COMMENTARY: WHITHER AFTER COVID-19 AND BREXIT: A SOCIAL SCIENCE PERSPECTIVE

Abstract

The traumas The lockdowns in England (23 March, 5 November, 4 January), as well as those in the devolved regions, associated with Covid-19 and the persistent question marks placed on our methods of ‘getting and spending’ have not only triggered large falls in economic activity, as measured by GDP 2 The spread of the virus has also called for a switch from socially intensive private sector activities such as hospitality, leisure and restaurants to the provision of public sector support in health, education, social care and communication networks [ ]our exit from the European Union after the end of the transition period on 31 December 2020 is with a Trade and Co-Operation Agreement that opens a huge policy gap in every area of economic, social, security and foreign policy that was explored by the Policy Reform Group for NIESR in 2019 [ ]unlike the 1980s, which were more concerned with deregulating product, labour, financial markets, it is now much more about addressing specific capital gaps—human, organisational and knowledge—which in my view also finally have to deal with the 90-year old ‘Macmillan Gap’ in finance 4 The calculation of economic losses from these two exits reflects a scientific consensus, stated well by the Office for Budget Responsibility in November 2020, and should be used as a starting point for formulating responsible policies in mitigation There remain significant question marks over the extent of the safety net for poorer families and it is with some regret that earlier more consistent approaches were not made to tackle child poverty through free school meals or a temporary enhancement of child benefit or the introduction of a family tax allowance While a useful benchmark calculation, it cannot accurately capture the possible impact on long-term health from the emergence of long Covid-19 (rather than deaths per se), 6 the loss of lives elsewhere that might have resulted from an overload of the health system, the impact on the income distribution from a more rapid spread of the virus as opposed to the socio-economic impact from lockdowns per se