July 1. My job as a Pro Vice Chancellor at the Open University, working with Brenda, covered many areas, as befitted so protean an organisation.
Two of my responsibilities, ten years on, still influence all our lives. I inherited the task, central to the OU from its creation, of working with the BBC to promote learning across society at large, as well as our own students. And in what had become a digital age, I initiated the transfer of OU learning materials to a free-to-use site we called Open Learn.
The Radio 4 programme, More or Less, has just finished a series which has coincided with the coronavirus outbreak. Its brief is to interrogate and illuminate the figures by which we understand our lives, some official, some generated by other organisations. The programme is sponsored by the OU and listeners can follow up its broadcasts by going to the Open Learn site and engaging with further learning materials.
This morning, More or Less conducted a retrospect of its coverage of the pandemic from the first cases in Britain. The emphasis was exclusively on what has gone wrong, particularly in England. Data published in the last few days has demonstrated beyond doubt that we have the worst record in Europe, and over the long run are likely to be overtaken only by the disastrous populist regimes of Brazil and the United States. The programme both summarised official data and demolished claims made along the way by Matt Hancock and Boris Johnson, particularly with regard to the tragedy in the care homes, which have accounted for 43% of all excess deaths.
Throughout the crisis ministers have sought to postpone any historical reckoning until some later date, when a leisurely public enquiry can accumulate the evidence and reach a conclusion long after the guilty parties have left office. We are supposed to focus only on the future. The More or Less programme was broadcast the day after Boris Johnson’s ‘New Deal’ speech in which he attempted to re-set the agenda of public debate, shifting the narrative away from the pandemic towards the glorious ‘bounce forward not bounce back’ economic agenda. It’s not going to work. We are all of us historians now. We want to understand what went wrong, and, critically, we have multiple channels for helping us do so, including, directly and indirectly, the OU.
Amongst the comparisons made in any retrospective is with China, whose response, after a critical delay, has ultimately been much more effective that the UK’s. The vast difference is in the level of public debate. It is more than possible that in free society, the outbreak in Wuhan would have been spotted before it escaped to infect the rest of the world. And there is no prospect whatever of Chinese citizens now discussing what long-term improvements should be made in the management of pandemics. For all its ramshackle systems the British state is still exposed to the informed, Radio 4-listening, OU-studying, public.
Much of the More or Less programme focussed on the missing fortnight in March, when the government failed to act on the information that was building up in Europe. It concluded, however, with a new scandal, the failure to inform local health officials of test results in their areas. The Labour MP Yvette Cooper tweeted today: “Our local public health teams, council, NHS doctors & managers in Wakefield have had to fight for months to try to get this data. In public health crisis, most important thing is knowing where infection is. Appalling & incomprehensible that basic info hasn’t been provided.” Indeed, it is.
A functioning democracy needs debate not just at the national level but in local communities, which in turn requires the appropriate data to be made available at that level.