Thank goodness parliament is back – it’s time for ministers to be put under real pressure

The government should not be allowed to argue that reflecting on any mistakes in the handling of the coronavirus outbreak is a matter for tomorrow, not today

The new-style, virtual parliament gets under way today after a month-long silence – and it is not a moment too soon. It is vital that the government is held to account for its handling of the coronavirus crisis.

In public, ministers welcome such scrutiny. In private, they argue that now is not the time for MPs to undermine the national effort against the pandemic by looking back in anger. One aide complained: “Critics are trying to write the first draft of history when all the focus should be on how to change it for the better.”

So the “welcome” for scrutiny is qualified. The daily Downing Street press conferences have suited the government nicely. Ministers can talk directly to the camera – and the nation. They hold the cards; they can deny a reporter a follow-up question if they are on a sticky wicket. They often refuse to answer a question directly, merely spouting the pre-prepared line. Ministers are much keener to make headline-grabbing promises – about the number of tests, or the provision of personal protective equipment (PPE) – than to be quizzed about the progress towards fulfilling them.

My fellow journalists have been accused of pursuing the “gotcha” approach to our trade – trying to catch ministers out or trap them into an embarrassing gaffe. I think that’s an unfair criticism. It is right to ask searching questions; the age of deference, when reporters once asked, “Is there anything you would like say to today, prime minister?” is long gone.

Parliament’s return will add an important layer of scrutiny. Sadly, it will not be business as usual. Only up to 50 of the 650 MPs will be in the Commons chamber, including a minister at the dispatch box. Another 120 MPs will Zoom in via video link from their homes, and will be shown on giant screens in the chamber when they speak.

The atmosphere will be more sedate than usual, slightly surreal without the usual cut and thrust, but the questioning should nevertheless be more revealing than at the press conferences. If a minister making a statement is deliberately evasive, that will become very apparent if scores of MPs repeat the same question. Ministers will know the audience watching during the lockdown will be much bigger than usual. So even a necessarily pared-back system should encourage straighter answers.

Ministers will argue that this is not the time to consider whether they were too slow to react to the outbreak, even though I suspect that will eventually become a key focus of an investigation into the government’s handling. Ed Davey, the acting co-leader of the Liberal Democrats, has rightly called for an independent inquiry once the immediate crisis is over, with “the strongest possible powers given the shocking failures on protective equipment for staff and the slow response of the government”.

Ministers already have an eye on the inevitable inquiry. The first draft of its evidence was written at last night’s press conference. Matt Hancock, the health secretary, claimed the government had achieved its two objectives of slowing the spread of the outbreak and stopping the NHS being overwhelmed. It looks as if Hancock is being set up by No 10 as the scapegoat when the inquiry comes; I’m told he was not given the usual advance notice that he was doing last night’s press conference, leading some allies to suspect he was deliberately sent into the lion’s den.

There are rumblings that Downing Street is less than enamoured with Hancock. No 10 insists that his target of 100,000 tests a day by the end of this month is a government one, but some ministers believe his rash promise will not be fulfilled until the middle of next month. His friends insist that such targets concentrate minds, although today he is facing more criticism after it emerged that some of the early tests carried out on NHS staff were flawed.

The government should not be allowed to argue that reflecting on any mistakes is a matter for tomorrow, not today. If lessons can be learned in real time, then the response to the crisis will be improved. The obvious area is community testing. If the UK had had the capacity to maintain contact tracing as the lockdown was introduced, the outcome might have been different. Lessons can surely be learned for the period when the restrictions will be eased, in which testing will play a crucial role.

Constructive criticism, as the forensic Keir Starmer is showing as Labour leader, is not disloyal or unpatriotic. Given the government’s poor record on testing, PPE and care homes, it is exactly what the country needs.

Ministers fear the appearance of incompetence; that is in their DNA. Yet the public would surely welcome a little more honesty; any government was bound to make mistakes in such an unprecedented crisis. A state of denial would risk losing the strong public support the government currently enjoys and the trust it will continue to need.