Reader TTS

Away from the storms in the Westminster teacup, the news is good. Coronavirus transmission across the UK has fallen sufficiently for Prime Minister to reduce the threat from Level 4, “high”,

to Level 3, when the virus is still in “general circulation”, but social distancing may be progressively relaxed. In the course of June, not only will many children return to school, but

families will be able to meet again in gardens. Not only shops and outdoor facilities, but pubs, restaurants and other parts of the hospitality industry may be allowed to reopen — provided

it is deemed safe to reduce the two-metre rule to one. Life will start to feel much more normal again. All this is, of course, conditional. Local lockdowns could yet be imposed if the R

number surges in a town or district. Contact tracing is being rolled out on a national scale, bringing with it the “civic duty” of social isolation for anyone who has contact with a person

who tests positive. The prospect of the authorities tracking the population fills some with suspicion or dread. While vigilance in defence of civil liberties is always necessary, in this

case such fears are mere paranoia. There is no danger of contact tracing mutating into a permanent system of surveillance. If the authorities had been able to have it up and running two

months ago, the death toll would certainly have been lower and we would by now have lifted the lockdown. So is it all over, apart from a mopping up operation? Was the threat of Covid-19

exaggerated? And was the lockdown unnecessary, the cure worse than the disease? The answer is: no, no and no. Looking across the Atlantic, it is clear that the pandemic has by no means run

its course. In the United States, the death toll has reached the 100,000 mark, despite confident predictions only a few weeks ago that it would never get to six figures. These claims were

not only coming from Donald Trump, but from experts such as the White House Covid co-ordinator Deborah Birx, who now admits that deaths may eventually reach 240,000. Another study predicts

that the virus will persist throughout the summer in states that have yet to be severely affected and peak again later in the year. This ominous forecast suggests that the patchy imposition

of lockdown measures across the fifty states has been a factor in the death toll. New cases are falling in the urban centres of New York and New Jersey, where morbidity has been highest and

lockdown strictest, but new cases are rising in rural states such as Arkansas, North Carolina and Wisconsin. Some mid-western and southern states have never enacted major restrictions or

only imposed them for a few weeks. President Trump has praised governors who have prioritised the economy by minimising prophylactic measures, but it is still unclear what price in deaths

these states have yet to pay. In Latin America, President Bolsonaro, the “Brazilian Trump”, has been a consistent, even fanatical, opponent of lockdown. But reports from Brazil suggest that

coronavirus is out of control there. Indeed, other countries that border on its vast landmass feel threatened by the scale and pace of the Brazilian outbreak, where the death toll is

approaching 25,000 and doubling every fortnight. Predictions from a US study suggest that 125,000 will have died of Covid-19 in Brazil by early August. Health systems in some Latin American

countries are rudimentary and even in Argentina, one of the wealthiest, plans to lift lockdown were reversed only last weekend due to the crisis in neighbouring Brazil. The continent expects

the worst is yet to come. In view of these transatlantic examples, it would be foolish to assume that Covid-19 has run its course in Europe. Nor is it justified to dismiss the threat merely

because some Continental countries have had relatively few deaths. Almost half of the global death total, which now exceeds 350,000, has been here in Europe. Epidemiologists do not know the

future course of this pandemic. As for the debate on the efficacy of lockdowns: it is still very much an open question. Last week Sweden, championed by sceptics, recorded the highest death

rate per capita in the world. Its government is still confident that Sweden’s policy of voluntary rather than compulsory social distancing will ultimately be vindicated, but the economy

there has not been unscathed. Unemployment, for example, is now almost 8 per cent and rising. Any verdict on the “Swedish experiment” is bound to be provisional. The geographical,

demographic and sociological peculiarities of Sweden anyway make it a problematic model for other countries. The sane and sensible conclusion must be that the British Government is right to

lift the lockdown here, but must proceed carefully, guided by the scientific consensus and keeping open minds. It is good news that we shall be able to see and converse with our loved ones,

not just virtually but in the flesh. This especially applies to those who are most vulnerable. Having safeguarded them thus far, however, we should not risk their health by throwing caution

to the winds. The story of the Covid-19 pandemic is still being written and we don’t even know which chapter we have reached.