Dominic Cummings Covid evidence

[Newtonianmechanics]

Is anyone going to watch this man give evidence today?

Apparently there is a vigil in Barnard Castle ahead of this.

The shopping trolleys emoji seems to mean they think Carrie was controlling Boris from the last few days. Wonder if this will feature.

It's funny (but actually it's not funny) but Dominic Cumming used the 'Spiderman meme' as an analogy in his testimony.

@minou123
So true. When he quoted Caprise too. It's like some crazy twilight zone.

One thing I'm finding mildly reassuring is there have been new details, but broadly the serious journalists did already tell us a lot of what is coming out in detail in the inquiry.

Back to Inquiry

Our second witness today, Sir Christopher Wormald (Permanent Secretary, Department of Health and Social Care) has now been sworn in and begins his evidence.

He is being questioned by Lead Counsel Hugo Keith KC.

Wormald does not accept Hancock lied during Covid, but he says he challenged him over repeated claims he 'over-promised'

The ex-NHS chief Sir Simon Stevens rejects the characterisation, however, that "bed blocking" forced lockdown decisions.
He says: "We - and indeed he - were being told that if action was not taken on reducing the spread of coronavirus, there wouldn’t be 30,000 hospital inpatients, there would be maybe 200,000 or 800,000 hospital inpatients.
"So you can't say that you would be able to deal with 200,000 or 800,000 inpatients by reference to 30,000 blocked beds.
"Even if all of those 30,000 beds were freed up - for every one coronavirus patient who was then admitted to that bed, there would be another five patients who needed that care but weren't able to get it.
"So no, I don't think that is a fair statement in describing the decision calculus for the first wave."

Any blame lies with politicians who applied LD without any mitigation or plan for post LD.

It does not lay with anyone on here, MN is not that influential.... we were told repeatedly "we are led by the science" we were also told that children would be catered for, we were also told the Govt put a protective arm around the necks of the elderly.....

I recall Tory voters were very pleased we had Boris and not Corbyn... zero mention (by Tory supporters) that the Tories were actively damaging children at all.... they supported the restrictions on free school meals still being applied over holiday periods and criticised Marcus Rashford for getting involved.

I know what this site was like. And how vociferously posters, including the last few, were managing to shut down any suggestion of harm to women and children.

Of course they’ll try to deny, but it’s all there.

Even on this female dominated site women and children were not to be a major consideration.

Why anyone would take notice how to those harms and not at the time is on them.

And if you spent the pandemic demanding harsher restrictions regardless of that damage, which many did on here, you can kick yourself now that you got it as demanded.

In his witness statement Stevens said Matt Hancock thought that, if decisions had to be taken about who would live and who would die, that should be a ministerial matter. He said:
The secretary of state for health and social care took the position that in this situation he – rather than, say, the medical profession or the public – should ultimately decide who should live and who should die. Fortunately this horrible dilemma never crystallised.

It is all just so horrific to hear.

I am interested in what Dr.Doyle has to say this afternoon.

I always wondered what she thought of the government during the briefings.

I find Stephen's statement a bit odd. What Hancock probably meant is that there would have been a statement or guidance for doctors for patients with COVID about what clinical treatment they would get. I seem to remember that the medical profession were anxious about having to make these decisions themselves in a crisis. We never got to that stage, but it strikes me as something that Hancock could easily dismiss.

Lots of finger pointing - Hancock being out of government might mean some more interesting answers on this.

Though his cricketing and nuclear confidence behaviour suggests he had barely thought about much.

We've had some insight into what Chris Witty and Patrick Vallsnce thought of the government during this.

There was one specific example.
It was during the whole Dominic Cummings and Barnard Castle debacle.
When it all hit the press BJ and other ministers did not want to do the Daily Press Breifing the next day. They knew the journalists would ask question about DC and get slaughtered for it.

According to Chris Witty and Patrick Vallsces diaries at the time, Martin Reynold (private secratary to BJ) came to them to ask them to do the Daily Press Briefing instead
Chris and Patrick stated they refused to do it because this was a politcal issue and thy cannot answer questions about politcally issues. There diaries show they felt strong-armed and pressured.

Martin Reynolds denies he strong armed them, but clearly Chris and Payrick were not impressed.

Chris and Patrick stated they refused to do it because this was a politcal issue and thy cannot answer questions about politcally issues. There diaries show they felt strong-armed and pressured.

Not surprised at all.

Inquiry resumes with questions about the first Cobra meetings

I enjoyed 'I don't mean to be rude but please answer the question' (not exact wording)!

Today's answers have been much more defensive than yesterday.

I can't watch it but it seems like Keith is getting quite frustrated with Christopher?

"Why were you wasting time on the process?" is pretty blunt questioning!

Q: Do you accept scientists were saying the mitigation approach would lead to many deaths?
Yes, says Wormald. On 12 March Sage discussed NPIs (non-pharmaceutical interventions – or lockdown-type measures).
Q: When did you realise the reasonable worst case scenario was likely to happen, with the NHS being swamped?
Wormald says he agreed with the Sage advice received on 12 March. The debate was not about whether to impose further restrictions, but when.

Wormald says full lockdown might have avoided if voluntary stay-at-home order had been issued earlier

Keith is now talking about the national lockdown ordered on 23 March.

Q: In your statement you say the voluntary NPIs of 16 March (the stay at home order) was not enough. You accept that if voluntary NPIs had been introduced earlier it is “possible” they may have worked, and a lockdown may have been necessary?

Wormald says they don’t know, and will never know, what impact that might have had, because that regime was only in place for a week.

He says there is some evidence the wave was “beginning to turn” after the 16 March measures were announced. People were also witnessing lockdowns in Europe. But some people were not complying.

Q: But you accept that lockdown might have been avoided?

“That is certainly a possibility,” he says.

He goes on:

With hindsight we were at least a week late with all the NPI decisions.

He says he is referring to the measures announced on 12 March (the instruction that people with symptoms should stay at home for seven days), on 16 March (the stay at home order) and on 23 March (the legally enforced lockdown).

He says he supported the timing decisions at the time, but with hindsight he thinks the government should have acted earlier.

Wormald defends 25 February 2020 advice saying care home residents 'very unlikely' to get Covid, saying it was based on clinical advice at time

Brenda Campbell KC is now asking questions on behalf of Northern Ireland Covid Bereaved Families for Justice. She asks why the Department of Health and Social Care was telling care homes on 25 February 2020 that the risk of infection in care homes was very low, when at that point it was spreading around the world.

The advice said:

It is therefore very unlikely that anyone receiving care in a care home or the community will become infected.

Wormald says that was the clinical advice at that time. The number of cases in England was very low. So that was the description of how things were at that point. “It was not a prediction of the future,” he says.

Sir Christopher Wormald has concluded his evidence.

Our third witness, Dr. Yvonne Doyle (Former Medical Director, (Former Medical Director and Director for Health Protection, Public Health
England) has been sworn in and begins her evidence.

She is being questioned by Counsel to the Inquiry Andrew O’Connor KC.

Concluded until Monday.

Do you know what was said by Dr Doyle? I couldn't watch it live and the Guardian blog cut to the AI summit.

Sorry the only bits I saw she was talking about the sub groups such as Nervtag and how they worked.