Verification of Corona 1st Wave Response Private Investigation Committee Report What Under the Water October 7th 21:40

It has been seven days and six months since the state of emergency was declared due to the new coronavirus.

A private group of lawyers, university professors, etc. interviewed more than 80 politicians, bureaucrats, and experts, and compiled a report that verified the response of the first wave.

The report points out that there was a gap and tension between experts who wanted to control the infection thoroughly and the government, which was concerned about financial damage, and recommended that the government examine the process.

The report was compiled by the "New Corona Response / Private Extraordinary Investigation Committee" created by business owners, crisis management, international politics, and other specialist lawyers and university professors.



The study group was established in July, chaired by the government's Regulatory Reform Promotion Council and chaired by Mitsubishi Chemical Holdings Chairman Yoshimitsu Kobayashi.



Some of the 19 members of the working group who were in charge of the hearing investigation under the committee are also members of the private accident investigation committee that verified the accident at TEPCO's Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant eight years ago. ..



The study group interviewed 83 people, including former Prime Minister Abe, Minister for Economic Revitalization Nishimura, and executives and experts from the Prime Minister's Office and the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare, and verified Japan's response for half a year from January.



The period covered this time is about half a year from January 15, when the first infected person was confirmed in Japan, and politicians and governments such as former Prime Minister Abe, Minister for Economic Revitalization Nishimura, and Minister of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology Hagita Subcommittee chairman Shigeru Omi and others testify under their real names, and bureaucrats and many experts respond to the investigation on condition of anonymity.

"Passing and feeling nervous" by canceling the state of emergency

The report makes the state of emergency, which requires a large political decision, a major point of verification.



Among them, the government and experts shared a sense of crisis when issuing the state of emergency and aimed in the same direction, but at the stage of canceling the state of emergency, "there may be a feeling of passing and tension between the two. It has increased. "



Especially with regard to the criteria for lifting the state of emergency, there was a gap between the government and experts as to how many new infected people could be lifted.



In the report, experts initially set strict standards that could not be lifted in the infection situation at that time, but finally revealed the details of how loose standards were adopted in line with the government's claim. I will.



In response to the hearing, an executive of the Cabinet Secretariat testified, "I thought that if I followed the opinions of experts, I would not be able to release it for the rest of my life."



Shigeru Omi, chairman of the government subcommittee, commented on the relationship between the government and experts, saying, "The problem is not the difference in opinion itself, but the problem of not knowing the mixed roles. The government explains exactly who decided. That's what it should be. "



Based on these analyzes, the government examines a series of responses, saying that there are many issues regarding how to adjust and explain to the public when experts who want to thoroughly control infection and the government concerned about financial damage do not agree. It is recommended to do.

Government and experts interact many times on the basis of the cancellation of the state of emergency

Details of how the criteria for lifting the state of emergency were set, as revealed in the report.



In early May, the expert meeting

first presented the idea that


the cumulative number of newly infected people per 100,000 people in the last two weeks was less than 0.5


.


Speaking in Tokyo, the total for two weeks is 70 people, and 5 people per day is a guideline,


while the government has said that it is too strict, such as "I think it is an order of magnitude different." about it.



In response to this, the expert meeting said that almost half of the infected people at that time knew the infection route, so after relaxing the period from "2 weeks" to half "1 week",


"cumulative per 100,000 people" On May 14, we made a proposal that the number of newly infected people is less than 0.5.


In this case, the standard number of newly infected people in Tokyo is 70 per week and 10 per day.



However, to the standard finally set by the government on May 14, the number "less than about 1 person per 100,000 people", which is 20 people per day in Tokyo, was also conditionally added.



According to the government's intention, the report has been given a range of decisions.

Just before declaring an emergency, chased by "lockdown" information

On the other hand, half a year ago, just before issuing a state of emergency, the underwater examination status that was being promoted within the government was also verified.



The state of emergency was issued to seven prefectures on April 7, six months ago, and was expanded nationwide nine days later.



When a state of emergency is declared, the governor of the prefecture covered by the declaration will be able to refrain from going out or request a leave of absence, but there are no penalties and no compulsory force.



However, the report points out that information was circulating about a "lockdown" that would block the city, and the government was forced to respond to counteract the information.

The government said that the trigger was a press conference on March 23, when Governor Koike of Tokyo said, "There is a possibility that we will have to take strong measures such as lockdown." "That remark was a turning point. As a result, there was a delay in the declaration of an emergency," said Nishimura, the governor of economic revitalization, saying that he needed time to understand that there was no lockdown. I am.



On the other hand, the report also analyzes that based on the data on the infection situation during this period, Governor Koike's remarks changed the behavior of the people, such as refraining from going out, leading to a decrease in the number of infected people.



He also noted that there were cautious opinions within the government regarding economic implications that needed adjustments prior to the state of emergency.



Former Prime Minister Abe, who made the decision a few days before the declaration, said, "The most difficult decision was to issue a state of emergency. There was a lot of caution because of economic considerations. Because Mr. Koike used the word lockdown, it was necessary to resolve the misunderstanding. Under that law, if all the people do not cooperate, it will end up in a state of emergency. In order not to end up in a state of emergency However, I had to match the feelings of the people. It was difficult to do that. "



From a series of verifications, it is difficult to make judgments and adjust opinions amid growing social unrest, and the report states that it is necessary to anticipate all situations and revise the law on infectious diseases. ..



Governor Koike told NHK, "At that time, the number of new positives in Tokyo was on the rise, and the possibility of an infection explosion was increasing." Lockdown "was already used at a government expert meeting. It is a quote from the words that have been said, and he said as part of communicating the severe situation in Tokyo at that time in an easy-to-understand manner. I think that the country took responsibility for the situation of the whole country. " I have commented.

All school closures announced in February "caused confusion"

In this report, we also examined the simultaneous closure of schools, which had a major impact on educational settings, and the border measures for Europe, which are said to have led to the spread of infection in Japan after April.



According to the testimony of executives of the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology and the Cabinet Secretariat, the school closure was suddenly reported to the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology by former Prime Minister Abe on February 27.



While Minister of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology Hagita said, "Not all families have mothers," "there are problems that can be completed by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology alone, and problems that cannot be solved without consulting with other ministries and agencies." Former Prime Minister Abe said, "Let's protect the children," and said, "It is the responsibility of the government to handle everything," and the implementation was decided on the same day.

Although the school closure had a great psychological effect on preventing the spread of the infection, there were also negative expert testimonies such as "it had little epidemiological meaning" and "it was the opposite".



Confusion also occurred at school, and the report stated that it was done without sufficient coordination with the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology and without listening to the opinions of experts, causing confusion.

March Border measures for Europe "a little sooner"

Regarding border measures, we focused on responding to Europe.



Analysis of the data in the first half of March heightened the sense of crisis among experts, and on March 17, the expert meeting made a request to the government.



The report describes this as "a numbness to the government, which is not willing to take drastic measures."



In response to this, the government took measures to refuse entry from 21 European countries on March 27, after issuing recommendations such as suspension of travel.

Regarding the first wave in Japan, the National Institute of Infectious Diseases later released an analysis that the new coronavirus that entered from Europe spread in Japan from the middle of March, and the report said, "Europe etc. If the border measures against the disease could be implemented a little earlier, the spread of the infection in Japan after April could have been suppressed to some extent. "



Regarding the series of responses, one of the bureaucrats at the Prime Minister's Office said, "We were unable to propose to the Prime Minister's Liaison Council a measure to suspend travel in Europe, which is highly likely to be criticized due to public opposition and criticism of the simultaneous closure. "Looking back now, I think I should have taken the suspension measures at that time. That is the most regrettable place," he said.

“Many challenges and failures” Recommendations for the future

The report of the "New Corona / Private Extraordinary Investigation Committee" gives a certain evaluation of the Japanese government's response to the first wave, but states that the efforts are a series of trial and error and include many issues and failures. , Making recommendations to prepare for future crises.



There are six recommendations, including the government's verification of expert relationships.



▽ In the first wave, the outbreak report of the patient was sent by hand by fax, so it was difficult to grasp the infection situation in real time, so we requested the promotion of digitization of the government, and



▽ to support the economy. It is recommended that the financial measures of the government should be related to digitization and decarbonization that will lead to future growth, not to provide uniform funding.



In addition, the


budget for pandemics should be secured separately from the budget of each ministry and agency, and



in response to the shortage of personnel at health centers, etc., we will respond to OBs of university researchers, doctors, nurses, etc. It is necessary to establish a "reserve system" that allows you to request.



In addition,


▽ Japan is proposing a revision of the law that includes penalties and financial compensation, saying that there is no guarantee that the non-forced self-restraint request and leave request will continue to work.

"Recorded in a different position from the government"

Akihisa Shiozaki, a co-chief officer and a core member of the "New Corona Response / Private Extraordinary Investigation Committee," said, "We have taken a position different from that of the government to properly record and verify that we need to prepare for the next crisis." I will.



On the 8th, Chairman Kobayashi and his colleagues will hold a press conference to announce the contents of the report.