The Sunday Telegraph

Lockdown ‘bias’ risks inquiry whitewash

MPs warn that groups given ‘core participan­t’ status are dominated by advocates of Covid curbs

- By Camilla Turner CHIEF POLITICAL CORRESPOND­ENT

THE Covid inquiry risks becoming a “whitewash”, MPs say as they warn it has become dominated by lockdown advocates.

Baroness Hallett, the inquiry chairman, is accused of excluding groups likely to “challenge” the Government’s decisions during the pandemic that plunged the country into prolonged nationwide shutdowns.

A group of 21 MPs and peers have said it is “critical” that the inquiry considers a “diverse range of views and perspectiv­es”, warning that otherwise there is a “serious risk” that it could become “inadverten­tly blinded to areas of important investigat­ion”.

In a letter to Lady Hallett, seen by The Sunday Telegraph, the parliament­arians argue that Module Two is the most critical part of the inquiry as it will examine high-level decision-making in Government during the pandemic.

But they fear the inquiry’s current make-up will lead to some of the “fundamenta­l questions” raised by lockdown, such as the significan­t infringeme­nts of personal liberties and the safeguardi­ng of children, being sidelined.

The signatorie­s of the letter, which include former Cabinet ministers Lord

Frost and Esther McVey as well as Sir Graham Brady, chairman of the 1922 Committee, say they are concerned by “the compositio­n” of core participan­ts for Module Two.

They say it “appears to be heavily weighted towards organisati­ons and individual­s which can fairly be presumed either to favour lockdowns as a pandemic policy or else to have understand­able personal reasons to advocate for earlier and/or harder lockdowns”.

The letter cites the 14 Government department­s and arm’s-length bodies that have been granted core participan­t status, along with four separate groups of Bereaved Families for Justice and Imperial College London, whose Covid modelling informed ministers’ decision to send the country into lockdown.

While anyone can submit evidence to the inquiry, “core participan­t” groups have special status, including the right to representa­tion and the ability to make legal submission­s, suggest questions for witnesses and receive disclosure of documentat­ion.

The MPs and peers point out that while it is appropriat­e for groups representi­ng those bereaved due to Covid to be represente­d, it is “surprising” that there appears to be no representa­tion of families bereaved as a resault of the impact of lockdowns including cancelled or delayed medical appointmen­ts, suspension of child welfare safeguards and other unexplaine­d deaths.

The cross-party group of MPs and peers also notes that there is no representa­tion from any British industries that resisted or were affected by lockdowns, such as the hospitalit­y, tourism and retail sectors.

The Telegraph understand­s that an applicatio­n was made for core participan­t status in Module Two by a consortium of hospitalit­y groups but this was rejected by the inquiry.

“While we understand that in-depth investigat­ion of the impacts of the pandemic will follow in later modules, we worry that the current narrow range of voices will be ill-equipped to ask the right questions and ensure a balanced and therefore robust process,” the letter says. “As it stands we fear the inquiry risks leaving itself exposed to claims of a whitewash.”

Molly Kingsley, co-founder of UsForThem, a parent campaign group which has challenged lockdown measures, said: “If you only have people who are predominan­tly of the same mindset, how are we going to ensure the right questions are asked and the right challenges are made?

“This is our one, and likely only, chance to scrutinise the decisions but also to learn for future pandemics.

“If all we have is a room full of lockdown enthusiast­s, we will end up with exactly the same groupthink that has been such a feature of the Government’s response to Covid.”

‘We worry that the current narrow range of voices will be ill-equipped to ask the right questions’

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom