Barry Turner

By Barry Turner Columnist

A document has been leaked to The Sun by remarkable coincidence in the week when Brexit deal talks appear to have stalled yet again, and the possibility of a ‘2nd wave’ of COVID-19 is struggling to command the headlines.

The paper entitled Preliminary set of Reasonable Worst case Scenario Planning assumptions to support civil contingencies planning for the end of the Transition Period (July 2020) and marked ‘Official Sensitive’ is remarkable not only for the poor grammar in its title but for the catastrophic doomsday scenario it paints for the coming new year.

Not that we have not heard this before of course, and not that it is the first time this kind of material has been leaked.

The picture is one of the perfect storm of a deadly 2nd wave of COVID-19, accompanied by floods and exacerbated by a bitter and acrimonious trade war with our former partners in the EU. Power and petrol shortages, port blockades caused by tariffs, pitch battles at sea between British fishing vessels and illegal EU fishing boats, involving intervention from the Royal Navy.

Local authorities going bust and troops on the streets quelling public disorder while a shortage of medicines is accompanied by animal diseases sweeping the country. Yet another disaster scenario of epic, indeed biblical proportions. We are reassured of course that this is a worst case scenario and that it shows us the government is ready for all catastrophes.

If that were true, of course, at least that would be a change — sadly the existence of the document and its inevitable ‘leaking’ are not. It is a mystery why documents such as this ‘officially sensitive’ one always… always find themselves published in the mainstream media. In any case, what is it in such a paper that needs to be kept from the British public in the first place. If this Armageddon scenario is facing us, don’t we have a right to know without relying on the inevitable leak?

This document has not of course been ‘leaked’, it has been sort of ever so slightly deliberately put in the public domain by its originators while the Cabinet who commissioned it turn a blind eye to what they know was inevitable. Of course, we will hear the faux outrage and the determination to find who leaked it, and then it will go quiet until the next doomsday script is drafted for immediate leakage.

The question is what is the purpose of endless planning for worst case scenarios when in the main there is little evidence of planning for the best, or even ordinary case scenarios? People have a perfect right to ask why so much time, effort and taxpayers money is spent on planning for the worst, only to see failings in dealing with dangerous scenarios when they do actually happen. Apparently every developed country in the world including the UK has had for years a contingency plan for a pandemic, then come the pandemic and those plans are either abandoned, forgotten about or rewritten.

So we might be facing a 21st century version of the ten plagues of Egypt come the new year, give or take a few. The frogs are not likely to appear, pesticides and pollution have done for them. Not much chance of locusts either, they are ravaging parts of the world since January, but the UK is not conducive to locust comfort. We had the livestock pestilence some years ago when a former government thought it safe to allow cattle to eat dead sheep and be injected with hormones. Boils, no, we are all too saturated with antibiotics for that.

We can leave the rest to the imagination. Let’s hope though it is not as vivid as the imagination of the drafters of the ‘leaked’ document, who it seems at times to relish the possibility of such calamities. We should however be asking ourselves, what is the real purpose of such documents and their terrible propensity for leaking? Is it really to prepare for the worst or more likely another platform for grandstanding?

The British people voted for Brexit over four years ago, even those of us who wanted to remain consider that maintaining democracy is far more important than maintaining a political union with our trading partners. If economic damage is a consequence of Brexit, the consequence of ignoring a democratic vote would be far worse in ‘worst case’ scenario terms.

Coronavirus is a naturally occurring event and we have known that a pandemic was inevitable since we started recording them centuries ago. Even if this one could have been prevented, which is unlikely, there will be other ones down the line. If there is a second wave. let’s hope we manage it better than we did the first one, there is no need for worst case scenario planning there, just better planning all round.

Floods are a product of climate change and very poor planning and development strategies over decades. Do the Cabinet Office EU Transition Task Force really think they can sort that out by drafting another disaster movie script?

As for troops on the streets, if we deployed our entire armed forces, reserves and World War Two re-enactor clubs, we might manage one soldier for every three streets in the UK. The Navy are likely to be unimpressed by engaging a fleet of French and Spanish lobster boats, it’s hardly the spirit of Trafalgar.

Coming back to the worst case scenario model, we might be inclined towards second thoughts when we consider the recent fiasco of the school exam results. We could have more confidence in government disaster planning if we saw some proper management of disasters that are taking place, as opposed to those that likely will not.

Barry Turner is a Senior Lecturer in War Reporting and Human Rights and a member of the Royal United Services Institute.

By Barry Turner Columnist

The Prime Minister has made yet another bold statement on what his government will do to get the kids back to school. Pubs, restaurants and shops may be closed again to prioritise children’s education. A ‘trade off’ as it is so frequently and casually described.

This incessant bombardment of declarations on COVID-19 strategies risks economic damage and stagnation not seen since the austerity years of 1945-1951, and it is neither reassuring nor politically possible. The economic damage that has already been done, particularly in the hospitality sector, is beginning to be seen clearly and the picture that is developing is frightening.

Last week housing minister Robert Jenrick categorically denied that pubs could be closed again as a ‘trade off’ to get schools reopened. Now his boss tells us it is a “moral duty” to get schools reopened and that he would if necessary close pubs and restaurants again.

While the PM may be correct in his assertion that we have a moral duty to educate our children, making dramatic statements such as this in no way helps the situation. Another lock-down of the hospitality sector would be devastating. Even if this was underwritten by another colossal burden for the taxpayer, many pubs and restaurants simply would not survive to open again.

Last week more information of an at first encouraging nature surfaced about the sector. Insolvencies in the hospitality sector were down in the last three months from 643 to 326, down 49% on the first quarter. Sector insolvencies are in fact at the lowest rate since the 3rd quarter of 2010. But it is too early to cheer or pop the champagne corks in the recently reopened pubs. Factors contributing to that drop in insolvencies include not only the financial assistance for businesses and furloughed staff, but a moratorium on the requirements for a business, particularly a licenced business, to declare insolvency.

Company law and licensing law makes it unlawful to trade while knowingly insolvent. To do so risks personal penalties, not only losing one’s business but potentially home and personal possessions.  Sensibly the government suspended the parts of the legislation that imposed this burden during the lockdown, but it cannot remain suspended forever. To do so would be to hand a blank cheque to those who would seek to exploit it for less than honest needs.

The financial intervention of the government have been necessary and a lifeline to businesses and jobs.  We all know that we, the taxpayer, will be paying this back for a long, long time. We are also painfully aware that it has not saved all the businesses that it was intended to. Many hospitality businesses have gone under and the worst is yet to come.

UKH (UK Hospitality) and data firm CGA Data Consultancy predict three quarters of hospitality businesses are at risk of insolvencies within the next 12 months. That is an enormous threat to the economy. This is not a wild guess, but is carefully calculated and divided into risk groups. 3% expect to be insolvent, 18% predict significant risk of insolvency, 55% a slight risk and only 24% stated there was no risk. It goes without saying that a second lockdown will very much increase the risk of insolvency for many in the sector. Put simply, we would see those figures veer strongly towards bankruptcies.

Some commentators have referred to the government’s financial assistance program as having created zombie companies, still alive only because of the suspension of wrongful trading regulations and government bailouts. The warning is already issued, those found wrongfully trading after the emergency provisions and those who knew in advance of their bailout that they were insolvent face insolvency proceedings and even fraud prosecutions in the worst cases. Those who took financial assistance knowing they were already insolvent before COVID-19 are at very high risk indeed.

The press in the last few days have increased the pressure on the hospitality sector. Stories appear daily of ‘irresponsible’ behaviour of pubgoers and licencees. Calls for punitive action and closer surveillance are out there. The general line is “why should our health be put at risk for other people’s fun”. On the face of it, a perfectly reasonable question, but one that needs tempering with a closer examination. It’s not just about other people’s fun. When we come out of this pandemic we need a strong economy to pay for it. Every time a business goes bust the economy gets a double hit. Jobs are lost, tax revenues are lost and the knock-on affects us all, even if we never go out for a drink or a meal.

So next time there is a quick fix call for a second shutdown of the hospitality sector, we should all remember this. Our wonderful NHS is paid for by the taxes that business and workers’ pay, and so for that matter are ours schools. Let’s hope the next time Boris and his ministers talk about this they stop for a few seconds to contemplate what a ‘trade off’ really is, because when it comes to trade it is about cost every bit as much as advantage.

Barry Turner is a Senior Lecturer in War Reporting and Human Rights and a member of the Royal United Services Institute.