Culture Secretary Defends Decision to Hold Cheltenham

Image: 
Description: 

Photo: Patrick McCann/Racing Post
Thousands gather for the Cheltenham Festival in March 2020

Culture secretary Oliver Dowden has defended the decision for the Cheltenham Festival to go ahead despite the coronavirus pandemic.

The four-day festival began March 10 with additional hygiene measures before the government issued a ban on mass gatherings. Ten days after it ended, a nationwide lockdown was announced.

Appearing on ITV's Good Morning Britain April 20, Dowden was accused by presenter Piers Morgan of "actively encouraging" people to attend events such as the festival and the high-profile Champions League match between Liverpool and Atletico Madrid March 11.

"The scientific evidence we were being given was that the threat at a mass gathering relates to the people who immediately surround you—the people in front of you and behind you," said Dowden. "The risk at mass gatherings was no greater or less than it would have been in pubs or restaurants, and the advice at that point was that we did not need to ban mass gatherings.

"As the situation developed, the scientific advice changed and we changed our guidance. Mass gatherings are not different to any of those other events I described and at the appropriate moment we took the decision to close pubs and restaurants."

A total of 251,684 people attended the Cheltenham Festival across its four days, down on an overall attendance of 266,557 in 2019.

The decision to stage the festival was heavily criticized by some but, speaking Sunday on Racing TV, British Horseracing Association chief executive Nick Rust insisted the meeting had taken place in line with government advice. 

"There's a lot of blame around the decision for it to go ahead but it was taken alongside government and medical advice. Many other activities, such as the Six Nations, took place that week and the advice was to keep going," said Rust. "If we had cancelled racing against government advice I just don't think it would have been the right decision and it would have been widely criticized as being alarmist.

"However, the mood did change rapidly during the week and by the following Monday limitations on gatherings were introduced and the scientific advice changed. Of course we should be a bit worried, not necessarily because of the decision but the perception of it."