(C) OpenDemocracy This story was originally published by OpenDemocracy and is unaltered. . . . . . . . . . . Covid inquiry: Welsh health chiefs get off with minimal scrutiny in rapid-fire day [1] [] Date: 2024-03 A pattern emerged at today’s hearing of the UK Covid inquiry in Cardiff: clear questions from the lawyers leading the charge, followed by evasive answers that needed more probing but received none. Decision-making in the Welsh government is getting just three weeks of scrutiny as part of the wider UK inquiry. Bereaved families in Wales have criticised outgoing first minister Mark Drakeford’s refusal to give the nation a full probe of its own, and at times today it felt like lawyers were in a rush to get through all the witnesses – there are 12 squeezed into this second week alone. Concerns that the Welsh government was too slow to act in early 2020; the admission of hospital patients to care homes; Wales’ Covid-19 testing capacity, PPE provision; and the impact of the pandemic on Black and minority ethnic healthcare workers in Wales all featured in questions put to Andrew Goodall, now permanent secretary to the Welsh government and the former chief executive of NHS Wales, and Tracey Cooper, Goodall’s replacement at Public Health Wales. Some topics were discussed for just ten or 15 minutes, while the well being of Black and minority ethnic healthcare workers was given just under three. Get our free Daily Email Get one whole story, direct to your inbox every weekday. Sign up now Late into Cooper’s evidence session, inquiry counsel Bo-eun Jung asked the Public Health Wales exec a series of direct questions on whether the Welsh government was too slow to act in early 2020. “You say in your statement that from the second half of February the Welsh government stepped up and that there was a key change of tone,” she recounted. “Do you think that that key change of tone from the government came too late?” Cooper’s response, presented here in full, was lengthy but not illuminating. “Bearing in mind by the end of January we were seven days a week as an organisation,” she began, “we were working really, really closely with the chief medical officer, as I mentioned earlier – in a pincer movement, often – and there were some elements that, as I described, holding onto the NHS and running with them, that perhaps would have benefited from a little bit more performance management just to help people get a bit faster on some of the areas – notwithstanding the fact that they were helping. I think it would have benefited if there had been more proactive engagement earlier.” Inquiry chair Heather Hallett attempted to clarify: “By ministers?” Not necessarily by ministers, Cooper replied, more by a collective within the Welsh government and health agencies – an answer that of course could still mean ministers were to blame. Jung had time for a rare follow-up, gamely rephrasing the question: “Is it fair to say that the Welsh government’s delay immobilising and taking control of a national, coordinated response deprived Wales the precious time to get ready, to fortify itself for the pandemic?” Again, no direct response on whether this was a fair statement was elicited from the witness. Jung was lucky on a third occasion, just about, when she asked: “Did Public Health Wales do enough to make the government understand how serious the situation was?” “You can always do more,” said Cooper. “We did a lot. We were literally with colleagues mobilising the NHS, trying to be two steps ahead. I’m not sure what more we could have done – perhaps a formal letter from me, but I’m not sure it would have made much difference.” No time was spent asking why a letter from Cooper wouldn’t have made a difference or why she didn’t pursue it anyway. The witnesses may have been evasive, but some blame falls on the inquiry itself, whose counsel kept failing to ask follow-up questions – this was just one example. During Cooper’s evidence, the issue of a mass testing centre established in Cardiff by the UK government without the knowledge of the Welsh government or Public Health Wales was also briefly raised – and confirmed, with a disbelieving shake of the head, from Hallett. Cooper’s evidence followed a session with Goodall, who spent much of the morning suggesting that with hindsight pandemic response in Wales could have been different, but that the approach at the time was considered broadly right. During Goodall’s evidence, the inquiry heard that “funding limitations” meant the “firebreak” lockdown of October 2020 wasn’t as long as ministers would have liked. We also learnt that Wales’ politicians and health leaders in February 2020 had been following an assessment by the chief medical officer for Wales that coronavirus was a “low impact” virus despite scenes of devastation that were by that point emerging in Asia and mainland Europe. Yet these insights were only briefly dealt with, and counsel seemed keen to move on each time, eschewing follow-up questions. The inquiry has already heard evidence from chief medical officer Frank Atherton, so there’s no chance to ask him more about any of this in the remainder of the module. The inquiry was shown an email from Wales’ then deputy minister for economy and transport Lee Waters on 22 March 2020, asking for advice from the office of the deputy minister of health and social services. Waters said in the email he had been contacted by a care home that was “being asked to take patients from what they term a ‘Covid-19 positive hospital’”. Inquiry counsel Tom Poole KC asked Goodall if this meant the Welsh government had been pushing for patients to be discharged into care homes on the eve of lockdown despite knowing there was a lack of testing. Goodall replied that there was a need to ensure “patient flow” through hospitals was protected before questioning moved on to testing capacity in the future. Hallett got involved again following a lengthy description by Goodall of how the NHS was preparing and planning its response to Covid-19 at the end of January and into February 2020. “What did you do apart from set up groups? What did you do?” the chair asked. After a further prompt for clarification, Goodall replied that during February chief executives of health organisations were revisiting “continuity plans” and “capacity plans”. “There was some correspondence that was in the system that was asking them to get prepared at this early phase for a need for response,” he said, “but what we weren’t doing at that point was translating it into full capacity plans for the NHS in Wales. That was something that took place in early March.” Hallett apologised for interrupting and the counsel’s questioning moved on. A spokesperson for Covid Bereaved Families for Justice Cymru told openDemocracy: ”It is becoming very evident that when Heather Hallett explained at the outset that the inquiry could only scrutinise the 'significant' matters, that this was true. We’ve seen a pattern of her having to cut short questioning.” ”We’ve been calling for a #WalesCovidInquiry for over 2 years. Hopefully, it’s becoming clearer to everyone why it’s so needed. Why the Welsh Government would be happy with only 12 days of scrutiny in Wales compared to 35 days on UK Gov in the same module is beyond us.” We are now six days into the Welsh module of the UK-wide inquiry – and there have been some revelations. We learnt that Welsh ministers joined their counterparts in Westminster and Holyrood in systematically deleting WhatsApp messages, that a detailed plan for care homes in the early stages of the pandemic had been deprioritised, and that there was surprise from Wales’ top scientists that lockdown wasn’t brought in earlier in the UK. But whether the thousands of bereaved families in Wales feel health chiefs are being adequately held to account in this rapid-fire mini-inquiry is another matter. The inquiry continues. openDemocracy is fundraising to pay reporters to cover every day of the public hearings. Please support us by donating here. [END] --- [1] Url: https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/covid-19-inquiry-welsh-public-health-wales-nhs/ Published and (C) by OpenDemocracy Content appears here under this condition or license: Creative Commons CC BY-ND 4.0. via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds: gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/opendemocracy/