Thread.
You often see references on Twitter to 'the inevitable inquiry into Covid-19'. Why does anyone think that under this government a meaningful public inquiry into the pandemic is inevitable? @DavidLammy @JolyonMaugham @mikegalsworthy @EdwardJDavey @joannaccherry 1/
You often see references on Twitter to 'the inevitable inquiry into Covid-19'. Why does anyone think that under this government a meaningful public inquiry into the pandemic is inevitable? @DavidLammy @JolyonMaugham @mikegalsworthy @EdwardJDavey @joannaccherry 1/
Johnson, Gove, Hancock, Raab etc have never shown any wish to be accountable for anything. (Re Cummings, for example.) In the case of Covid they will surely move heaven and earth to avoid effective, independent scrutiny. 2/
And since it is governments that set up inquiries they have the power simply to block an inquiry into the Covid response. You might say the demand from the public will be too strong. Well maybe, but they have already shown significant willingness to defy the public will. 3/
They are usually deaf to public petitions. Opposition pressure? Their majority in the Commons gives them a lot of protection. The press? Do me a favour – the Sun, Mail, Telegraph, Times are all their allies. Papers might make a little noise, but they will never push it. 4/
And the government knows time is its ally. Look how quickly the idea of 30,000 needless deaths has been 'normalised'. And as (or if) the Covid threat retreats we will have plenty of other worries. The government is adept at distraction. (See painting jets and abolishing DfID.) 5/
Just as they advanced No Deal under the cover of Covid, expect them to use the chaos of No Deal to make us forget Covid. At the same time, if forced, they might seek to bury the Covid story by setting up a 'review', a device long used by governments to neuter criticism. 6/
Look at the needless 'review' in response to #BlackLivesMattterUK. Under a chair almost no one respects. Any similar 'review' of Covid-19 will not address all the huge questions about government decision-making; it will obfuscate and deny, and take ages doing so. 7/
When eventually it reports, if there are tricky passages for the government they can always be redacted. Or alternatively the report in its entirety might be suppressed. Don't tell me that couldn't happen under this government. 8/
In reality, if we want a meaningful inquiry it has to be fully empowered under the 2005 Inquiries Act, with lawyers asking tough questions in live-streamed sessions. But even then the government can meddle by choosing the chair and fiddling the terms of reference. 9/
Public inquiries can be clumsy, slow and expensive, but they are still the best tool we have, and a good chair with well-judged terms can avoid the worst problems. Which is why this government, if it was ever forced to order an inquiry, would go for a bad chair and bad terms. 10/
All this is why I'm surprised anyone thinks a real, proper public inquiry into the UK's Covid disaster is inevitable. Just as gangsters don't call in the cops, this government will not willingly put itself at the mercy of judge-led public scrutiny. (Nearly done now.) 11/
Is it hopeless? I can't say. But I know that the longer we wait before demanding a 2005 Act inquiry, on terms approved across the parties in Parliament and not just by the Tories, the weaker our cause. Lord Kerslake and others proposed this weeks ago. 12/ ft.com/content/b4bc19…
If we delay, the 'Move On' message will swamp the country. The dead, bereaved, NHS staff – all the victims & heroes of Covid-19 – will be buried under a wave of 'Time to Rebuild' and 'The Future Not The Past' slogans, courtesy of Dominic Cummings. That should not happen. ENDS
