I don't think they would anyway and certainly not furlough...I think they'd just let it spread rather than see us up to it necks in debt again?
Don't you think it might depend on what exactly the pandemic is, the risk to life, it's potential duration, options for recovery, etc, etc? Never say never, as they say...
I don’t think that can be quite the case, not as black and white anyway, but wide ranging national lockdowns in principle don’t make much sense. Usually public health risks are managed locally, and they will close schools, workplaces etc if the risk means its right to do. However locking someone down in a remote part of Scottishland because there’s a massive outbreak in London doesn’t make much sense. Targeted, risk assessed closures, advice on not mixing etc, done quicker but in smaller locations would seem to make more sense? (That and not being scared to stop incoming flights from high risk countries of course)
Without getting into politics,I'm basing my hunch on the current financial predicament of the Country ... I could be totally wrong,let's hope we never need to find out.
There isn't always the option to do nothing. 'Ignore it and hope it'll go away' was the plan last time. It just wasn't realistic and they had to U-turn because so many lives were being lost.
