It was the first time the Covid inquiry had heard directly from Rishi Sunak and things immediately went wrong for the prime minister: his claim in a witness statement that no one had raised concerns about his flagship pandemic policy was quickly denied by the government’s former chief scientist. advisor.
Monday’s row over the “eat out to help out” scheme, in which Sir Patrick Vallance responded to a reading from Sunak’s unpublished statement, was probably more embarrassing than damaging.
But the dangers are increasing as the prime minister is scheduled to appear on stage in person soon. More and more details are emerging about the role of the man whom one scientific advisor disdainfully refers to as “Chancellor Dr Death”.
The dangers fall into two broad camps. The first is the narrative that emerges from a range of evidence and testimonies that the Sunak Treasury, as recorded in Vallance’s diary, were, in Boris Johnson’s words, the “death squad” – that is, very determined to prioritize economic reopening. He said it endangered public safety.
Much of this centers around eating out for charity: a short but generous £850m scheme to encourage people to go to cafes and restaurants in person in summer 2020; A plan implemented without any consultation left Vallance and others “blindsided”, the investigation said.
The second danger is arguably more serious: an emerging allegation that the Prime Minister was not only reckless in his search for side advisers, but also tried to cover up this failure.
While Sunak’s seemingly enthusiastic approach to reopening the economy may appeal to some voters, it is worth noting that it could earn him equal praise among anti-lockdown Conservative MPs as well as some right-wing newspapers and TV channels.
So Sunak could be persuaded to present himself unapologetically as the voice of economic and social reality, as a counterweight to restriction-obsessed scientists.
If so, there is certainly no lack of evidence to support it. Witness after witness highlighted Sunak’s willingness to lift restrictions; This is an example of the nickname “Dr Death” used in a private message by Prof Dame Angela McLean, who has since replaced Vallance as chief scientific adviser.
Vallance’s diary repeatedly showed his apparent irritation with the then chancellor; One quote said Sunak was using “increasingly specific and spurious arguments” against the new restrictions. Johnson’s former deputy, Dominic Cummings, was also reminded and summarized Sunak’s view as “let people die, that’s okay”.
In one particularly illuminating quote, Sunak was described as telling a virtual meeting on the economy that his job was “not to deal with the virus, but to deal with the scientists”, without realizing England’s chief medical officer Chris Whitty was on the phone.
Defending all of this would involve justifying eating out to help out; research suggests that this proposal could have been responsible for a new cluster of infections that summer, as well as a rise in Covid deaths among Bangladeshis and Americans. Pakistani communities heavily represented in the hospitality industry.
One point of near-unanimity among scientists who spoke to the inquiry was that they do not believe in the idea of paying people to mingle in public spaces, when advice given months ago recommended the exact opposite.
John Edmunds, professor of infectious disease modeling at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, said he was “still angry” at the plan, adding: “This was a plan that encouraged people to take epidemiological risks.”
In his statement, Vallance said he ate out to help “completely reverse” public health messaging. “It’s quite possible that this will have an impact on transmission,” he said. “It’s actually very difficult to see how this wouldn’t have an impact on transmission, and that would have been the advice if asked in advance.”
During that meeting, Andrew O’Connor KC presented to the inquiry the first image of Sunak that had not been filtered through someone else’s memoir and read out an extract from the prime minister’s statement.
As Eat Out to Help Out was being published and approaching its launch, “I do not recall any concerns expressed about this plan during ministerial discussions, including those in which the CMO participated.” [Whitty] and CSA [Vallance]Sunak said the following in his statement, which will be published in full after his speech.
When asked if this was true, Vallance was polite but clear. “I think it was very clear to everyone that this was going to lead to – so inevitably – an increase in the risk of transmission, and I think that would be known to ministers,” he said, adding: “I would be very surprised if Sunak didn’t know that.
All of this needs to be put into context. Sunak, like Johnson, was not portrayed as a borderline sensitive hologram of a leader who failed to grasp basic science during the inquiry and adopted the view of the last person he spoke to; As with Matt Hancock, he was not sacked because he was inherently untrustworthy.
And Sunak faces more pressing concerns, from a stagnating economy to high net immigration figures and an increasingly restless Conservative party.
But as the election approaches and the possibility of defeat looms large, Sunak will be thinking about the slim legacy the history books will leave him with. “The man who murdered an unknown number of Britons in reckless disregard of expert advice” is not the political epitaph he would want. If he gets it wrong in the investigation, that might still be what he gets.