Is Boris Johnson following the science – or following the Scots?

Boris Johnson and his ministers are well known for their mantra that they are “following the science”. On the evidence of recent weeks it might be said that they are also “following the Scots”. The recent Westminster/English policy U-turn on masks follows other such examples, where UK ministers now responsible only for policy in England have followed the Scottish precedent, reversing a previously decided approach, as on the wearing of face coverings on public transport, in shops and indeed on abandoning plans to send pupils back to school towards the end of the last term.

Most recently, the UK’s secretary of state for education, Gavin Williamson, has pleaded to be allowed to keep his job on the grounds that his counterparts in Belfast (DUP/Sinn Fein), Edinburgh (SNP) and Cardiff (Labour/Lib Dem) have been doing much the same as he has, and if they’re not being sacked neither should he be dismissed from his role.

There is also some suggestion that the Scottish government (as well as the devolved administrations in Wales and Northern Ireland) earlier in the year urged the English authorities to proceed more slowly in relaxing the lockdown from May onwards, and to retain more of the social distancing conventions and business support for longer. So far as their devolved powers allowed them to, this is indeed what transpired in the three mostly self-governing parts of the UK. Arguably their greater caution has resulted in better health outcomes and fewer local lockdowns.

What has become abundantly clear during the coronavirus crisis is that the inter-nation and inter-party competition and rivalry across the UK has been a healthy one, on balance. Each party in each home nation has had a keen eye on adopting distinctive policies for its own territory. Partly this is sometimes purely for show, difference almost for the sake of it, and incomprehensible or ludicrous to the public. Thus travel restrictions on tourism retained in Scotland led to wild suggestions about border checks on camper vans pouring across the border from England, and shoppers hopping over a bridge from Wales to England for “non-essential items”. UK ministers, particularly the prime minister, sometimes pretended that devolution didn’t exist and that their solemn decrees would take effect in Dundee or Dungannon as much as in Dunton. The different policies and slogans did contribute to some confusion and inconsistency.

More substantially, though, the different approaches did allow for a more flexible and appropriate response and, incidentally, might also have helped London, which was the first part of the country to be badly affected by Covid, weeks before it was noticed in Scotland, say. Northern Ireland was able to take better account of Irish policy, given its long and open border. All parts of the UK could look to the experience of others. When English ministers learnt how Scottish schoolchildren were congregating inside during rainy breaks, it sparked a change of attitude towards face coverings in English schools, even going as far as having different approaches within locked-down England (Leicester and the north) and the rest.

Of course, being a collection of relatively small territories with free movement of people, the overall Covid metrics across the UK did not vary that much, by global standards. Scotland probably did a bit better than England, say, but then Covid started to exact its toll about a month later – so the UK-wide lockdown was (accidentally) better timed for Scotland than England, where precious time was lost in March. It is also fair to add that Nicola Sturgeon has impressed more than Boris Johnson during the crisis – although Scotland has had its share of failures too, such as its lockdown-busting chief medical officer, its careless footballers, and its exam results, all of which were a mess.

The key question, too, of when the first minister first became aware that Scottish patients with Covid were being discharged from hospitals into care homes, with tragic consequences, has been raised again at Holyrood by the Tories’ Ruth Davidson, and is still being ducked by Ms Sturgeon.

On the other hand, Scotland might, if independent, have imposed an even earlier lockdown, and kept it for longer, and borrowed more to support its economy, but all that is speculative.

Competition in government, then, can be just as healthy as competition in business, and with similar benefits for consumers. Devolution has made for a better national response to Covid, even if so many of those involved seem to find it so irksome, with nationalists wanting more power and some Conservative and Unionist Party ministers in Westminster no doubt quietly contemplating how Brexit and “the lessons of Covid” can be used to take back control in London.

UK devolution, facing its severest test since it was implemented by New Labour in 1997-98, has shown its worth, but it is essentially a compromise between a unitary and a truly federal structure. Like all compromises, no matter how fair or effective, it seems doomed to be friendless.