Just so we are clear, you can not say "I believe in free markets" and then say "except in this case, the markets weren't working properly", especially when the next sentence is, "so a government investment of £700 billion is justified". That is exactly the same sort of nonsense as people who say "I believe in free speech, except when it is offensive to someone".

Here is the thing - markets don't work properly. Even Adam Smith didn't think so. It's a theoretical construct that free markets lead to desirable outcomes. For them to do so you need at least the following things - everyone to be fully informed about every aspect of every choice they make, no-one's choices to have any detrimental effect on any other party, and no-one to have any market power (for example, the ability to set prices). These things never happen, and they never will.

This is not to say that markets can't be made to work better (through regulation), nor is it to say that government intervention replaces market forces - the two often work hand in hand. Governments can level the playing field to ensure equity, while well-functioning market mechanisms (through prices) can more efficiently allocate goods and services.

I think many with more lefty-bent have realised that sometimes, there are good and bad ways to tax, that government spending is often inefficient and that markets can work better than social planners. This should be a similarly eye-opening moment for free-market enthusiasts. Because the things that make market function poorly are inherent to human nature, so there's always going to be a minimal level of government presence. After this last year, I think it is clear that we are not yet there.