Few MPs in the House of Commons have been as eloquent on either side of the lockdown argument as Charles Walker. The MP for Broxbourne returned to the chamber yesterday afternoon to take aim at the scientists sitting on Sage — the government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies. Walker — who has accused Boris Johnson of treating MPs like dogs and carried around a pint of milk in protest — began his speech by contrasting the status of elected members with that of the unelected ‘experts’:
As you know, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sage has huge power over our lives. It has power over whom we hug and hold. It has power over which businesses open and which businesses close. In essence, it has power over who keeps their job and who loses their job. We, too, in this place have great power, but our power is matched by accountability. Accountability is very important in the exercising of power, so I want to suggest some reforms to Sage — some quite technical reforms.
Walker began by suggesting greater financial transparency for Sage members, in line with MPs’ own declarations about their outside earnings, interests and pensions. This would ‘help our constituents know whether or not the people making these decisions are sharing the pain or are insulated from the pain’ given the ‘new satanic mills’ many young people now find themselves in, working from bedrooms turned makeshift offices. He then turned his guns on the current trend of advisers appearing on national television to give their opinions on the pandemic:
There should also be far greater personal accountability. There should be no more, ‘Here is Sir Mark Walport — of Sage, but here in a personal capacity’. Nonsense! He is there because he is a member of Sage. We should also have elections to Sage, so we could see Sir Mark Walport, Professor Susan Michie, John Edmunds and regular talking heads in our TV studios challenged by people with a different perspective—people such as Professor Karol Sikora, Professor Paul Dolan, who is an expert on human behaviour and quality of life, and Professor Ellen Townsend, who has a huge interest in the welfare of children and adolescents who are now being plagued by anxiety and eating disorders.
At this point fellow Covid Recovery Group ringleader Steve Baker intervened to ask about the ‘risk averse’ instincts of experts who do not want to be blamed for a disaster. Walker agreed with Baker’s call for ‘competitive multidisciplinary expert advice with red team challenge’ and mooted elections to Sage where the public could presumably vote for scientists hostile towards another lockdown or those in favour such as those on Independent Sage. Walker concluded by criticising the scientists for undermining Boris Johnson, likening it to generals undermining politicians in a war with a running commentary:
There is an alternative to elections and to financial disclosure, which is that the Prime Minister could say to members of Sage, “Here it is: you can either advise me or you can advise the “Today” programme, Sky and Channel 4, but you can’t do both. You can either be a serious scientist at this moment in time advising your Government or you can be a media talking head building a career outside Sage, but you can’t do both”. I think that is a perfectly legitimate thing to do. We would not expect our generals to give a running commentary on a war, undermining politicians. It is just not acceptable. It is just not acceptable, Mr Deputy Speaker. Can you imagine if the Clerks who advise my Administration Committee were going out and briefing what they would like to see my Committee do and pushing us into a corner all the time? It would not be tolerable. It would not be tolerated in this place, and it should not be tolerated by No. 10.
You can watch the full speech below.
Comments