Despite the criticism Boris Johnson is doing what any prime minister would do over coronavirus

The scientific advice being offered to the government is not sacrosanct, but it is by far the best guide, writes John Rentoul

Boris Johnson, flanked by chief medical officer Chris Whitty and chief scientific adviser Sir Patrick Vallance (Getty)

Any prime minister in a crisis is bound to be criticised either for being too draconian or not draconian enough – and probably both, by the same people.

Boris Johnson is clearly acting on advice, which is what you would expect any prime minister to do. It is hard to imagine Jeremy Corbyn adopting a different policy on coronavirus, although perhaps the better comparisons are with Theresa May or Keir Starmer. I could imagine May communicating the policy less well, and Starmer being rather more precise, but the policy itself would be essentially the same.

Those who criticise the prime minister for abruptly changing the government’s line, switching to trying to reduce contact between people nationwide, may be giving too little weight to changing evidence, and the changing scientific advice based on that evidence.

It would seem that this was what happened yesterday, in that the Imperial College modelling suggested that the virus was spreading faster than previously thought, with more people needing intensive care, and that a policy of more drastic “suppression” would save thousands of lives.

Those who complain, on the other hand, that the government has not yet closed schools, have a point in that the explanation has not been communicated well, and it is fair to criticise Johnson for that. His comment yesterday that schools would remain open “for all sorts of reasons” was unhelpful. Nor was Chris Whitty, the chief medical officer, much use when he said that the advice for people visiting relatives in care homes was “difficult”.

Some of the official advice issued yesterday was unclear. There seem to be various levels of avoiding “non-essential” social contact for three different categories of people: everyone; at-risk groups; and people with symptoms. But the government advice uses words such as “pragmatic” – “Everyone should be trying to follow these measures as much as is pragmatic” – that seem to leave the interpretation of what is an essential journey or trip to the shops up to the individual citizen.

There was also the mysterious comment at the news conference yesterday that people in London should take the advice particularly seriously, because the outbreak is further advanced there.

There are more serious criticisms that can be made of the prime minister, such as why more ventilators were not ordered two months ago, and why testing capacity was not increased earlier – these questions need to be asked.

But I doubt if any prime minister would have followed a different course in the past few weeks. The scientific advice is not sacrosanct and it may not even be totally consistent, but it is by far the best guide, and it seems that Johnson is following it.

Now he needs to turn his mind to the serious economic implications of doing so.