Coronavirus has brought the practical implication of devolution into sharp focus. My latest @instituteforgov report looks at where differences in lockdown rules have emerged, why and what can be learnt for the next phase of the crisis.

The early phase of the crisis was characterised by close working between the four governments with almost daily meetings between the UKG and DAs. Decisions to close pubs, schools and impose lockdown were made jointly.
But as the UK moved out of lockdown, the four governments began to take different decisions about the easing of restrictions, leading to different rules in each part of the UK.
Some of these differences have been a matter of timing e.g. NI and England reopened non-essential retail before Scotland and Wales. Others have been a matter of substance e.g. rules on the number of people and/or household that can meet.
Faced with rising covid cases across the UK, in the last month there have been more fundamental differences in approach. NI & Wales have imposed temporary âcircuit-breakerâ lockdowns including pub closures & virtual learning. Scotland & England are taking a more regional approach
Epidemiological evidence may explain some of the differences we have seen, particularly in regional restrictions, but not all of it. ONS data published last week shows that Wales has the lowest number of infections and the tightest restrictions.
Scientific advice is closely coordinated between the four governments. The Scottish and Welsh Government advisory groups regularly exchange information with SAGE structure. This has meant scientific advice has largely acted as a constraint of divergence rather than a driver of it
Different political judgements can best explain divergence. Decisions on the lockdown rules involve difficult trade-offs between public health, the economy & wider societal factors. Different governments have legitimately reached different decisions about the appropriate balance
There are good reasons why the four governments have diverged, but in some cases, different rules have led to public confusion and difficulties for businesses operating UK wide. Divergence and its consequences must be carefully managed.
A weakening of intergovernmental working has led to a rise in unmanaged divergence. Meetings have become increasingly sporadic, COBR did not meet between May and September & Ministerial Implementation Groups that facilitated daily contact were disbanded between UKG & DAs in May
In the next phase of the crisis, the four govs need a more co-ordinated approach. This does not mean uniformity, but they must improve information sharing, consider the implications of their decisions for one another and where necessary agree common elements of their approach.
We recommend that the four govs should:
- agree a regular schedule of meetings
- commission scientific evidence on a UK-wide circuit breaker
- agree travel restrictions from high-prevalence areas in the UK and abroad
- agree lockdown thresholds that will trigger economic support
- agree a regular schedule of meetings
- commission scientific evidence on a UK-wide circuit breaker
- agree travel restrictions from high-prevalence areas in the UK and abroad
- agree lockdown thresholds that will trigger economic support
You can read the full report here https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publications/devolution-and-coronavirus
Thanks to the @instituteforgov team for their comments input and particularly to @Aron_Cheung @melissaittoo @AlexNicest for the wonderful graphics
Thanks to the @instituteforgov team for their comments input and particularly to @Aron_Cheung @melissaittoo @AlexNicest for the wonderful graphics