Reader TTS

The irony won’t be lost on anyone. Less than a year after Boris Johnson’s attempt to prorogue Parliament for a few weeks to facilitate Brexit provoked a constitutional crisis, the threat of

coronavirus may now force MPs to stay away for up to six months. The danger of 650 “superspreaders” carrying Covid-19 to all four corners of the kingdom is deemed to be serious enough to

suspend sittings from the end of this month until September. This would mean 160 days of sittings would be lost, the longest prorogation since 1914, when the First World War interrupted

proceedings. The speed with which events have moved in response to the epidemic is mind-boggling. Yet the logic is irresistible. More than a million people visit the Palace of Westminster

every year and some 10,000 members and staff work there. Assuming that London will be an epicentre of the epidemic, the only way to prevent Parliament becoming an engine of infection is to

close down Westminster and tell MPs to stay in their constituencies. In ancient times, the motto during an outbreak of contagion was: “_Cito, Longe, Tarde.” _Translated from the Latin, this

means: “Leave quickly; go far away; come back slowly.” This is still sound advice — as long as one is not already a carrier. Parliament is not the only institution that will have to close

its doors. Museums, football stadiums, swimming pools, cinemas, theatres, concert halls, offices and workplaces of all kinds may have to follow suit. Indeed, public gatherings of any size

are already being cancelled; airports are rapidly emptying and railway stations won’t be far behind. Shopping centres may be next, as panic buying mounts and home delivery services struggle

to keep customers supplied. Britain, in short, is in the early stages of a period of disruption which has no precedent in the lifetimes of most people now alive. The nearest parallel was the

three day week, nearly half a century ago. Lasting from January 1 to March 7, 1974, it lasted only three months. The “three day week” meant that commercial users of electricity were limited

to three consecutive days’ consumption a week; the rest of the time, employees were sent home. Only essential services such as hospitals were exempt. That crisis was caused primarily by the

international oil embargo imposed by the Arabs after the Yom Kippur War, but it was compounded by a miners’ strike. The 1973-74 crisis was caused by energy shortages; it was wholly

man-made. The chaos now precipitated by Covid-19, by contrast, will affect every aspect of the economy and society; it is, as insurers like to say, an act of God. For a true comparison, we

must go back to the Second World War, which one must now be an octogenarian to recall in any detail. Rationing, evacuation, mobilisation and many other wartime measures are part of our folk

memory, but too remote to be of practical relevance to those now charged with planning for the present crisis. Preparations for a temporary interruption of supplies in certain Brexit

contingencies are already being activated, but the coronavirus epidemic is incomparably more serious and far-reaching.  The worst-case scenario involves up to half a million deaths from

Covid-19 and related illnesses over a period of months. That number is a shocking prospect. We should remember, however, that this is roughly the number of people who die in any normal year.

Hospitals, emergency services, GP surgeries, crematoria and other facilities will struggle to cope, but the authorities should have enough warning to avoid these services being overwhelmed.

Those infected with Covid-19 deserve to be treated as compassionately as any other patients, but they will require isolation and medical staff must protect themselves as best they can.

Families will have to accept the same restrictions; this won’t always be easy.  Keeping calm and carrying on, indeed, may be all that most of us can do. A YouGov survey suggests that, out of

ten countries including China and the United States, the UK is the least alarmed by Covid-19. Some 70 per cent of Britons surveyed said they were either “not very scared” or “not at all

scared” of the virus.  There may be an element of complacency about this attitude. Once the death toll here begins to rise and personal acquaintances are affected, there may be

manifestations of panic. Isolated incidents of hostility towards those assumed to be Chinese have been reported. But the British are, in general, a decent and resilient lot. Coronavirus will

test us as a nation as we have never been tested before.  This will require leadership of a higher calibre than has been seen hitherto. In this column, we have suggested that Boris Johnson

needs to set an example, giving up his own creature comforts and foreign trips _pour encourager les autres. _Leadership needs to go much further than that, though. In the temporary absence

of Parliament, the Prime Minister and his colleagues will carry an even greater burden of responsibility than usual. Britain expects every man and woman to do their duty, but we expect much

more than that from Boris Johnson.