Even given all that is already known about poor decision-making, avoidable deaths, lockdown-breaking parties and atrocious procurement, the evidence being related to the Covid inquiry has the power to shock. Though Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak are not due to testify for a few more weeks, the reflections of Dominic Cummings, Lee Cain and other key figures at No 10 shine an unforgiving spotlight on the heart of government. On Monday it was revealed that Chris Whitty, the chief medical officer, described the “Eat out to help out” scheme launched in August 2020 as “Eat out to help out the virus”. On Tuesday Mr Cummings said that the prime minister was routinely described as “the trolley” – a reference to his erratic nature and chaotic changes of policy direction.
From the man who went from being Mr Johnson’s most senior adviser to his enemy, such contempt might be viewed as sour grapes. But a diary kept by Sir Patrick Vallance, the chief scientific adviser, revealed that he too saw Mr Johnson as “weak and indecisive”. Simon Case, the cabinet secretary whose evidence has been delayed for health reasons, complained that Johnson “cannot lead”. Mr Cain, the former head of communications, put it more gently when he told the inquiry that the pandemic was the “wrong crisis for his skillset”.
Questions to Mr Cummings from Hugo Keith KC rightly probed the sequence of events leading up to the about-turn in mid-March 2020, when it was decided that a policy of mitigation had been a mistake and a lockdown began to be envisaged. Mr Cummings’ disdain for Whitehall is well known, so his criticisms of “Potemkin” meetings, conducted for show and little else, were unsurprising. So were his views on “pop-ins” to the prime minister’s office by civil servants eager to influence him. But his account of inconsistent data, communication failures between the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies and Downing Street, and the lack of pandemic planning, all point to problems that go beyond personalities. So does the well-documented hiatus in mid-February, when the prime minister and numerous others went on holiday in the midst of a national crisis.
Such complacency is inexcusable. But it was never the whole story, as political calculations continued to influence decision-making alongside scientific evidence. Lord Bethell, a former health minister, said this week that Mr Johnson treated the pandemic as secondary to Brexit. Witnesses at the inquiry have described his oscillation between a libertarian impulse to “let the virus rip” – partly on grounds that those most likely to die were already old – and a more cautious approach that put public health first.
This seesaw went beyond the chaotic early months. In one message, Mr Case referred to the prime minister’s wish to abandon restrictions as “Trump-Bolsonaro levels of mad and dangerous”. Such recklessness was not limited to No 10. Sir Gavin Williamson, then the education secretary, was said to have rejected mask-wearing in schools on the quite disgraceful grounds that he “didn’t want to give an inch to the unions” – a bullish approach endorsed by Matt Hancock and Grant Shapps.
The inquiry has a long way to run. The situation in Gaza, among other factors, means it is not dominating headlines in the way that might have been expected. But judging from this week’s evidence, there are huge lessons to be learned not only about appalling errors in the way the pandemic was handled, but also about the Conservative party in government.
