Sunak’s strange Covid Inquiry appearance

Rishi Sunak had a strange pandemic. He spent a lot of it in government meetings, the details of which he could not recall, and with people who he always got on with. That was the overall thrust of his evidence to the Covid Inquiry today. The only phrase that came up more than a variation on ‘I do not recall the specific details’ was ‘referring to the Spectator article’ (you can re-read this now vital piece of inquiry evidence here). 

There was one thing the Prime Minister can recollect in sharp detail from his time as chancellor, though, and that’s that absolutely no one raised any concerns with him about the Eat Out to Help Out scheme between it being proposed and going live.

‘There was almost a month between announcement and commencement’, he told the inquiry. In this instance he could not recall anyone saying anything, not because he was hazy on the detail, but because – according to him – they really hadn’t said anything.

‘They had ample opportunity’ to raise the concerns in that month, he said, pointing out that the minutes of meetings where future risks were discussed suggested that no concerns were raised by the Chief Medical Officer Chris Whitty or other government advisers such as Patrick Vallance. The claim from Whitty and Vallance, by the way, is that they weren’t consulted on the scheme, and would have raised concerns if they had been. Sunak did concede that he hadn’t formally consulted the pair, arguing: ‘This was a micro policy to make sure that that capacity which the scientists had already said was part of an overall package which could be safely delivered, was actually used. And it was done very much in that context.’ But when shown an email from Treasury officials warning that the reinfection rate could rise above 1 as a result of policies to open up the economy. ‘I don’t recall seeing that email. That didn’t come to me.’

It is interesting that of all the things Sunak felt he had to defend today, the now-notorious attempt to get the hospitality sector back on its feet was the one he made the most effort over. He insisted that jobs in hospitality were in grave danger without the scheme, and pointed out that as chancellor, his role had been to consider the economic impact of measures.

Sunak does get rather tetchy when he feels people questioning him aren’t getting his point, and there were little moments of passive aggression with Hugo Keith KC, including when the counsel to the inquiry asked him to slow down, and Sunak apologised, adding that he thought he’d just been told to move along more quickly. But his main irritation was clearly with the officials who he felt had unfairly blamed his scheme, rather than with ministerial colleagues, including Boris Johnson, who he was studiously neutral about. Perhaps the Prime Minister, having recently dumped his attempt to be the ‘change candidate’ in the next general election, felt that characterising the Johnson administration as being dysfunctional probably wouldn’t help him as he tries to persuade the electorate to stick with the Conservatives.