Coronavirus: The prime minister says he followed scientific advice, but ultimate responsibility is his | Politics News | Sky News
Five months into this pandemic and it is clear that the UK will end up with one of the worst death tolls from coronavirus.
Figures released by the Office of National Statistics this week put the official toll above 50,000, but look at the excess death figures and we know it will be even higher.
Tens of thousands of families mourning the loss of loved ones and millions more fearful for their livelihoods as the economic crisis begins to hit, it is a heavy burden for any leader to bear.
But the prime minister is not yet ready to carry the weight of the inevitable inquiry into what happened and why, as the acute health emergency appears to recede.
Mr Johnson is trying to keep his eyes firmly on the road ahead, refusing to look in the rear mirror as he tries to steer the country out of the lockdown and to a new normal.
OECD warns of economic damage to UK
Yet on Wednesday he was forced to reflect after Professor Neil Ferguson, a former key scientific adviser to the government whose pandemic modelling was instrumental in bringing about the lockdown, told MPs at a select committee hearing that the death toll could have been reduced "by at least a half" if the UK had gone into lockdown a week earlier.
Some 25,000 lives or more could have been saved.
Professor Ferguson: Earlier lockdown would have saved lives
Professor Ferguson's remarks were an admission of his own culpability as much as the prime minister's for his role in failing to realise just how fast the disease was spreading in March.
But it made for difficult terrain for the prime minister who doesn't want to be drawn into this discussion right now.
When I asked Mr Johnson what he might have done differently, he told me that "frankly a lot of these questions are premature".
Johnson: Now is not the time to cast judgement
When I asked him whether, given what we know now, he regretted not locking the UK down earlier, the PM was quick to point out that he had followed scientific guidance.
"We made the decisions at the time on the guidance of SAGE, including Professor Ferguson, that we thought were right for this country. The questions that are posed are still unanswered."
:: Listen to the Daily podcast on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, Spotify, Spreaker
Refusing to express regret, all through this epidemic Mr Johnson has insisted he and his ministers have been guided by scientific advice.
But what if the science seemed right at the time but wrong in hindsight? It seems that the scientists -- Professor Ferguson at the select committee hearing and Professor Whitty at the daily briefing -- find it easier to revise opinions or even admit mistakes in light of changing evidence.
Whitty says testing could have been better
It is perhaps easier for scientists to be frank. They are the ones who advise, it is the prime minister who ultimately has to decide.
He might have followed their advice, but he knows ultimately the responsibility for all the decisions on managing this pandemic, for better or worse, lies with him.
This is a point his cabinet are driving home as they implore the PM to go against the scientific advice and relax the two metre distancing rule in order to help get kids back to school and the hospitality sector back to work.
The PM must know too that the threat from this disease has not passed and lessons must be learned.
Not ready to reflect publicly, but if he is going to get the rest of this right, Mr Johnson will need to acknowledge and understand what went wrong. It matters not just for policy decisions but for public faith too.