Whitty admits withholding ‘confidential’ information from ministers in pandemic
The Chief Medical Office explained his approach during the politically-charged context of the pandemic.
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir Chris Whitty has admitted withholding “political” information from the UK Government during the pandemic when he considered it to be confidential.
Giving evidence to the Covid-19 Inquiry on Wednesday, the Chief Medical Officer also denied a claim made by Matt Hancock that he referred to people in Scotland as “going soft” on mass gatherings during the early stages of the pandemic.
Providing an insight into the challenges he faced in a highly charged political context, Sir Chris explained his approach to handling information shared by colleagues in confidence.
Where I thought that was political I stayed well clear of it and if I had information I would keep it to myself.
When asked to clarify whether he had passed on differences of opinion between the UK Government and devolved nations, Sir Chris said: “Where I felt that wasn’t breaching a confidentiality point, or where I thought there was going to be no issues. I had no illusions that some of the issues involved were political.
“Where I thought that was political, I stayed well clear of it and if I had information, I would keep it to myself.
“Sometimes I knew things that political leaders in England didn’t know. When the UK Government did not know and it was appropriate that I didn’t pass them on, I would have taken the judgement that it was a perfectly reasonable thing to do having presumably discussed this with (Chief Medical Officer for Scotland) Sir Gregor (Smith).”
Earlier Sir Chris was asked to comment on a text exchange between then health secretary Mr Hancock and Boris Johnson in the early months of 2020.
Mr Hancock referenced the then prime minister’s concern that the Government’s messaging on Covid-19 was “getting over-complicated”.
He said Sir Chris had suggested a simple way of describing what the Government wants the public to do, citing the phrase “If you are ill, stay home”.
Mr Hancock then added: “However, [Sir Chris] thinks that the Scots are going soft on mass gatherings and Nicola (Sturgeon) has decided she definitely wants to move on some totemic cancellations.”
In a question to Sir Chris, Claire Mitchell KC, on behalf of the Scottish bereaved, said: “Do the comments on ‘going soft’ and the phraseology ‘totemic’ reflect your views at the time?”
Sir Chris responded: “I certainly would not have used a phrase like ‘going soft’, that would be the interpretation of Mr Hancock.
“I must be identifying that I felt that in Scotland there was a greater concern about mass gatherings than in England.
“I think that is a perfectly appropriate thing to state as a point of fact, provided I didn’t think it was breaching any confidence.
“Do not take these words as my words or my views. Take the general point that I’m making that there were major differences of opinion across the UK, which I think is a reasonable thing to so.”
On Monday, Sir Chris told the inquiry that the Government’s decision not shut down mass gatherings in March 2020 was “logically incoherent” as it sent an “unhelpful” message to the public on ministers’ views of risk.