Time for charmed elite to practise what they preach

HYPOCRISY is one of the aggravating sins of the progressive elite. There is nothing more sickening than the failure of prominent figures to abide by the standards they seek to impose on others. Such double standards can be found in socialists who rage against private education but send their children to fee-paying schools, or in eco warriors who wail about carbon footprints while globe-trotting in luxury jets.

Now comes another classic example in the surprising form of Professor Neil Ferguson of Imperial College, London.

During the coronavirus crisis, few experts have had a greater influence over Government policy. As a renowned epidemiologist, his advice was crucial in the adoption of the lockdown, including instructions to avoid social mixing and to stay at home except for exercise, essential shopping, medical care and vital work. Without such measures, his team at Imperial estimated 250,000 British people could die from Covid-19.

YET it now turns out he has not been sticking to his own rules. In a display of breathtaking arro- gance, he refuses to accept the sacrifices he demands of others.

Yesterday, a damning news story revealed he has enjoyed at least two encounters with his married lover Antonia Staats, who travelled from her south London home to be with him.

A “senior campaigner” with the Left-wing pressure group Avaaz, which lobbies on issues such as climate change and global poverty, Ms Staats is said to have an “open marriage”.

But such an unorthodox arrangement, however fashionable among metropolitan liberals, does not give the Professor and Ms Staats a licence to flout the regulations that he has so vigorously advocated.

Perhaps he thought these liaisons counted as “exercise”. Or maybe he felt he could get

SORRY SAGA: Professor Ferguson helped create lockdown

away with massaging his Staats. Whatever his motivation, his shabby secret is out. His feeble explanation is that he thought he was “immune” from the disease as he had previously tested positive for the virus.

But a brush with Covid-19 is no excuse for defying quarantine. In late March, the Deputy Chief Medical Officer Jenny Harries explicitly stated that couples not living together must stay apart.

Recognising his position is indefensible, he has now resigned as a member of the Scientific Advisory Group for

Emergencies, the key body for guiding the Government.

Health Secretary Matt Hancock, whose job is tough enough without this sort of distraction, labelled the Professor’s conduct “extraordinary”.

It is worse than that. The saga shows that Ferguson believes there is one law for him and another for ordinary people outside his charmed circle.

He has demonstrated the worst kind of contempt for the British public, the vast majority of whom have stoically complied with the unprecedented lockdown. Thanks to advice based on his modelling, families are split up, citizens left isolated and relatives barred from the bedsides of dying loved ones.

In the brave new Britain that Ferguson helped to build, sunbathing or sitting on a park bench for too long are now offences against the state. The police in England and Wales have handed out 9,000 fines for breaches of restrictions.

The Professor’s irresponsible behaviour risks undermining the Government’s tough message. It is likely the lockdown will now further fray, given that some people will think that if dissent is good enough for Ferguson, it is good enough for them.

EVEN before this sordid episode, he was highly controversial. Although widely admired for his sharp brain and ferocious work ethic, several other scientists disputed both the accuracy of his Covid-19 modelling and the Government’s reliance on Imperial’s forecasts.

Moreover, his record is a chequered one. During the 2001 foot and mouth crisis, his research helped persuade Tony Blair’s Government to carry out the mass slaughter of six million animals, yet later investigations described the modelling as “seriously flawed”. Nor were subsequent bleak warnings fulfilled. In 2002, he speculated that BSE, or mad cow disease, could cause up to 150,000 human deaths. That turned out to be fewer than 200. In 2005 he said that up to 200 million people might die from bird flu. By the end of the decade, just 282 had succumbed worldwide.

Similarly, the Government’s bleak prediction in 2009 of 65,000 possible British deaths from swine flu, based partly on his analysis, never materialised. Only 457 died. Dismissing his critics, Ferguson argues that his research highlights “a range” of outcomes. But his credibility, already dented, has been dealt a hammer blow by his hypocritical self-indulgence.

‘Perhaps he thought these liaisons counted as exercise’