- By Kate Whannel & Sam Francis
- Political reporter
Watch: Matt Hancock instructed the Covid inquiry that “Cummings brought on poisonous tradition”
Entering lockdown three weeks earlier would have lower deaths within the first Covid wave by 90%, former well being secretary Matt Hancock has mentioned.
Mr Hancock instructed the Covid inquiry that with the advantage of hindsight the UK ought to have locked down a lot sooner.
He additionally mentioned a “poisonous tradition” existed in authorities pushed by Dominic Cummings, the PM’s chief advisor.
But he denied accusations he lied to colleagues throughout the pandemic.
Offered an opportunity to reply, Mr Hancock referred to as Mr Cummings a “malign actor” who subjected Health Department employees to abuse as they grappled with the emergence of Covid.
He argued it was having to do the work of different departments, for instance on faculty closures, and that its “onerous work” was hindered by “a poisonous tradition that we needed to work with”.
He mentioned Mr Cummings sought to seize energy from Mr Johnson whereas shutting out ministers from key conferences.
There was an “unhelpful” assumption that “when something was troublesome or a problem… there was one way or the other fault and blame”, Mr Hancock mentioned.
He was suspended as a Conservative MP, after showing on ITV’s I’m a Celebrity Get Me Out of Here in 2022 and later mentioned he wouldn’t stand for re-election.
More on Covid and the Covid Inquiry
During his testimony Mr Hancock mentioned “many, many lives” may have been saved if the UK authorities had initiated the primary coronavirus lockdown round 2 March 2020, reasonably than 23 March.
However, he careworn that there was nonetheless “huge uncertainty” and solely 12 instances had been recognized within the nation by this level.
He instructed the inquiry he was talking with “hindsight” and robustly defended his position within the pandemic and that of the division he led.
“From the center of January, we have been attempting to successfully increase the alarm,” he mentioned, including: “We have been attempting to get up Whitehall to the dimensions of the issue.”
Not ‘satisfactory’
Pushed on when he suggested Mr Johnson that fast motion can be wanted to comprise the virus, Mr Hancock mentioned he raised the alarm bell on 13 March.
However, the inquiry’s lawyer, Sir Hugo Keith KC, questioned the assertion, noting that this was not talked about within the entry for 13 March in Mr Hancock’s ebook, Pandemic Diaries.
Mr Hancock replied that the proof solely got here to mild after his diary was printed and cited an electronic mail he despatched the prime minister calling for a “suppression technique”.
Sir Hugo argued that this didn’t quantity to calling for a direct lockdown.
Asked concerning the existence of pre-prepared plans for a pandemic, Mr Hancock mentioned they existed however repeated his earlier assertion that they weren’t “satisfactory”.
Mr Hancock will proceed his proof on Friday.
Mr Johnson will give proof to the inquiry on 6 and seven December. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak can be anticipated to present proof earlier than the top of the yr.
The inquiry has been bruising for the politician, with previous witnesses accusing Mr Hancock of “nuclear ranges” of overconfidence and an absence of honesty.
Helen MacNamara, a senior civil servant throughout the pandemic, mentioned he would say issues that might end up to not be the case.
Sir Patrick Vallance, the previous chief scientific adviser, mentioned Mr Hancock had “a behavior of claiming issues which he did not have a foundation for”.
Mr Hancock mentioned there was no “proof in any way” that he lied throughout the pandemic.
In the session, the inquiry was proven extracts from Sir Patrick’s diary which described a “huge inner mess” contained in the well being division and reported that then-civil service head Sir Mark Sedwill complained of the division’s “clear lack of grip”.
Government response
Mr Hancock has been criticised for saying within the early days of the pandemic {that a} “protecting ring” had been thrown round care properties.
He mentioned he used that phrase to seek advice from actions together with giving the sector £3bn and offering protecting tools.
However, he appeared to agree with strategies that the protections didn’t quantity to “an unbroken circle”.
He additionally instructed the inquiry that he didn’t know concerning the “Eat Out to Help Out scheme” – whereby the federal government subsidised folks to go to eating places in the summertime of 2020 – till the day it was introduced.
He acknowledged he had issues about the way it impacted an infection charges, nevertheless he mentioned he didn’t categorical these publicly as a result of he abided by “collective accountability”.
‘Greatest remorse’
Mr Hancock was additionally questioned about apparently contradictory proof on when the federal government knew folks with out signs may transmit the virus.
Referring to a report by the US’s Centre for Disease Control, he mentioned there was not clear proof till the start of April and as much as then he had been suggested to not base coverage on the belief that transmission may very well be asymptomatic.
Mr Hancock mentioned it was his “single best remorse with hindsight” that he did not overrule the recommendation.
“I used to be within the pro-let’s fear about asymptomatic transmission camp. The frustration was that, understandably from their viewpoint, and right here I’m placing myself of their sneakers, the Public Health England scientists mentioned we’ve not received concrete proof.”
The inquiry was proven messages between Chief Medical Officer Sir Chris Whitty and Sir Patrick wherein they counsel the federal government had identified about asymptomatic transmission.
Posting on X because the inquiry was happening, Mr Cummings mentioned Mr Hancock was “speaking garbage”.
