commercial property is uncertain over the long term and authorities may be taking on high levels of long-term debt with associated debt costs,” the NAO said.

Councils have been able to access low-cost funding from the government’s public works board, but critics argue it has caused them to bid higher amounts for property, and in some cases overpay.

Spelthorne council in Surrey, a tiny Conservative-controlled authority, has used these Treasury-backed loans to build a £1bn property portfolio, despite its annual operating budget of £22m. The council said last year that income from commercial property allowed it to offset £2.5m of government grants cuts, and raised more income than council tax.

Shropshire council has previously been criticised for spending £51m on three shopping centres in Shrewsbury, all of which had fallen in value by almost a quarter even before the pandemic.

Sign up to the daily Business Today email or follow Guardian Business on Twitter at @BusinessDesk

However, the council countered that the fall in value was not a major concern and the assets would guarantee some annual income and enable redevelopment, to make Shrewsbury town centre more attractive.

A spokesperson for the Local Government Association, which represents English and Welsh councils, said: “Councils have faced a choice of either accepting funding reductions and cutting services – such as care for older and disabled people, protecting children, reducing homelessness, fixing roads and collecting bins – or making investments to try and protect them.”

Fears over council’s property investments are being replicated across the continent. The latest analysis from the real estate consultancy Green Street Advisors says that commercial property across Europe will “experience occupancy declines and rent declines in 2020 and 2021”.

Owl wonders whether Exeter City planners allow the two two-letter phrase “up to” in their applications as EDDC does?

Daniel Clark  eastdevonnews.co.uk 

A developer behind a bid to build for 40 zero-carbon ‘smart homes’ in Pinhoe, Exeter, has increased the number of ‘affordable’ dwellings proposed.  

City council planning chiefs delayed deciding the fate of the scheme on land between Pulling Road and Church Hill in February as they felt the initial 15 per cent allocation was too low.

Now Verto Homes has upped the number from six to 10 – a quarter of the overall number of units – following talks with the authority.

Exeter City Council’s planning police states new developments should be made up of 35 per cent of affordable homes.

Councillors also asked for a pair of electric car charging points to be provided per house, but the applicant says that this would be an ‘over-specification’.

Council officers are again recommending the planning committee approves the scheme when it meets virtually next Monday (April 27).

A report to members says: “Officers have discussed the affordable housing provision with the agent stressing that the original level proposed was unacceptable and, without a significantly enhanced offer, it is likely that the application would be refused.

“The applicant is keen develop this site within Exeter and accordingly has agreed to increase the number of affordable housing by additional four units on-site.

“It is acknowledged that even the reduced level does not meet the 35 per cent requirement, but it is considered that this latest offer represents a significant enhanced level of affordable housing than originally proposed and accordingly the scheme is recommended for approval.”

Verto Homes has also reduced the number of allocated parking spaces for residents by seven and increased visitor spots by three.

The report adds: “While it can be reasonably assumed that residents of this zero-carbon development may be more inclined towards a lower level of car ownership, these aspirations may not be shared by visitors to the site.

“The provision of two charge points would only serve to meet the extremely unlikely situation that both cars are driven to the point of almost empty and both return home at the same time and both vehicles require an urgent charge in order to proceed with an onward journey.

“It is therefore not considered practical or advisable to engineer a solution for such a rare customer behaviour.

“The fundamental issue remains that the construction of zero-carbon dwellings results in a reduction in affordable housing provision.

“However, this is considered an acceptable compromise which will result in both additional dwellings to meet the five-year housing supply and a housing product which meets the overall aims of the council commitment toward being carbon neutral.

“Accordingly, it is considered that the application is acceptable.”

UK’s scientific advice on coronavirus is to be kept secret until after the pandemic is over (see below). In the context of the re-opening of parliament yesterday’s Guardian editorial contained this paragraph:

….during this time, ministers have governed mainly by press conference. Message management has been tightly controlled. In these circumstances, crucial issues of concern have often been brushed aside. These include casual prior preparation of the kind alleged over the weekend, continuing shortages of personal protective equipment, neglect of social care, reluctance to cooperate with European neighbours and, most recently, the terms of any exit strategy. Not surprisingly, this system suits ministers fine. But it fosters bad government, not good. Among other defects, it suggests ministers do not trust the public, that the cabinet is divided over next steps and that Britain is governed by incompetent or feeble leaders who are afraid to take decisions, especially in Boris Johnson’s absence.

Owl has looked at the definition of what information should be classified “Secret”. 

Very sensitive information that justifies heightened protective measures to defend against determined and highly capable threat actors. For example, where compromise could seriously damage military capabilities, international relations or the investigation of serious organised crime.

So Owl thinks this all about: Shut your eyes – Keep it Secret – Save our Faces!

UK’s scientific advice on coronavirus to be secret until after pandemic

Rhys Blakely, Science Correspondent www.thetimes.co.uk

The scientific evidence that has underpinned No 10’s response to Covid-19 will not be made public until the pandemic ends, the government chief science adviser has told MPs.

Sir Patrick Vallance said that the minutes of meetings of the Scientific Advisory Group on Emergencies (Sage) — the government’s most senior team of expert advisers — would only be released “once Sage stops convening on this emergency”.

In a letter to Greg Clark, the science and technology select committee chairman, Sir Patrick said that when the outbreak was under control the names of the scientists taking part in the meetings could also be released, he added, but only if those involved gave their permission.

Since the letter was sent on April 4, the government has been urged to reveal the scientific experts advising it on the Covid-19 amid concerns that ministers are consulting too narrowly. The only members of Sage to have been officially acknowledged are Sir Patrick and Chris Whitty, the chief medical officer for England, who co-chair the group.

The Conservative MP Mr Clark is among those calling for all members to be made public. “In order to have some visibility into what institutions and disciplines are represented, it would be extremely useful to have the membership known,” he said.

Other scientists have questioned the wisdom of making Sage membership secret. Dame Anne Glover, professor at Strathclyde Institute of Pharmacy and Biomedical Sciences and a former chief scientific adviser to the European Commission, said: “My fear is that we are limiting ourselves when we need fresh thinking.”

Sir Patrick told Mr Clark that he is following the rules for Cobra meetings, to which Sage supplies advice. “This contributes towards safeguarding members’ personal security and protects them from lobbying and other forms of unwanted influence which may hinder their ability to give impartial advice,” Sir Patrick wrote.

The experts who make up Sage change according to the emergency it is facing. Sir Patrick has said that about 80 scientists from more than 20 institutions are regularly being consulted on coronavirus through four sub-committees.

However, the documents published during the Covid-19 crisis on the Sage website so far are largely related to mathematical models designed to predict the course of the pandemic.

Professor Dame Glover said: “Fears of lobbying as mentioned by Patrick are misplaced I think. Openness supports trust and trust is really needed at the moment. It also opens up the possibility of very valuable challenge and input from ‘not the usual suspects’ which could be very helpful.”

She added: “If Sage was a cybersecurity committee or a defence committee I could understand security concerns, but it isn’t. It’s an advisory group that should bring the best thinking that we have from every area, not just epidemiology, to bear on a significant crisis.”

Sheila Bird, a former programme leader of the biostatistics unit at the University of Cambridge, said that calls to make Sage membership transparent had been ignored.

“We should know who is among the core Sage group. It would provide reassurance that the correct disciplines are represented,” she said.

A government spokesman said: “We have already released a wide range of key papers that have informed Sage advice and we are currently preparing the next set of evidence for publication shortly.”

The spokesman added that the group’s members had been identified as those “best placed to provide high-quality, trusted advice and have a wide-range of scientific and technical specialities to ensure Sage advice is well-rounded.”

From a correspondent:

‘So £825 million of South West NHS Trust debt written off.  That sounds good. 

Wait a minute:   the population of the South West is almost exactly 10% of that of the whole of England.

So if the government is handing out £13.4 billion to NHS trusts across the Country, then by rights we should be getting £1.34 billion, over half a billion more than we are getting.

That missing half a billion is almost exactly £100 for every man, woman and child in the South West.

The government has simply transferred money from us to everyone else.

We ALWAYS end up worse off like this.’

Owl believes that this hotly debated and topical issue derives from our longstanding “cheap food policy” which leads to poor wages and conditions. Not generally recognised but….. 

“Britons spend an average of 8% of their total household expenditure on food to eat at home. This is less than any other country apart from the US and Singapore……The food consumed in the UK is also the cheapest in Western Europe – costing 8% less than the EU average,….

It is also much cheaper in relative terms than the food bought by Britons’ parents and grandparents. 

The proportion of household income spent on food has more than halved over the past 60 years, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS), while spending on housing costs and leisure activities has doubled.”  (2018) www.bbc.co.uk › news › business-45559594

Lisa O’Carroll  www.theguardian.com

British applicants for jobs harvesting crops have said farmers have made it virtually impossible for them to secure the work despite a national appeal for a “land army” to save the UK’s fruit and vegetables.

Dozens of workers have expressed anger at claims they are too lazy or picky to take the jobs, alleging that farmers are favouring cheap migrant labour.

Offers of on-site accommodation in which three or four workers share a caravan were among the most frequent complaints on social media and in emails to the Guardian, after reports that thousands of British workers had turned down jobs and Romanians were being flown in to pick salad.

Chay Honey, in Bristol, whose work on festivals has disappeared, said the pay and conditions of the farm work were difficult to justify. “I live with my fiance and to live on site would mean I would only have one day a week for friends and family. They also said you can’t use your own vehicle, which makes getting out to the shops difficult. Very quickly the romance of going to work for a farm to help provide food for the nation has become very unattractive,” he said.

“It seems it is very much geared up for migrant labour. We are not looking for special treatment, but the whole system needs to have some flexibility and not just have this blanket approach.”

Genevieve Black, in south Wales, said she had been unsuccessful in applications for 10 jobs despite being willing to live on site in Kent, Hampshire or Scotland. “The idea that Brits are just too lazy to work on farms is just not true,” she said.

She is part of a Facebook group, Jobs for Camper Nomads, which is awash with criticism of the farming industry. One poster suggested that farmers could allow applicants with their own camper vans to live on site. “We are forever being told these are unprecedented times and we are all in it together. UK berry farmers not so much! I am sure with a bit of thought a workable solution can be found.”

Alison Harrow, an England Athletics running coach seeking farm work, said she was feeling “really discouraged”. “I’ve applied for 200 jobs and you either get ‘We’ve got enough people now’ or you don’t hear anything back,” she said. “Well, if they have jobs coming up at the end of May or June, why don’t they just allocate those now and just confirm a job?

“I get an email from one farm worker recruitment agency saying I have not been shortlisted. How can this be? There seems to be a mismatch between demand for workers and matching workers to farm work.”

Nick Marston, the chair of British Summer Fruits, said the business model of fruit farming had been “structured around a non-UK workforce for many years” because UK workers had shunned the work: “Farms are receiving large numbers of applications and I think it would be unfair to say the industry is not accommodating local workforce.”

He appealed for patience among the army of would-be-pickers, saying the season had barely started and that there would be surge in job opportunities at the end of May and June.

Tom Bradshaw, vice-president of the National Farmers’ Union ,said he could understand why people felt frustrated over the lack of job offers. “In a way, the media publicity has come a bit too soon, because the jobs don’t peak until the end of May and June,” he said.

He added that a national website that “would act as a centralised hub for all recruiters” was expected to launch later this week, which would make it easier to match supply to demand.

Almost £30million in Government grant support has been paid to businesses in East Devon in response to the coronavirus lockdown.

Philippa Davies www.sidmouthherald.co.uk

A total of 2,528 qualifying businesses have received the money, which is being distributed by East Devon district council.

The portfolio holder for the economy, Cllr Kevin Blakey, said: “We have written to all eligible businesses and emailed them where possible. We are still waiting to hear from 1,500 businesses and urge them to use the information provided and claim their grant.”

Any businesses that believe they qualify for a grant but have not heard from the council should email businessrates@eastdevon.gov.uk

Cllr Blakey said: “For businesses that do not meet the criteria for grants and other forms of support, please be assured that we are compiling a record of these types of businesses and we are feeding this back to central Government.

“We are aware that there are a number of businesses who have displayed entrepreneurialism and innovation in adapting to the current circumstances, for example, establishing new ways of delivering their business and engaging customers.

“We would like to help showcase such examples and I would encourage you to send these to us.

“This week, we are highlighting the work that Darts Farm have done to quickly launch an online delivery service which is also helping to benefit a range of local suppliers.

“We continue to receive feedback which shows the grants are providing real support during this challenging time.”

The comments include:

“Many thanks for this and a huge thanks for you and all your colleagues, keeping the country running at a time like this.”

“I was really impressed with how quickly EDDC got a system set up. It took a week from applying online to getting the much-needed money, so well done and thank you EDDC.”

“Received remittance advice for my £10,000 yesterday. Only applied a few days ago so thanks for a fast business saving job.”

“I just wanted to say that you and your colleagues at EDDC have managed this grant process wonderfully well. Please convey my thanks to the team at EDDC who have worked through this process so efficiently.”

Information on the business grant support available, and an online application system, can be found here on the EDDC website.

Remember that the official definition of the South West Region includes Gloucester, Wiltshire and Dorset on the eastern boundary.

Welcome news but right now who’s counting? (Maybe they are – see Max Hastings again)

Beth Sharp  www.sidmouthherald.co.uk 

More than £13billion of NHS debt has been written off as part of a wider package of NHS reforms announced by the Health Secretary.

This includes more than £825million of debt in the South West, across 13 NHS trusts.

As of April 1, more than 100 NHS hospitals were rid of historic debt, freeing them up to invest in maintaining vital services and longer-term infrastructure improvements.

It comes alongside new NHS funding model to make sure the NHS has the necessary funding and support to respond to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic.

This is part of a package of major reforms to the NHS financial system, designed in a collaboration between the Department of Health and Social Care and NHS England, which will begin from the start of the new financial year.

The changes will provide much needed financial support during this unprecedented viral pandemic, as well as laying secure foundations for the longer-term commitments set out last year to support the NHS to become more financially sustainable.

This significant change will mean hospitals will get all the necessary funding to carry out their emergency response, despite many hospitals cancelling or limiting their usual services such as elective surgery or walk-in clinics due to the virus.

Simon Jupp, MP for East Devon, said: “This is great news for the NHS in Devon and provides an opportunity to focus on the future without having to worry about the past.

“I will continue to work closely with our superb NHS as they tackle the virus today and provide first class healthcare for all of us into the future.”

Health Secretary Matt Hancock added: “As we tackle this crisis, nobody in our health service should be distracted by their hospital’s past finances.

“The £13.4 billion debt write off will wipe the slate clean and allow NHS hospitals to plan for the future and invest in vital services.

“I remain committed to providing the NHS with whatever it needs to tackle coronavirus, and the changes to the funding model will give the NHS immediate financial certainty to plan and deliver their emergency response.”

107 trusts have an average of £100 million revenue debt each, with the 2 trusts with the highest debts reaching a combined total of over £1 billion.

At times like these we need individuals in Whitehall who know when to cut the red tape (see previous article by Max Hastings)

A supplier of personal protective equipment (PPE) has warned that government bureaucracy has made it impossible to buy the necessary supplies.

Tim Shipman  www.thetimes.co.uk

Howard Amor of Seren Plus, a pharmaceutical supplier with 40 years of experience with Chinese suppliers, was contacted three weeks ago by NHS Supply Chain, the agency that buys kit for the health service, and asked to help.

He provided quotes to supply surgical masks, protective suits, eye protection and sanitising gel, pledging to supply samples within three days.

There was no response. Amor has supplied new quotes every seven days as market prices change. “We’ve heard nothing back from the NHS, except one response to complain that our updates had confused them. The NHS is weeks too slow to compete adequately in this volatile market and against other buyers who are way more aggressive,” he said.

“Foreign governments are paying cash (sometimes over the odds) to secure production capacity and stock.”

Instead, the government has offered to pay after 30 days. “The market in China demands payment up front. Suppliers don’t have infinite cash to finance a national crisis. Government needs to find a funding solution.”

A spokesman said the government was processing offers from 6,000 suppliers: “We are working rapidly to get through orders and ensure they meet the safety and quality standards that our NHS staff need. We have delivered more than a billion pieces of PPE equipment to the front line so far.”

Boris Johnson’s government has come under pressure to defend its handling of the coronavirus pandemic after Michael Gove was forced to admit that the prime minister had missed five key emergency meetings when the crisis first hit.

Peter Walker  www.theguardian.com

With ministers warning that shortages of protective medical gear could continue, test rates remaining stubbornly low and the hospital death toll rising on Sunday to 16,060, some Conservative MPs have expressed private concern that Downing Street does not have a strong grip on the crisis.

Johnson’s role in the decision-making over crucial weeks before the UK-wide lockdown now risks becoming a symbol of that perceived inattention, with Labour saying the prime minister appeared to have been “missing in action” at the time.

His de facto deputy, Gove, sent out on a broadcast round, initially refused to comment on a report in the Sunday Times – which also claims that 279,000 of the UK’s shrinking PPE stockpile was sent to China – saying Johnson had missed five meetings of the government’s Cobra emergency committee in late January and February while he was taking a break at a government country retreat.

“I won’t go through, here, a point-by-point rebuttal of all the things in the Sunday Times story that are a little bit off beam,” Gove told Sky News.

But about 90 minutes later, he told the BBC that Johnson had, indeed, missed all five meetings, saying instead that this was normal. “Most Cobra meetings don’t have the prime minister attending them,” said Gove, whose cabinet title is chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster. “That is the whole point.”

Cobra meetings were “led by the relevant secretary of state in the relevant area”, he argued. “The prime minister is aware of all of these decisions and takes some of those decisions. You can take a single fact, wrench it out of context, whip it up in order to create a j’accuse narrative. But that is not fair reporting.”

Addressing the daily No 10 press conference later, the education secretary, Gavin Williamson, reiterated this point, insisting that Johnson had, throughout, “been leading our nation’s effort to combat the coronavirus”.

While it is correct that the Cobra meetings are often chaired by others, in times of national crisis prime ministers have generally been ever present. Gordon Brown’s former press secretary Damian McBride tweeted that Brown, when PM, had chaired every Cobra meeting during the 2007 foot-and-mouth outbreak.

The sense of the government being forced on to the defensive was reinforced by two hugely detailed rebuttals it published on Sunday. One said the Sunday Times article contained “a series of falsehoods and errors”, while another condemned a Financial Times story about supposed confusion in efforts to source privately designed ventilators.

The acknowledgement of Johnson’s absences, some of which took place during a 12-day period in February during which he retreated into privacy at the government’s Chevening country estate in Kent, risks reinforcing a sense of official drift, with the PM still absent as he recovers from coronavirus.

Conservative MPs are barred from speaking to the media about the pandemic without No 10 clearance, but some are known to be worried about the apparent lack of preparation, the continued significant daily rises in deaths, and the lack of a publicly discussed exit strategy from lockdown.

The latest daily deaths figure from the virus in hospitals announced on Sunday was 596, well down on the previous day’s 888. However, Jenny Harries, the deputy chief medical officer speaking alongside Williamson at the press conference, said this could be in part due to lower reporting rates over the weekend.

Asked to predict whether the UK might have passed the peak of the crisis, she declined to “jump to all sorts of positive conclusions”, but said the data connected to hospital admissions looked as if it was “starting to plateau”.

With the number of hospital victims virus now above 16,000, the country is on a similar trajectory to Italy, according to a government-produced chart estimating total deaths including those outside hospital settings.

Harries warned against comparisons with other European countries such as Germany, which has seen just over 4,500 deaths, saying the countries were “at different phases of the pandemic”, while differences in areas such as data and demographics made the area even more complex.

She also defended official preparations for the virus, saying: “We had and we still have a very clear plan – we had a containment phase and it was very successful.”

Ministers spent much of the day trying to quash reports about possible ways the economy and society could gradually emerge from lockdown once the number of Covid-19 cases begins to drop.

Gove rejected reports of a supposed “traffic light” phased return to normality over May and June, starting with schools, nurseries and more shops beginning to open, then moving on to smaller companies, restaurants and then other venues, with distancing measures in place.

This was not the plan, Gove told Sky: “It is the case that we are looking at all of the evidence, but we’ve set some tests which need to be passed before we can think of easing restrictions in this lockdown.” Williamson reiterated the point at the press conference, declining to give a date as to when pupils might return to school.

Jonathan Ashworth, the shadow health secretary, told the Ridge show that Gove had given “possibly the weakest rebuttal of a detailed exposé in British political history”. There were, he added, “serious questions as to why the prime minister skipped five Cobra meetings throughout February, when the whole world could see how serious this was becoming”.

In this context, he added, the knowledge Johnson had missed key meetings “suggests that early on he was missing in action”.

Johnson remains at his official country retreat of Chequers. Gove said the PM was “in cheerful spirits” and had talked on Friday to Dominic Raab, the foreign secretary, who is standing in for him.

The government’s target of carrying out 100,000 Covid-19 tests each day by the end of the month has come under criticism from senior scientists, who say it will be impossible to reach.

Hannah Devlin  www.theguardian.com 

Experts told the Guardian that a “macho” focus on headline-grabbing figures had been pursued at the expense of rigorous science.

The Cabinet Office minister, Michael Gove, said on Sunday that the government was confident that the goal of 100,000 tests daily by the end of April would be met.

However, scepticism is building. On Saturday, only 21,626 tests were carried out.

Paul Hunter, a professor of medicine at the University of East Anglia, said he viewed the target as impossible. “I cannot see that being achieved,” he said. “It was always designed to be a headline grabber rather than anything else.”

Others said a relentless focus on the number of tests performed each day had led to basic data reporting standards falling by the wayside. Prof Sheila Bird, formerly of the Medical Research Council’s biostatistics unit at the University of Cambridge, said: “The level of incompetence in reporting these tests is outrageous.”

Gove acknowledged on Sunday that the target referred to tests carried out. In the past fortnight the government has placed a growing emphasis on “testing capacity”. It said that although fewer than 22,000 tests were performed on Saturday, labs now had the capacity to carry out 38,000 tests daily, and this had not been fully taken up by hospitals.

Scientists said the distinction was misleading as the logistics of having enough doctors and nurses on the ground to perform swab tests and send off samples continued to be a challenge. “Having the capacity is just the first step,” said Bill Hanage, a British epidemiologist based at Harvard.

Bird said the failure to give breakdowns of how many tests were being carried out on patients in hospital, critical workers and family members of critical workers made it impossible to extract prevalence rates of infection in these different groups and other crucial information that would allow scientists to more accurately assess the status of the outbreak in the UK.

“This macho thing about the number of tests done each day is leading to a reporting standard that makes the data almost uninterpretable,” she said.

Ideally, she said, tests would be reported separately for these different groups and would take into account the fact that hospitalised patients typically have a sequence of three tests over several weeks – an initial positive test followed by two negative tests (the second negative for assurance that the recovering patient is no longer infectious and can be transferred home or to a general ward).

“Reporting the number of tests performed each day is a political requirement, not a scientific requirement,” she added.

Hanage said that even if the 100,000 target were met, this figure was not a relevant measure of the adequacy of the UK’s testing operation. “Aiming for a large number that sounds good is not the way you should be doing this,” he said.

That around a third of those tested in the UK this week had positive results suggests that, while useful for guiding medical treatment, current testing is far below the levels that would be needed for population surveillance.

“The data I’ve been seeing suggests there’s not anywhere near enough testing,” Hanage said. “The way you should be doing it is to build the capacity and ability to run large numbers of tests – enough that only 10% are coming back positive.”

The World Health Organization has repeatedly urged governments to pursue testing and tracing, and some countries, including Singapore and South Korea, have successfully used this approach to contain their outbreaks, while Germany has also continued to carry out contact tracing.

The UK abandoned population testing and contact tracing in early March, when case numbers began to rise steeply, but the health secretary, Matt Hancock, said on Friday that contact tracing would be reintroduced, including through a proposed NHS smartphone app.

Experts say the ability to rely on this approach to safely exit the lockdown will depend critically on widespread population testing beyond the level needed for diagnosing patients in hospital.

Former health secretary Jeremy Hunt is now chair of the health select committee. He has been very critical of the government’s response to Covid-19. Can he escape responsibility for cuts made under his watch or for failing to learn the lessons from the last pandemic exercise “Cygnus 2016”?

Steve Topple 19th April 2020 www.thecanary.co 

Former health secretary Jeremy Hunt has been all over the news during the coronavirus (Covid-19) pandemic. The media has been treating him as some sort of prophet over the virus. Probably because he now chairs the health select committee. But one tweet has given an important reminder of the hypocrisy of Hunt’s words during this crisis.

Hunt: the coronavirus prophet?

Hunt has been wheeling himself out to any media organisation that will listen. Most recently, he told LBC that the UK should do coronavirus testing where:

        every single person who thinks they’ve got Covid or Covid symptoms gets a very quick test

He’s also been somewhat critical of Boris Johnson’s government’s response. The Canary reported in March, that Hunt called the PM’s plan (or lack thereof) for dealing with coronavirus “surprising and concerning”. It would almost appear that the former NHS boss has an iota of concern over the health of the nation. But don’t be fooled. Because ‘Saint Hunt of Surrey’ is actually partly responsible for the huge crisis the NHS is currently in. And someone on Twitter summed it up perfectly.

Twitter steps in

Many people will be aware of captain Tom Moore. He’s been walking lengths of his garden to raise money for the NHS. At the time of publication, Moore had raised over £25m. So, as Rachael Swindon tweeted:

Yes, it’s true. As Nursing in Practice reported, Hunt was health secretary when the NHS paid £21m for consultants to tell it how to save billions; £26bn according to the Mirror. As the head of the Royal College of Nursing (RCN) said at the time:

            The Government will struggle to justify this level of spending on management consultants who advise on        cutting nursing staff.

This sort of expertise should already be held within the NHS. It is a false economy when the consultants cost more than the savings they identify.

Now, with an NHS that’s running out of personal protective equipment (PPE), having to beg retired staff to come back, and hospitals declaring critical incidents, the fall out from years of Tory neglect is clear for all to see. Central to this has been Hunt. Yet he, and the media interviewing him, seem to have forgotten that fact.

Steaming hypocrisy

For example, people seem to have forgotten that Hunt was in charge when the NHS did a pandemic ‘drill’. Called Exercise Cygnus, the results showed the government that the NHS wouldn’t cope with something like coronavirus. Yet Hunt and the rest of the government’s health team ignored it. Also, NHS budgets rose in real terms by just 1.4% per year between 2009/10 and 2018/19, when historically (prior to Conservative-led governments) they went up by around 3.7%, on average. Hunt oversaw most of these meagre rises.

Meanwhile, there was a 2 percentage point increase in spending on private companies in the NHS between 2011/12 and 2018/19. Waiting times have been getting worse, staff shortages have been dire, and health inequality has been on the rise.

Yet somehow, Hunt has managed to absolve himself of responsibility for the mess the NHS is in during the coronavirus pandemic. And our media has allowed him to. So, it’s left to people like Swindon to point out the steaming hypocrisy in his mealy-mouthed words.

“Schools could start returning within three weeks under a ‘traffic light’ plan being pushed by senior ministers to ease lockdown misery – amid Cabinet splits over whether the government should risk more deaths from the disease to save the plunging economy.”

“Over-70s face a ‘red light’ for many months more, potentially having to wait for a vaccine before going back to normal life.”

Overall, just under a quarter (22.6%) of the population of East Devon is aged 70+, but in some areas of Sidmouth it’s more like a half (49.9). Good ONS interactive map of where over 70s live can be found here.

James Tapsfield www.dailymail.co.uk

Schools could start returning within three weeks under a ‘traffic light’ plan being pushed by senior ministers to ease lockdown misery – amid Cabinet splits over whether the government should risk more deaths from the disease to save the plunging economy.

The fledgling ‘exit strategy’ would see the country get back up in running in stages after May 11, with primary, GCSE pupils, and nurseries potentially going back part-time.  

Meanwhile, clothes shops and garden centres could be among the ‘non-essential’ stores given a ‘green light’ to reopen with precautions to protect customers. Rail services would be brought up to normal levels, with commuters probably urged to wear facemasks, and the NHS would resume carrying out non-urgent procedures. 

A second ‘amber’ stage later in the summer would see more of the economy revived, with all employees told to go back to work and some social gatherings allowed. 

However, it might not be until later in the year that pubs and restaurants can reopen and sporting events get up and running. And over-70s face a ‘red light’ for many months more, potentially having to wait for a vaccine before going back to normal life.

The proposals are gaining traction amid a mounting backlash at the lack of a clear plan. Senior ministers are divided between those who want to ‘run hot’, using apparent spare capacity in the NHS to relax social distancing soon, and those who fear acting too early will allow the disease to run rampant, according to the Sunday Times. 

After concerns about drift at the heart of power, Boris Johnson is gearing up to take back the reins of government, making calls to ministers from Chequers where he is recuperating from his own health scare with the disease. 

Cabinet minister MIchael Gove tried to dampen down frenzied speculation over loosening of restrictions this morning, saying while it was ‘entirely understandable’ people want to know the way out it was too early to make such decisions. 

Asked if the ‘traffic light’ system was the government’s ‘exit strategy’, Mr Gove told Sky News: ‘No it’s not. It is the case that we are looking at all the evidence. But we have  set some tests that must be passed before we can even think about easing the lockdown.’ 

Although he stressed no decisions had been taken, Mr Gove did hint at the shape of an easing, suggesting pubs and other parts of the hospitality industry will be ‘among the last’ to come back. 

Max Hastings’ view on how to deal with the consequences of a hollowed out state caused by a decade plus of austerity

Max Hastings www.thetimes.co.uk 

It seems mistaken to heap too much blame on the government for the failures in Britain’s response to Covid-19. Instead, our rulers should be judged by how fast they learn from grim experience, and how imaginatively they address the yawning fissures exposed by this earthquake.

Amid many uncertainties, one thing is assured: the state will play a role in all our affairs for the next few years, greater than we have known for 60 or 70 years. The fumbled response thus far represents consequences of generations in which its institutions and instruments have been eroded and run down, as the dynamic of society shifted to the private sector. The NHS could just cope six months ago, but unsurprisingly lacked spare capacity to meet the coronavirus, hence the enlistment of the army to provide logistics, communications and managerial support through its Operation Rescript.

The Foreign and Commonwealth Office, after suffering decades of shrinkage and political contempt, struggles to address international issues, including the welfare of tens of thousands of British citizens abroad. Meanwhile, we have the police force we deserve, in the absence of effective supervision as well as adequate funding.

The government should be devolving many decisions and supervisory functions to local authorities, rather than persisting with a surely doomed attempt to run everything, and to distribute stupendous sums of public money, direct from Whitehall. But councils, too, are resource-starved, treated by central government as a burden upon national life rather than as a key component of it.

Above all, the civil service at every level has been abused, bypassed, despised, demoralised. Most of its indifferently rewarded high-flyers quit before reaching the highest posts. Permanent secretaries are obliged to share power, though seldom responsibility, with ministers’ often half-witted and unfailingly arrogant spin doctors.

It would be mistaken to idealise past British governments, including wartime ones. In the 20th century, however, weak and incompetent ministers were protected and buttressed by an impressive Whitehall machine. Sir Humphrey Appleby was a valuable article, much brighter than hapless Jim Hacker.

It is such human instruments to execute policy that are today lacking, and must be rediscovered. Not merely this country, but the world, faces years of unprecedented medical, economic and social stress. The critical agent in preserving our societies will be the state, which thus needs our best brains and most competent administrators.

Whitehall is experiencing an invasion of management consultants. Such people are a dubious resource in good times, a wholly inadequate one in bad. There is talk of bringing in clever former ministers — Jeremy Hunt, William Hague, Ken Clarke, Rory Stewart and suchlike. This might be sensible, even essential. Even more pressing, though, is the demand for high-quality administrators lower down the chain.

In the early months of the Second World War, there was regulatory and administrative confusion and bungling at least as great as now. From 1940 onwards, however, Britain mobilised its people more efficiently than any other nation. The British Army never achieved excellence, but the home front did.

The department store chief Lord Woolton ran food, and gave his name to an economical pie. Patrick Hennessy, wunderkind boss of Ford of Dagenham, joined the Ministry of Aircraft Production, to do the heavy lifting for Lord Beaverbrook. The former Trades Union Congress chief Ernest Bevin directed labour. Lord Leathers became responsible for shipping and transport. The “three profs” — Lord Cherwell, John Maynard Keynes and Lionel Robbins — addressed their brilliant minds to the conduct and funding of government.

Nearer the coalface, many of the finest mathematicians in the country were guided towards Bletchley Park. Such academics as Noel Annan, Edgar Williams and Enoch Powell, thrust into ill-fitting uniforms, dramatically raised the quality of service staff work. It is an insufficiently understood aspect of war that it matters least who does the killing — a task requiring little intellect — and much more who generates ideas and steers them towards implementation.

Today, thank goodness, we are not fighting anybody. We need not thrust millions of young men and women into uniform. Yet after generations in which most of the nation’s brightest and best have devoted their lives to making money or spending it in the private sector, now instead their talents are desperately needed on the front line — a new kind of front line, but just as critical as were the beaches 80 years ago.

No such mobilisation is going to happen in five minutes. We are all undergoing a supremely traumatic process of adjustment. But it seems important that those in charge of government should at least identify a direction of travel, a roadmap towards radical measures such as were unthinkable three months ago. They should be planning, for instance, the recruitment of civilian special constables to reinforce a police force that lacks the numbers to handle the law-and-order challenges that lie ahead. They should be considering how best to re-employ the talents of millions who will forfeit their existing jobs.

Ministers, as much as the rest of us, need to acknowledge that we cannot look forward to some happy date this year when normal service will be resumed. We must prepare, instead, for a new world, wherein we can survive and prosper only if we respond to its challenges with courage and imagination.

Foremost is that we should conscript the best possible people to manage the myriad activities of the state, which will, for many moons ahead, intrude unprecedentedly but also, we should hope, constructively upon all our lives. If the government kids itself that McKinsey can supply the answers, then it is asking the wrong questions.

Is EDDC using the best technology to keep democratic local governance  going during lockdown? 

Looks like EDDC is still using Skype when the rest of government is using the more appropriate Zoom.

Council meetings

It is expected that the vast majority of meetings will not need to go ahead because they are not dealing with essential matters during this time of crisis. However, as of now, the council will review the need to hold meetings on a rolling basis. Moving forwards, as a matter of priority, and subject to what Government permits local authorities to do, we are looking at ways of conducting urgent/important meetings remotely using Skype and/or conference calling.

Robert Jenrick, the housing, communities and local government secretary, has “made it clear” to councils that they must keep parks open during the coronavirus lockdown, although he sidestepped calls to apologise for visiting his Herefordshire home.

Owl wonders which of his three homes he returned to after conducting the briefing: his Hereford grade 1 mansion, his £2.5m London house or the property in Southwell near Newark [his constituency]?

Aaron Walawalkar  www.theguardian.com

Speaking at the daily Downing Street press conference on the coronavirus outbreak, Jenrick said it “cannot be right” that some councils across the country had closed their parks in recent weeks.

He said that, while the virus “does not discriminate”, lockdown measures are much harder for people who do not have gardens or open spaces for children to run around in.

“People need parks. That’s why I have made it clear to councils that all parks must remain open,” he said.

The announcement comes weeks after the health secretary, Matt Hancock, threatened a ban on outdoor exercise on the weekend that Brockwell Park, in south London, was controversially closed in response to a reported influx of sunbathers. Analysis by the Guardian has revealed that park closures would disproportionately effect the most deprived Londoners.

Jenrick also addressed reports of mourners being turned away from funerals, pointing to the case of 13-year-old Ismail Mohamed Abdulwahab, from Brixton, who died after contracting Covid-19.

He said the tragedy was compounded after Ismail’s family could not attend his funeral. “That is not right and it shouldn’t have happened,” he said. “For clarity, funerals can go ahead with close family present.”

The government will publish further guidance on funerals, Jenrick said, adding: “I’m also asking councils to keep open or indeed to reopen cemeteries and graveyards … for people to make that private visit and seek solace at the grave of someone you’ve loved or to privately lay flowers.

“There have been times in my life when I have needed to do that. These are small steps, but small mercies can make a difference.”

Jenrick defended his decision to visit his parents’ home earlier this month, despite repeatedly urging the public to stay at home to curb the spread of coronavirus.

The Guardian established that the housing secretary visited his parents in Shropshire, 40 miles from his own home by road, who were already being supported with grocery deliveries by their local community.

Jenrick said in the briefing he had delivered medicines to his elderly parents and that it is “entirely within the guidelines” to do so.

He said he “would not want people to feel concerned that they cannot do something like that to help their own elderly relatives or parents who are in need”.

Jenrick was also asked whether he should apologise to the public for seeming to have broken the rules when visiting his Herefordshire home during the lockdown. He says his house in Herefordshire is his main home, despite the fact his children and wife attend school and work in London.

He responded: “I joined my family at our home in Herefordshire as soon as I was able to do so, as soon as we made the decision that it was no longer necessary to work in person in Westminster.

“I’ve been there since I’ve been working from home and returned to Westminster last night to do this press conference because parliament returns next week.”

The briefing came as the number of people to die in UK hospitals rose by 888 to 15,464.

“When people voted to leave in 2016 they were voting to take back control of our borders,” Priti Patel (Nov 2019)

David Collins, Northern Correspondent www.thetimes.co.uk 

Hundreds of private jets have been used by rich passengers to enter the UK from virus hotspots since the lockdown began.

Britain is already setting itself apart from the rest of the world with few travel restrictions. Many other countries have clamped down on international travellers and imposed quarantine rules.

An investigation identified 545 private jets landing in UK airfields since the lockdown was imposed last month. They have arrived from Spain (25), France (27) and Germany (32). A total of 15 private jets have also arrived from America, according to flight data supplied by WingX, an aviation consultancy. America has the world’s highest Covid-19 death toll, in excess of 38,000.

More than 15,000 passengers are still arriving into the UK each day on normal flights. No routine tests are carried out on arrival.

Private plane operators should carry out due diligence on passengers hiring private jets to see if they conform to the government’s rules on “essential travel” only.

Some wealthy passengers are being misleading about the purposes for private jet hire, however, claiming that they are travelling to family homes, rather than second homes or holiday homes. The UK still operates an open borders policy, unlike 130 other countries that have imposed travel restrictions since the pandemic began.

Professor Gabriel Scally, president of epidemiology and public health at the Royal Society of Medicine, said it was “hard to understand” why the UK persisted in an open borders policy, calling it “most peculiar”.

Justin Bowman, chief executive of the Air Charter Service, the largest private charter service in the world, said: “Governments are facing huge challenges moving people from different parts of the world back to the UK, where they are stranded.

“The airlines stopped pretty much overnight. There are still thousands of people in the wrong place. Many of these flights will be legitimate repatriations from around the world. I would hope those abusing the rules are in the minority.”

The super-rich have also been using private jets to leave the UK. A total of 767 private planes have flown from UK airfields since the lockdown. This includes 115 flights from London Farnborough airport, known for its “discretion and bespoke service”, according to one private jet company’s website.

The most popular destinations for jets leaving the UK during the lockdown were France (34), Germany (34), Spain (30) and Russia (23). Private jet hire to Moscow can cost between £20,000 and £70,000.

Ten private planes have flown to the United Arab Emirates since the lockdown. Industry sources say a private flight to the UAE would cost up to £100,000.

One aviation source said: “These are some of the wealthiest people who count the UK as their home, who are fleeing to second homes since the lockdown was imposed.”

The Civil Aviation Authority, which oversees and regulates all aspects of civil aviation in the UK, said it had “no way of knowing if the hire of private aircraft has increased or declined in recent weeks”, as it does not monitor the numbers.

It emerged last week that French police turned back a private jet after a group of wealthy passengers flew from Farnborough to Marseilles for a holiday.

Clive Jackson, founder of the private plane hire firm Victor, said he believed most of the industry was acting responsibly when taking bookings from the public. “We have an obligation not to flout the rules as we have an essential part to play in the Covid crisis, providing genuine medical evacuation and repatriation for families in distress.”

Scotland and Wales are already developing their own exit strategies. Whitehall and No 10 appear to be concentrating on London (as always). The Northern  Metro-Mayors are asking for a seat on COBRA, but who speaks for the regions? The unelected Great South West or the equally unelected Local Enterprise Partnerships? Can our MPs come together as (most of them did) with #pleasecomebacklater

“The role of local government is being massively underplayed in Whitehall”  (Especially, it would seem, with regard to contact tracing – Owl)

David Collins, Northern Correspondent  www.thetimes.co.uk 

Boris Johnson faces rising pressure to open up Cobra emergency meetings to political leaders from outside London as plans are drawn up to lift the national lockdown.

Senior ministers privately canvassed several of the country’s metro mayors last week about their thoughts on a staged “regional release” of the lockdown, with London the first to benefit from being freed of restrictions. The response was an unequivocal “no” from regional leaders, who are concerned about a “London-first” approach.

Senior politicians believe a lack of input into Cobra from local government has caused blunders in addressing the growing crisis in care-home infections, a lack of personal protective equipment (PPE) for care workers, and a confused NHS volunteer scheme that clashes with existing local schemes.

Two of the most powerful civic leaders outside the capital, Andy Burnham, the Labour mayor of Greater Manchester, and Andy Street, the Conservative mayor of the West Midlands, said they would support a seat on Cobra for the regions as government planning moves to the “recovery” phase.

“There should be representation for the English regions on Cobra now,” Burnham said. “I’m not saying that for the benefit of Greater Manchester, or any other particular region, but for everybody’s benefit. I think certain decisions might have been made differently if Cobra had had a regional voice from the very start of this crisis.”

A strong regional voice on the Cobra committee could offer practical “on the ground” experience that some government sources say the current “overly centralised” set-up lacks.

“The role of local government is being massively underplayed in Whitehall,” said Burnham, a health secretary under Gordon Brown who led the response to swine flu in 2009. “We have issues in Greater Manchester that I would like the chance to express in Cobra.”

Burnham gave an example of asking the government for PPE for care home workers in Greater Manchester last week. After asking for 500,000 items, which would have lasted care workers one week in the region, just 48,000 arrived.

“This would be something I would have raised with Cobra,” he said. “And it’s a problem not just specific to us but something that is going on across all the regions in the care sector.”

Street said he had been “comfortable” with not being on Cobra due to the emergency meetings so far being about national guidelines and policy-making around the epidemic. But as the focus begins to shift towards a recovery plan after lockdown, he said: “I would definitely want to make the case for the Midlands.”

Lifting the lockdown “sector by sector” would affect regions differently, making it crucial that they had input, both Street and Burnham said.

For example, relaxing restrictions on the car industry and bringing 20,000 workers back to work would help the West Midlands more than other regions, and Liverpool, which depends heavily on tourism for jobs and income, will be hoping for a boost to the hospitality sector.

“We need to be part of those discussions,” said Street, who used to be managing director of John Lewis. “We understand our regions better than anyone.”

Cabinet Office Briefing Room A (Cobra) is used for committees that co-ordinate the government’s response to a national emergency.

London’s mayor, Sadiq Khan, has used Cobra meetings to argue that building workers should not be going to work in the capital.

He claimed the prime minister overruled him during Cobra, arguing that building workers could carry out their jobs in relative safety.

Earlier this week, the Government was accused of misleading the public about the scale of the pandemic because it failed to include care home deaths in its daily briefings. Healthcare workers warned that deaths in care homes have been substantially underestimated by official figures.

The number of care home residents who have died of suspected coronavirus may have reached 7,500, according to the latest estimate, The Telegraph has learned.

By Gabriella Swerling, Social Affairs Editor 17 www.telegraph.co.uk

New data collated by Care England, the country’s largest representative body for care homes, suggests the number of deaths from Covid-19 is far higher than its previous estimate of 1,400 from earlier this week.

The number is also far in advance of the official figure from the Office for National Statistics (ONS), which has recorded 217 care home deaths from the virus up to April 3 – the most recent date for which official data is available. 

However, as the Government published its daily update on coronavirus hospital deaths on Friday, which showed a rise to 14,576, it emerged that the death toll in UK care homes is suspected to be much bigger than previously feared. 

Professor Martin Green, the chief executive of Care England, told The Telegraph that around 7,500 people may have died in care homes as a result of the virus. 

“Without testing, it is very difficult to give an absolute figure,” he said. “However, if we look at some of the death rates since April 1 and compare them with previous years’ rates, we estimate a figure of about 7,500 people may have died as a result of Covid-19.”

Care England, which represents around 3,800 homes and more than 50,000 residents, gathered data by “taking a sounding” from its homes.

Its estimate comes amid a growing row about the extent of the coronavirus crisis in care homes and the Government’s response, as data from Public Health England confirmed that the elderly have been hardest hit by the virus, with 69 per cent of those who have died aged over 70.

Earlier this week, the Government was accused of misleading the public about the scale of the pandemic because it failed to include care home deaths in its daily briefings. Healthcare workers warned that deaths in care homes have been substantially underestimated by official figures.

Charities said the new data “will send a chill down the spine of anyone with a loved one living in a care home” as they renewed calls for increased provision of personal protective equipment (PPE) to help keep residents and carers safe.

Earlier this week, a leaked letter from care home bosses accused Number 10 of a “shambolic” response to the sector’s crisis, with “paltry” and “haphazard” deliveries of PPE. 

Matt Hancock, the Health Secretary said during the daily Downing Street briefing on Thursday that only 15 per cent of care homes had been hit by Covid-19. He told the health and social care committee on Friday that data on the deaths of care home residents with coronavirus will be published “very shortly”.

His pledge came as care professionals claimed they have not seen £1.6 billion which Rishi Sunak, the Chancellor,  announced had been set aside for social care. The Local Government Association (LGA) warned that, without a “cast-iron funding pledge”, councils will be heading towards “financial failure”.

Responding to the Care England data, Caroline Abrahams, the charity director at Age UK, said: “This is a shocking and utterly heartbreaking estimate that will send a chill down the spine of anyone with a loved one living in a care home. 

“It emphasises just how crucial it is that the Government’s commitments on PPE and testing in care homes are implemented successfully and at speed.

“As we have feared for some time, what’s going on in care homes – not only here but in many other countries too – is a tragedy in the making. It’s too late to avert this entirely, but there’s still time to make a positive difference and save many lives, of staff as well as older people.

“Central and local government and  the care home sector must work together to make this happen. And later, possibly a lot later, we have to ensure this can never happen again.” 

A Department of Health and Social Care spokesman said: “Every death from this virus is a tragedy, and that is why we are working around the clock to give the social care sector the equipment and support they need to tackle this global pandemic.

“It is important that we have the best possible reliable data to know how many deaths there are, wherever they occur. In an important step forward, ONS are now providing a breakdown of deaths by place of occurrence.

“We are currently working with CQC and other organisations to understand how to best to provide up to date information about deaths in care homes and elsewhere.”