Cases of COVID-19 infection confirmed in the UK have reached more than 250,000 with a death toll of more than 36,000 since the first report of two cases of infection in the country, on January 31, 2020. The number was second to the US, topping other European countries, and was the second highest in the world. Over the past three months, the UK's approach to the prevention and control of the pandemic has gone through several different phases. In the beginning, the government was inattentive to the pandemic and blindly confident of its ability to overcome it. Subsequently, Prime Minister Boris Johnson and some high-ranking government officials became infected, which drew global attention. Then, decision-making departments were shown to be divided in their opinions on when to institute lockdown measures, which led to a “disastrous April” that witnessed a multiple increase in confirmed infections and a high death toll. At the time, some British people believed that the government's hesitation and failure of decision-making should be blamed for the situation. However, others pointed out that the reasons behind the country's dilemma was the excessive privatization of public services, especially the excessive privatization and low budget of the National Health Service (NHS), which has triggered a public health security crisis for the people of the UK.

Why did the British government's anti-epidemic measures undergo the above-mentioned changes? Is seeking “herd immunity” an effective way of dealing with COVID-19? What were the reasons for the repeated delays in implementing lockdown measures? How will the pandemic impact the UK, post-Brexit? The online workshop invited Ma Zhen'gang, the former Chinese ambassador to the UK; Prof. Jia Qingguo, from PKU's School of International Relations; and Prof. Su Jian, from PKU’s School of Economics, to discuss the above questions from the perspectives of politics, economics, society, history, culture, and public health.