Thread by @pmdfoster

Dom Cummings attending SAGE raises some basic questions for a govt that defends itself by arguing that it acts on only “on the science”. The most obvious is why he attended? Why not read the minutes/output *after* the deliberations? 1/thread

theguardian.com/world/2020/apr…

If only to protect the Government from the *apprearance* of interference, would it not have been wiser for Cummings - who doesn’t exactly have a reputation for non-intervention - to have stayed out? To protect the “purity” of the science? /2

Of course we know that the science isn’t that “pure” - it’s a debate. As we’ve seen with the gaps between UKG and WHO, different reads on need for masks/lockdowns etc. And next, on how ‘hot’ or ‘cold’ to run the lockdown. /3

Given this, why was Cummings in the room? And what did he say? Did he sit quietly at the back? Or venture his amateur opinions on AI and epidemiology? Did he filter political insight into the discussion? The case to see the minutes - to protect all reputations - is overwhelming/4

Dom Cummings is not a neutral figure. Nor is he some junior SPAD/flack taking notes. His presence at SAGE raises those obvious questions about when science ends and politics begins. /5

We’ve seen this on the ventilators scheme - the exact relationship between Govt and the regulator MHRA needs a lot more explaining. More Qs to come on this later. /6

More generally this also lays bare the fact that the government defending itself by relying “on the science” is a cowardly fiction.

The reality is that the science provides data/input but the DECISIONS govt must own are deeply political. /7

How many should be allowed to die in carehomes?

How ‘hot’ shall we run the exit? [How far about RO number of 1]

How do we strike balance between protecting the elderly and the economy?/8

The science can help you with this - but the decisions are political.

Now, if you want to use the SAGE inputs to explain those decisions, then great. But you’d be better having that discussion unimpeachably scientific. /9

So again. What was Cummings in the room for? Did he sit mute at the back? Or did he speak? If so, what did he say?

It might actually be to No10 benefit to get out in front on this - rather than wasting time attacking the reporting. /10

Because Cummings presence in SAGE may well have undermined the foundations of the Govts own defence on the science. Why couldn’t he read the minutes like everyone else at his level of Govt?

These are basic Qs. They need answering. ENDS