COVID Inquiry says Boris Johnson and Tories oversaw late and chaotic COVID response with leadership failures and toxic culture

T he second report from the UK’s public inquiry into the COVID-19 pandemic opens without ceremony yet lands with considerable force. It is a dossier shaped by two years of hearings, tens of thousands of documents and emotional testimony from officials and families who lived through the crisis.

Across more than 700 pages, the inquiry concludes that the UK’s response to the pandemic suffered from repeated delays, institutional drift, and a corrosive working culture at the heart of government. Its central message is stark. Decisions that were taken late contributed to the high death toll, which now stands at roughly 240,000 people. The authors argue that more rapid action, particularly in March 2020, could have saved approximately 23,000 lives in England alone.

The report’s central finding is expressed with clarity: “The response of the four governments repeatedly amounted to a case of too little, too late.” The inquiry’s chair, Baroness Heather Hallett, writes that the UK’s leadership underestimated the threat, failed to prepare for the virus’s arrival and was slow to alter course even as evidence of its spread became unambiguous.

Her conclusion is rooted in the simple progression of dates. While cases mounted in China and Italy, February 2020 passed in the UK with few senior-level discussions and almost no escalation of emergency measures. This lack of urgency, described by the inquiry as “a lost month”, shaped everything that followed.

From the outset, the inquiry proceeds through the five essential questions: what happened, where it unfolded, when crucial decisions were taken, who shaped the response and why those choices produced such significant consequences. It also asks how institutions functioned under pressure and why patterns of delay repeated through successive waves.

The Hallett team stresses that the pandemic arrived at extraordinary speed and placed every government in a difficult position. Yet the evidence collected suggests that the UK’s response was hindered by structural weaknesses that were already visible before the virus took hold.

The political centre faltered

The inquiry’s most critical passages focus on Downing Street. It portrays a government struggling to find clarity, order and cohesion. Boris Johnson’s approach to the emerging crisis is described as inconsistent, reactive and heavily influenced by a chaotic workplace culture.

The authors repeatedly note his failure to attend Cobra meetings in February 2020. They write that “Mr Johnson should have appreciated sooner that this was an emergency that required prime ministerial leadership to inject urgency into the response.” Instead, the prime minister spent the school half-term week at Chevening, receiving no regular updates on the virus’s spread.

Former officials provided deeply uncomfortable testimonies. Simon Case, who served as the cabinet secretary, said, “Good people were just being smashed to pieces”. Other senior figures described meetings dominated by the loudest voices, often men, with junior women either talked over or ignored. The inquiry quotes witnesses who referenced misogynistic language and a belief that confrontation was encouraged at the highest levels.