MANY people, myself included, have been eagerly anticipating the start of the Covid-19 inquiry.
Even if only to confirm our suspicions over how Britain’s response to the pandemic was riddled with poor decision-making and blatant incompetence.
The investigation, chaired by Baroness Hallett and scheduled to conclude in 2026, is supposed to lay out, in detail, the systemic failures of leadership in dealing with the pandemic.
And from what we have been told, this is meant to be an exercise of the strictest impartiality and critical analysis.
Or so one would hope.
From tongue scraping to saying no, here are 12 health trends to try in 2023
However, so far, it leaves much to be desired.
Firstly, I find it very curious that, so soon into the investigation, the inquiry’s lead counsel has suggested that Brexit may have played a role in worsening the pandemic.
Hugo Keith KC, only hours after the probe got underway, questioned whether “work to address what were likely to be the severe consequences of a No-Deal Brexit” hampered the country’s ability to prepare for tackling coronavirus.
Ah yes, the dreaded B-word.
Like all of society’s ills, from poor public policy to a cat being stuck in a tree, everything that goes wrong in Britain can be blamed on Brexit.
By that logic, surely some 530,000 Covid deaths in France, Germany and Italy can also be blamed on Brexit, right?
It is only fair.
The point of this inquiry is to ask difficult questions about the handling of Covid and to reach outcomes based on evidence.
It is not meant to draw foregone conclusions.
How can the public have confidence in the findings of this probe when it is so obviously biased from the start?
How to de-clutter if you have a beauty stash to last you a lifetime
Moreover, I wonder if the KC is a psychic to draw such conclusions so early on.
This is not the only cause for concern. The investigation’s preliminary strategy also raises eyebrows.
Earlier this week, Conservative ex-Chancellor George Osborne and former Prime Minister David Cameron attended the “resilience and preparedness” public hearings to give evidence for the Covid inquiry.
And, apparently, to answer for the crime of not foreseeing a global pandemic to come years after they left office.
Clearly, their crystal ball was broken.
Their questioning centred on austerity measures and their impact on the country’s response to the pandemic.
But how is this relevant? And where does it stop?
Should we then expect to see Liam Byrne, Labour’s former Chief Secretary to the Treasury under Gordon Brown, be questioned about his role in austerity when he left his successor a note in 2010 saying: “I’m afraid there is no money”?
Indeed, even for that matter-of-fact indiscretion, Mr Byrne still draws the ire of his colleagues in the Labour Party.
But the reality is that no government operates in a vacuum.
There is always a degree of bipartisan co-operation that affects government policy.
And it is precisely for this reason that I’m sure many Labour MPs are waiting with bated breath to see if they, too, will have the misfortune of defending their political track record in the inquiry.
This peculiar strategy also fails to address the elephant in the room — China.
Why isn’t the probe more concerned with China’s role in the spread of the plague that claimed the lives of millions around the world?
Surely that is a better use of public resources than unpicking the successes and failures of David Cameron’s premiership.
Like with many public inquiries, the risk of “hindsight bias” is always a concern.
That is, as Professor Christopher Meyer put it, the tendency to “misinterpret cause-effect relations, underestimate the difficulty of taking decisions during periods of high uncertainty and pressure to act, and flawed prescriptions of how to overcome problems”.
I just hope that petty vengeance and party politics don’t take away from the vital lessons that need to be learned from the pandemic.
US GOV SHAME TOPS UK
AS a Brit, I take pleasure in knowing that no matter how embarrassing our politics are, America’s are more scandalous.
President Joe Biden’s son, Hunter, is facing tax and gun charges.
He’s expected to admit two tax raps and dodge jail through a pre-trial plea deal with prosecutors for the firearm rap.
Not so great for Sleepy Joe.
Of course, all the flames are being furiously fanned by Republicans, fuming that their own man, Donald Trump, took a battering from the Democrats.
He faces so many charges that he’ll be tangled up for years.
I don’t take pleasure in watching America’s deeply divided society rip itself apart over petty politics.
However, if there is anything to be learned from the US, it’s this: When it feels like things can’t get any worse . . . they will.
NOW IS TIME TO GO, NIC
NICOLA Sturgeon’s return to parliament this week after being questioned in the SNP fraud probe reeks of hypocrisy and disdain for the public.
On Tuesday, the former First Minister of Scotland put on a brave face as she made her way back to Holyrood, proclaiming her innocence.
Unfortunately for Ms Sturgeon – whose husband Peter Murrell was also quizzed in the police probe – allegations of fraud and corruption can be difficult stains to erase.
Nonetheless, clearly the decent thing to do would be for Miss Sturgeon to resign and preserve what little is left of her dignity.
After all, she has sacked members of her party for less.
Her position now is completely untenable.
One Kel of a showbiz outburst…
IT’S not every day that we see Hollywood celebrities turn against one of their own.
Ever since the Sussexes left the Royal Family to seek greener pastures in Tinsel Town, they have relied on the support of their fan base to insulate them from the critical real world.
However, it seems that the couple’s star is waning in – and out – of Hollywood now and some famous showbiz names are letting us know in no uncertain terms.
On the I’ve Had It podcast, Kelly Osbourne branded Prince Harry a “whingeing t**t” and said that all he does is complain about how hard his life is.
She is certainly not wrong there.
As fate would have it, it is hard to feel sympathy for a wealthy prince whose life has been shrouded in so much privilege that most people cannot possibly fathom it.
Hollywood has always been a notorious bubble of self-righteous and oblivious busybodies – and it looks like Harry fits right in.
MY SELF ID IS AS A PIZZA
THERE is a cruel irony when the logical conclusion to radical gender ideology is turned into a world of satire and confusion.
And this time it is happening in the classroom.
A young schoolgirl was this week branded “despicable” by her teacher for rejecting a fellow student’s claim that they identified as a cat.
Young people have become so emboldened by this strange trend that some are referring to themselves as “furries”.
That is, humans with animal characteristics.
I see nothing wrong with this.
After all, if someone can identify as the opposite sex, why can’t someone say they are a cat, as Piers Morgan did in yesterday’s Sun?
On the best of days I identify as a pizza.
And only a bigot would deny my right to pepperoni topping.
HOME TRUTH
THE country seems to be in a death spiral of economic woes.
Forecasts are weak, inflation is still high and the cost of living crisis doesn’t seem to be going anywhere.
And to add insult to injury, the threat of rising interest rates is spooking already stretched mortgage holders.
However, despite calls for the Government to intervene once again, Michael Gove has thankfully pointed out the counter-productive nature of that plan.
The reality is, the country’s finances are stretched thin enough.
And by increasing public spending to bail out those with mortgages, the ensuing rising debt will have a negative effect on interest rates.
It will do nothing but kick the can down the road and worsen the plight of Britain’s purse in the long run.
It’s not every day that politicians are candid and frank.
So I applaud Mr Gove for not wrapping the electorate in cotton wool and lying through his teeth.
