Imagine losing a loved one to a crisis that could have been better managed, only to discover that the leader responsible continues to benefit from public funds. This is the harsh reality for countless families in the UK, who are now demanding justice and accountability. Covid-bereaved families are calling for former Prime Minister Boris Johnson to be stripped of his ex-PM benefits, including his ministerial pension, privy council membership, and access to the public duty costs allowance. But here's where it gets controversial: they argue that Johnson’s actions during the pandemic constitute one of the most profound betrayals of the British public in recent history, claiming his decisions cost tens of thousands of lives that could have been saved.
In a powerful statement, Covid-19 Bereaved Families for Justice UK declared, “His actions during the pandemic amount to one of the gravest betrayals of the British public in modern history. His decisions, delays, and refusal to heed warnings resulted in the loss of lives that should have been protected.” They emphasize that this isn’t about an apology—it’s about consequences. “Boris Johnson should have no role in public life and no further entitlement to public funds,” they assert.
The damning report from the public inquiry, led by retired judge Heather Hallett, found that Johnson’s government acted “too little, too late.” It revealed that implementing a lockdown just one week earlier in March 2020 could have saved approximately 23,000 lives. The inquiry also highlighted Johnson’s indecisiveness, his role in fostering a “toxic and chaotic culture” in Downing Street, and his failure to make timely decisions. While leaders of devolved nations faced criticism, Johnson bore the brunt of the rebuke.
And this is the part most people miss: as a former prime minister, Johnson can claim up to £115,000 annually from the public duty costs allowance—a privilege he fully utilized in 2024-25. The bereaved families find this intolerable, stating, “It is unacceptable that we, the grieving families, are expected to subsidize the lifestyle of the man whose decisions led to the deaths of our loved ones. This must end.”
With around 7,000 members across the UK, the campaign group vows to pursue all legal avenues to hold Johnson personally accountable. “Justice for those we lost means real consequences for those who failed them,” they insist. “We will not rest until that justice is served.”
Former cabinet minister Michael Gove apologized for the government’s mistakes during the pandemic but defended Johnson against claims of fostering chaos in Downing Street. “I want to apologize to all those who lost loved ones and to those who made immense sacrifices,” he told BBC Radio 4’s Today program. However, he disputed some findings, arguing that while an earlier lockdown would have been “more prudent,” it’s a stretch to claim it would have saved 23,000 lives. He also denied the existence of a toxic work environment, stating, “Government during a crisis can’t operate like a Jane Austen novel.”
But here’s the question that sparks debate: Should leaders who fail in times of crisis be allowed to retain public privileges and funds? Or should accountability extend beyond apologies to tangible consequences? What do you think? Share your thoughts in the comments—let’s keep this critical conversation going.
