‘Next pandemic is around the corner,’ expert warns – but would lockdown ever happen again?

Published

2 years ago

March 23, 2024

admin

Exactly four years ago today, Boris Johnson announced the UK’s first COVID lockdown, ordering people to “stay at home”.

Working from home became our reality and people were separated from their loved ones, while frontline workers tackled a new and unknown virus.

With a public inquiry under way into how the UK approached COVID-19, many have criticised when and how we went in and out of lockdowns.

So if another pandemic struck, would we have to lock down again – and how would it be different?

Sky News asks scientists and disaster experts whether we would ever be told to stay at home again, what lockdown measures would involve – and whether the public would comply.

When could a pandemic happen again?

COVID has often been referred to as a “once in a lifetime” event. But with more than six million estimated COVID deaths globally, the last comparable pandemic only emerged four decades ago.

HIV/AIDs was first identified in 1981 and has killed 36 million people worldwide. Prior to that, the Hong Kong flu pandemic in 1968 caused about a million deaths, and the Spanish flu of 1918 50 million.

Scientists warn global warming and deforestation are also making it increasingly likely that a viral or bacterial agent will “jump” from animals to humans and cause another pandemic.

“We’re creating a situation that is rife for outbreaks,” says Dr Nathalie MacDermott, clinical lecturer in infectious diseases at King’s College London.

“I know that COVID was very hard for people and we want to believe we can just go back to normal and I understand that entirely.

“But the next pandemic is around the corner – it might be two years, it could be 20 years, it could be longer – but we can’t afford to let our guards down. We need to stay vigilant, prepared and ready to make sacrifices again.”

Dr MacDermott explains that by cutting down trees in the Amazon and parts of Africa, animals and insects are moving closer to people’s homes.

And with rising temperatures, outbreaks of mosquito and tick-borne viruses such as dengue, chikungunya, and Crimean Congo haemorrhagic fever (CCHF) are happening in parts of Europe rarely seen before.

“As temperatures increase around the world, even the UK will become an area where it’s possible for those types of mosquitoes to live,” she says.

How long would lockdowns last?

While there were three lockdowns in England, each several months long, Professor Stephen Griffin, virologist at the University of Leeds, argues there should have “only ever been one”.

“Lockdown was an extreme reaction to a situation that had already got out of control,” he says.

But if there was investment in mitigations like air ventilation in public buildings and generic vaccines and antiviral drugs that could be adapted at speed, he argues, lockdowns would be shorter and less severe.

Dr MacDermott says that until the government, scientists and healthcare workers know more about an emerging virus and how it spreads, “a lockdown would be inevitable to some degree”.

Professor Adam Kucharski, co-director of the Centre for Epidemic Preparedness and Response at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, says that if you can’t contain severe infections and eliminate them completely – like Ebola in Africa and SARS-1 in East Asia – the only way to prevent a large disease epidemic is by heavily reducing transmission until a vaccine or treatment make the population less susceptible.

In the UK, it was eight months before the first COVID vaccine was administered and more than a year before it was rolled out more widely.

Would we be banned from socialising – and would schools shut?

Professor Lucy Easthope, expert in mass fatalities and pandemics at the University of Bath, says she would want to see what she calls a “nuanced quarantine”.

“Lockdown is never a word I would have used – it’s only really associated with things like school shootings,” she says.

With regards to restrictions on socialising, she stresses how important “community and connection” are for disaster planning.

The 2016 UK flu plan says public gatherings are “an important indicator of normality” and that “there is little direct evidence of the benefits of cancelling such events”.

Immediately authorities should prioritise creating “large ventilated safe spaces” for children, pregnant women, and vulnerable people, she says.

This would involve places like cinemas, leisure centres, and town halls being repurposed as community centres.

She adds the importance of people having a “purpose”, so being able to meet people socially outside should be allowed as soon as the nature of the virus is clear.

Similarly, pubs, bars, cafes, and restaurants should be allowed to open outdoors as soon as possible, she says.

While the flu plan does advise schools in infected areas to shut, contingency measures have been suggested for temporary marquees to host lessons – or just spaces for children to go.

“Lots of children don’t have gardens, so organised ways of getting them outside is important,” Professor Easthope says.

“For the marquees for education, you might expect to see three or four schools consolidated together.”

Another ‘pingdemic’?

The government spent billions on its test and trace system, which included testing centres, the coronavirus helpline, manual contact tracing by what was then Public Health England, and the NHS COVID app.

While rapid tests are important to stop people spreading the virus further, and the app “had a lot of promise”, more innovative digital contact tracing may be required to avoid us relying on another lockdown, Professor Kucharski says.

“The pingdemic was to some extent the NHS app doing what it was designed to do,” he says.

“But with the digital contact tracing infrastructure that some Asian countries had, you can limit disruption to those people at higher risk in a particular outbreak rather than reverting to blanket measures.”

He cautions that it would require “hard conversations” around privacy, but options include using smartphone location and debit card transactions to link people to identified cases.

In some countries, leaving quarantine would see people’s phones automatically notify tracers of potential further spread.

Would the public comply?

When public health experts gave evidence to the COVID inquiry last year, they said they were wrong to assume the public would soon tire of a lockdown and suffer “behavioural fatigue”.

Social psychologist and crowd behaviour expert Chris Cocking says it was a lack of trust in government that caused compliance rates to fall – not simply getting “tired” of restrictions.

“The overall message should be positive,” the principal lecturer at the University of Brighton says. “Because if another situation arose, where it became necessary, people would comply.”

He says if another lockdown was needed, the current Tory government would either have to minimise scandals over their own rule-breaking – or change hands completely to keep the public on board.

He adds: “If we had a new government, people would be far more likely to have faith in them because they would be less likely to say, ‘it’s the same bunch as before – why should we do it again?’

“And if they put more effort into not having situations like ‘Partygate’ or Dominic Cummings driving to Barnard Castle, they could appeal to the public’s shared sense of identity, and it would be possible for compliance rates to remain relatively high.”

From COVID fines to arrests made during Black Lives Matter protests and the Sarah Everard vigil, Professor Easthope describes lockdown legislation as “definitely bad” and “cruelly applied”.

Mr Cocking argues lockdown laws are largely irrelevant to people’s decision to adhere to restrictions or not.

“It’s not the laws in place, it’s whether people psychologically identify with the need to comply,” he says.

And for people who don’t, engaging with different groups is important to avoid a mass movement of “lockdown sceptics”.

“People might feel unable to comply with restrictions for lots of different reasons. But it’s a real mistake to lump them all together because you then identify them all as part of the same group, which further alienates them from the authorities,” Mr Cocking adds.

Would we be well enough prepared?

Four years before COVID, the UK had carried out secret pandemic preparedness exercises for both flu and coronavirus outbreaks.

A detailed report on the flu exercise was compiled, but public health officials have told the COVID inquiry that the coronavirus drill wasn’t acted on.

According to Professors Kucharski and Easthope, the more extensive flu plan could be easily adapted.

“The separation of a flu plan from a coronavirus plan is nonsense,” Professor Kucharski says.

“The characteristics of COVID were a lot like the sort of infection in a flu pandemic. It should have been a wider discussion about what the acceptable outcome was from the horrendous trade-offs we were going to have to make.”

Professor Easthope says in the late 2010s, she and other emergency planners identified holes in infrastructure that meant the UK “wasn’t ready for even a relatively manageable pandemic” in terms of health and social care. She also says stockpiles of PPE “failed” in 2017.

But she says the internet’s capacity to cope with so many processes moving online is both “enabling and unifying”.

“We just didn’t know how well it would perform, but in the end, it was one of the reasons we didn’t fall apart completely,” she says.

A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson told Sky News: “Throughout the pandemic, the government acted to save lives and livelihoods, prevent the NHS being overwhelmed and deliver a world-leading vaccine rollout which protected millions of lives across the nation.

“We have always said there are lessons to be learnt from the pandemic and we are committed to learning from the COVID-19 inquiry’s findings which will play a key role in informing the government’s planning and preparations for the future. We will consider all recommendations made to the department in full.”

UK

Hadush Kebatu: Migrant sex offender deported after mistaken prison release

Published

3 hours ago

October 29, 2025

admin

Hadush Kebatu: Migrant sex offender deported after mistaken prison release

Migrant sex offender Hadush Kebatu has been deported to Ethiopia following his mistaken release from prison.

Footage captured from Heathrow Airport showed the moment he was escorted on to a plane on Tuesday night.

The government says he has no right to return to the UK.

Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood said she “pulled every lever” to deport Kebatu.

“I am pleased to confirm this vile child sex offender has been deported. Our streets are safer because of it,” she said.

Kebatu was found and arrested by the Metropolitan Police in the Finsbury Park area of north London at around 8.30am on Sunday following a manhunt.

Last month he was found guilty of sexually assaulting a schoolgirl and a woman in Epping, Essex, just over a week after arriving in the UK on a small boat.

He was expected to be deported, but instead of being handed over to immigration officials he was released from HMP Chelmsford on Friday.

He spent just under 48 hours at large before he was apprehended.

The accidental release sparked widespread alarm and questions over how a man whose crimes sparked protests in Epping over the use of asylum hotels was able to be freed.

Ms Mahmood said: “Last week’s blunder should never have happened – and I share the public’s anger that it did.”

On Sunday, Justice Secretary David Lammy said an exclusive Sky News interview will be used as part of an independent inquiry into the mistaken release.

Speaking to Sky’s national correspondent Tom Parmenter, a delivery driver who spoke to Kebatu at HMP Chelmsford described him as being “confused” as he was being guided to the railway station by prison staff.

The migrant is said to have returned to the prison reception four or five times before leaving the area on a train heading to London.

Mr Lammy, who put Kebatu’s release down to human error, said he ordered an “urgent review” into the checks that take place when an offender is released from prison, and new safeguards have been added that amount to the “strongest release checks that have ever been in place”.

From Monday, new checks include five pages of instructions and demands that more senior prison staff sign off a release, according to documents obtained by Sky News.

“I have been clear from the outset that a mistake of this nature is unacceptable, and we must get to the bottom of what happened,” said Mr Lammy.

This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly.

Please refresh the page for the latest version.

You can receive breaking news alerts on a smartphone or tablet via the Sky News app. You can also follow us on WhatsApp and subscribe to our YouTube channel to keep up with the latest news.

UK

‘Nervous’ British tourists in Jamaica tell of Hurricane Melissa ordeal

Published

6 hours ago

October 29, 2025

admin

'Nervous' British tourists in Jamaica tell of Hurricane Melissa ordeal

Up to 8,000 holidaying British citizens are in Jamaica as it is battered by one of the strongest Atlantic hurricanes in history.

People have been ordered to stay indoors as Hurricane Melissa sweeps over the Caribbean island, which is also home to 50,000 dual nationals.

And tourists are locked down in hotels as Jamaica is hit by 185 mph winds.

Follow latest updates on Hurricane Melissa

Andrew Tracey had been due to fly home to the UK on Monday, but his flight was cancelled.

Mr Tracey told Sky News that food packages were being delivered to guests at his hotel. Deck chairs have been removed from the beach, and the swimming pools have been drained, at the Negril hotel where he is staying.

“The balcony and walls do feel as though they are vibrating just due to the strength of the wind,” said Mr Tracey.

“I’m very nervous, it’s hard to comprehend what we are likely to expect.”

The US National Hurricane Centre in Miami said that Melissa was “one of the most powerful hurricane landfalls on record in the Atlantic basin” as it hit southwestern Jamaica near New Hope.

In a social media post, the centre warned that it is an “extremely dangerous and life-threatening situation” – and told those in the area not to leave their shelter as the eye of the storm passes over.

‘It is a bit scary, but we’ve got each other’

A British-Jamaican couple who are sheltering inside as the storm passes over the island spoke to Sky News about their ordeal.

Shantell Nova Rochester and her Jamaican fiance Denva Wray are due to get married on the island next month.

They spoke of broken windows and water coming in where they are staying, but the couple believe they are “as safe as they can possibly be” in St Elizabeth.

Mr Wray said: “Where we are is quite strong, sturdy, but you can hear a lot of wind. It is a bit scary, but we’ve got each other, so we are strong.”

Asked about the wedding, Ms Rochester said: “We’re just worried about getting through tomorrow, but that’s a worry in the back of our heads.

“Where we plan to get married is flooded at this time.”

Government action ‘too late’ – British tourist

One British man who paid £3,500 for last-minute flights so he and his family could return home before the hurricane hit the island said that he felt “completely let down” by the government’s response.

David Rowe and his family, from Hertfordshire, had spent 10 days in Jamaica before deciding to fly back to the UK on Saturday.

Mr Rowe, 47, was critical of the response of the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO).

Speaking to the PA news agency, IT manager Mr Rowe said: “It’s all too late, their reaction and their response to the storm has been too late – after the fact.

“The advice should have been last week, like on the Saturday – don’t travel – because a lot of the travel companies use the FCDO guidance on travel (for) all their planning and what decisions they make as an organisation.

“There should have been something done much sooner than this. A lot of the UK nationals, and people on holiday there, they are stranded.

“This could have been prevented with better action from the UK government.”

Mr Rowe added that he and his wife had felt “very anxious” before they flew home – and “very sad” for those left in the country.

A Foreign Office spokesperson said: “We understand how worrying developments in Jamaica are for British nationals and their families.

“Our travel advice includes information about hurricane season, which runs from June to November. Last Thursday we updated our travel advice for Jamaica to include a warning about Tropical Storm Melissa and that it was expected to intensify over the coming days.

“The safety and security of British nationals is our top priority, and that is why we are urging any British nationals in Jamaica to follow the guidance of the local authorities and register their presence with us to receive updates.”

UK

Slashing foreign aid will lead to unrest, crises and threaten UK security, MPs warn government

Published

6 hours ago

October 29, 2025

admin

Slashing foreign aid will lead to unrest, crises and threaten UK security, MPs warn government

The government’s decision to slash foreign aid will lead to unrest, further crises and threaten UK security, a group of cross-party MPs has warned.

A report by the International Development Committee found the decision in February to reduce aid to 0.3% of gross national income (GNI) by 2027/28 – coupled with the US cutting its aid budget – is having a severe impact.

Politics Hub: Follow latest updates

The foreign aid budget was cut to invest in defence from 0.5% of GNI, which was meant to be an interim reduction from 0.7% to cope with economic challenges caused by the pandemic.

Total aid spending is set to reduce from £14.1bn in 2024 to £9.4bn by 2028/29.

The committee, chaired by Labour MP Sarah Champion, said spending is being prioritised on humanitarian aid over development, which “builds long-term resilience and should lead to reducing the need for humanitarian aid”.

They said the international development minister, Baroness Chapman, has made it clear “the UK will remain a leading humanitarian actor”.

But the committee said while they are glad those in “desperate need of aid will be prioritised, particularly in the regions of Ukraine, Gaza, and Sudan”, they are concerned about the long-term effect of pulling development aid.

“We are concerned that slashing development aid will continue to lead to unrest and further crises in the future, presenting a threat to UK security,” the MPs said.

Risk to UK’s national security

They said a reduction in foreign aid will have “devastating consequences across the world”.

The committee said it recognises an increase in defence spending is needed, but “to do this at the expense of the world’s most vulnerable undermines not only the UK’s soft power, but also its national security”.

They said the government must make “every effort” to return to spending 0.5% of GNI on foreign aid “at a minimum, as soon as possible”.

The committee also found long-term funding for development is “essential” to ensure value for money is achieved.

However, they accused the government of seeing value for money only in terms of the taxpayer, saying that downplays “equity and the importance of poverty reduction” and causes tension.

They agreed accountability to the taxpayer is “key to reducing poverty globally, and maximising the impact of each pound to do so, must remain the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office’s central tenet for official development assistance spending”.

Spending on migrant hotels

Spending on migrant hotels in the UK was also criticised by the MPs, who said while international aid rules mean they can cover refugee hosting for the first 12 months in the UK, given the recent cuts, that is “incompatible with the spirit” of the UN’s OECD Development Assistance Committee rules.

“Excessive spend on hotel costs is not an effective use of development budget,” they said.

The committee recommended costs of housing refugees should be capped “at a fixed percentage” of total foreign aid spending “to protect a rapidly diminishing envelope of funding”.

‘Short-sighted’

Reacting to the report, Timothy Ingram, head of UK advocacy at WaterAid, said: “The UK government’s decision to cut the aid budget was one that defied both logic and humanity. Aid when delivered effectively in partnership with local communities is not charity – it’s an investment in a safer and more prosperous world.

“Undermining it, especially vital finance for water, weakens the world’s resilience to climate shocks, pandemics, and conflict – impacting the one in 10 people without access to clean water, and ultimately making us all less safe.

“This is a short-sighted political decision with long-term consequences for the UK’s stability, economy and global standing. We join with MPs in urging the government, once again, to urgently reconsider.”

Lack of transparency over private contractors’ spending

In the report, MPs said it is worried the Foreign Office has not reviewed aid spending on multilateral organisations, which allows the UK less direct influence over spending, such as the World Bank or vaccine organisation Gavi since 2016, despite spending nearly £3bn on them in 2024.

They said the use of private contractors does not offer inherently poor value for money, but a lack of transparency and data can mean under-delivering and a loss of “in-house” expertise.

‘Tragic error’

Sarah Champion, chair of the International Development Committee, said: “Ensuring aid delivers genuine value for money has never been more important. As major donors tighten their belts, we have to ensure that every penny we spend goes to the people most in need.

“The former Department for International Development was rightly seen as a world leader in value for money; the FCDO is broadly hanging on to that reputation. But it must make some urgent improvements.

“Reducing poverty must be the central aim of the development budget. While accountability to the taxpayer is an important consideration, the FCDO’s current definition of value for money risks diverting focus away from improving the lives of the most vulnerable – the very reason the aid budget exists at all.

“The savage aid cuts announced this year are already proving to be a tragic error that will cost lives and livelihoods, undermine our international standing and ultimately threaten our national security. They must be reversed.

“Value for money is critical to making the most of a shrinking aid budget. While this report finds some positives, the government must take urgent action to wipe out waste and ensure the money we are still spending makes a genuine difference.”