Neither Keir Nor There: Starmer demands mini-lockdown days after condemning local shutdowns

The leader of the opposition has urged Downing Street to “follow the science” and introduce a "circuit breaker" just days after questioning the effectiveness of current coronavirus restrictions.

Source: Flickr

On September 13, Labour leader Keir Starmer held his first live televised coronavirus press conference as leader of the opposition.

In his 15-minute briefing, the former head of the Crown Prosecution Service accused the government of "no longer following the scientific advice" and suggested that the prime minister had "lost control of the virus".

Starmer pointed out, as the prime minister did in his Downing Street briefing earlier in the week, that cases of Covid-19 had quadrupled in just three weeks and the NHS now records more hospitalisations than it had when the UK entered lockdown in mid-March.

The Labour leader, who served as the shadow Brexit secretary under former leader Jeremy Corbyn, implored the prime minister to impose a two to three-week nationwide lockdown, now dubbed a "circuit breaker", in a bid to prevent the country from "sleepwalking into a long and bleak winter".

Starmer's pivot came after the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) meeting released minutes from a meeting held on September 21, advising the government to introduce a short lockdown. 

Nevertheless, the prime minister and his cabinet opted to explore alternative measures.

The communities secretary Robert Jenrick insisted that the government needed a “balanced” and “robust” approach that would consider economic and scientific concerns.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer Rishi Sunak is among the main opponents to a second lockdown. The Telegraph reported that Sunak considers Starmer's and SAGE's suggestion as a "blunt instrument" that would "cause needless [economic] damage to parts of our country where virus rates are low."

Nonetheless, Starmer went on to argue that despite economic concerns such measures "could set the epidemic back by 28 days or more", enable the government to solve some of the problems with the test and trace app, and subsequently limit the long-term economic downturn that frequently introduced local measures could produce.

Starmer also deployed Labour's most recent attack line against Boris Johnson. When criticising the competence of Number 10, Starmer claimed that "the government has not got a credible plan" at a "decisive moment" in the nation's fight against the pandemic.

But Labour's position has appeared to vary and U-turn just as much as the government's. The party has offered support, then opposition to the government, before abstaining on crucial votes in the Commons, including in last week's vote on the rule of six.

The lack of clarity in Labour’s position was brought to the fore on Sky News' Sophy Ridge on Sunday show, when the Shadow Secretary for Work and Pensions, Jonathan Reynolds refused to confirm the party's position on the 10 p.m. curfew.

On October 7, Starmer unveiled damaging statistics that stated Covid-cases continued to soar in 19 of the 20 areas subject to local lockdown restrictions. But now the Labour leader has changed course.

Rather than continuing to question the efficiency of lockdowns, Labour has opted to tout a national lockdown irrespective of local Covid-cases. 

This would result in low-risk areas including North Norfolk where Covid-cases are running at 34 per 100,000 following the same rules as Nottingham - a city which is currently recording 918 cases per 100,000.

Critics, including Sunak, fear this could put the final nail into the nation's economic coffin. 

The Labour Mayor of Manchester, Andy Burnham, has emerged from this confrontation between predominantly northern local authorities and the national government as one of Johnson's main antagonists. 

Having previously championed the government's move to introduce tiered measures, he has since announced that the plan to impose Tier 3 restrictions on the city would be economically disastrous for Mancunian businesses.

Despite his fears over business closures, Burnham now demands the government introduce a nationwide circuit breaker in an attempt to suppress the transmission.

Now Burnham faces the challenge of trying to argue against the rules introduced by a lockdown system he once supported while advocating for a nationwide lockdown that would force the same draconian measures on Greater Manchester that he so vehemently opposes.

It is not just devolved Labour officials who appear to be backpedalling. Less than two hours before Starmer's press conference his Shadow Health Secretary Jonathan Ashworth proclaimed that a full national lockdown "would be disastrous for society". 

"But I don't believe anyone in this house is proposing that", added Ashworth.

A senior Downing Street source has since accused Starmer of being "a shameless opportunist playing political games in the middle of a global pandemic."

"He says he wants a national lockdown but he's refusing to vote for targeted restrictions in areas we need them most", the source added.

And it is not just Conservatives who have suggested that Starmer's party are playing political games amid the ongoing pandemic and economic catastrophe to follow. 

In March, when the nation was on the precipice of entering a lockdown, Ian Lavery, then Labour chairman, told young party activists that despite the consequences of coronavirus, this is a "great opportunity" for Labour.

More recently, Kate Green, who replaced Rebecca Long-Bailey as shadow education secretary in June, said that the party could "not let a good crisis go to waste". Green later apologised on Sky News. 

She told Sky News’ Kay Burley that: "It was absolutely the wrong thing to say - hurtful and offensive to people who have suffered in this pandemic and I shouldn't have said it."

The prime minister took advantage of this week's Prime Minister’s Questions to goad Starmer when he said: "opportunism is the name of the game for the party opposite!" 

"[Starmer] voted to do nothing last night … nothing in the areas where the incidence is high!" the prime minister added.

The Labour leader also neglected his usual "forensic" line of questioning - something he finessed during his days as a lawyer - when he smugly but mistakenly declared that the Tory leader of the Bolton council supported his mini-lockdown proposal.

The council leader, David Greenlaugh, has since stated this is not the case and has demanded that Starmer apologises for misrepresenting his views.

This article is published as part of The Commons Man series, written by Pi Media columnist Jack Walters.

Pi Opinion content does not necessarily reflect the views of the editorial team, Pi Media society, Students’ Union UCL or University College London. We aim to publish opinions from across the student body — if you read anything you would like to respond to, get in touch via email.