Boris Johnson’s Covid U-turns were like a ‘slow-moving car crash’, former aide says
Boris Johnson's former director of communications, Lee Cain, has said the numerous Covid-related U-turns made during Johnson's government resembled a "slow-moving car crash", with No 10 repeatedly making the same avoidable mistakes. Speaking on The Independent's In the Room podcast, Cain said the pattern of reversals frustrated the communications team, though he noted that even in politics, repeated errors eventually forced ministers to start listening.
Cain, who worked in Downing Street from July 2019 to the end of 2020, cited several examples of the government's flip-flopping, including Johnson's repeated denial of a second national lockdown before one began on 5 November, his encouragement for children to return to school in January 2021 only to reverse course and close schools that same evening, and the scrapping of the controversial A-level grading algorithm the previous August. Cain also recalled internal discussions early in the pandemic about keeping pubs and bars open while discouraging visits, an idea he believed came from Johnson himself and warned at the time would inevitably be reversed within 24 hours.
- Lee Cain likened Johnson's Covid U-turns to a "slow-moving car crash"
- Cited lockdown, schools and A-level algorithm reversals as examples
- Says repeated mistakes eventually made No 10 start listening
New here? Start with this
Boris Johnson was UK prime minister during the Covid-19 pandemic, when ministers made decisions about restrictions, schools and exams as the virus spread. Lee Cain was his director of communications in Downing Street from July 2019 until the end of 2020, helping explain the government’s decisions to the public.
A U-turn is when a government reverses a policy or public position. During the pandemic, these reversals affected people’s daily lives, including whether they could meet others, attend school or rely on exam grades. The decisions also shaped how the government communicated changing advice and rules.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
The pattern of reversals documented by Cain does suggest inadequate forethought and planning within government. When ministers deny a second lockdown only to implement one days later, or encourage schools to open before closing them that same evening, this reflects decisions made without sufficient internal deliberation or preparation. Such reversals are not merely inconvenient—they erode public trust, create unnecessary confusion, and suggest a government announcing policy before thinking it through properly, which is a legitimate governance failure.
The case against
Governing during an unprecedented pandemic required responding to rapidly evolving circumstances and new scientific understanding. What constitutes a 'U-turn' may simply reflect responsible adaptation: as evidence mounted, case numbers shifted, or new variants emerged, updating policy was the correct response, not a failure. Criticising reversals with hindsight conflates flexibility with incompetence; the real failure would have been rigid adherence to outdated decisions when conditions changed. Emergency governance often demands such adjustments, and reversals based on new information demonstrate responsiveness rather than chaos.