Rishi Sunak has defended policies encouraging customers back to the hospitality and leisure trade at the height of the pandemic as a "matter of social justice".
The Prime Minister - who had been appointed as Chancellor in February 2020, just weeks before the UK was plunged into lockdown - told the Covid inquiry that Britain is a "consumption-driven economy" where "our ability to pay for public services is a function of consumption being strong".
He said that the Treasury was alarmed after international polling indicated that there was "much greater reticence" among Brits to return to normal activities even once restrictions eased from June onwards, which "would have a genuine impact on people's lives and jobs".
Mr Sunak, appearing for the first time at the inquiry, said: "Hospitality, leisure tourism, retail, disproportionately employed people who were the most vulnerable in society: those on the lowest incomes, people coming off welfare, women, ethnic minorities, those working part-time.
"So those jobs, I think, as a matter of social justice, were particularly important to try and safeguard."
READ MORE:
- Covid's silent spread: Why asymptomatic transmission took the world by surprise
- Boris Johnson tells Covid inquiry he 'got on well' with Sturgeon
- Clownish, callous, or contrite - What Boris Johnson appeared at Covid inquiry?
Evidence led at the inquiry has shown that key scientific advisers had sometimes referred to the then-Chancellor as "Dr Death" over controversial policies such as the Eat Out to Help Out discount scheme used to promote half-price restaurant meals UK-wide during August 2020.
England's chief medical officer Professor Sir Chris Whitty is said to have privately dubbed it 'eat out to help the virus'.
The probe has heard previously that Sir Chris and former chief scientific adviser Sir Patrick Vallance were not aware of the scheme until it was announced on July 8.
Mr Sunak said they had "ample" opportunity to raise objections during subsequent government meetings on July 16, 22 and August 6, but did not do so.
He noted that minutes of the August 6 meeting "show that returning to schools was the single riskiest element of the Government's plan".
Mr Sunak said that he did not believe Eat Out to Help Out posed a risk because an "extraordinary amount of work had gone into the safe opening of hospitality" and the aim was to "make sure the capacity available was actually used".
He said: "Indoor hospitality had been opened as part of the May roadmap, and not opened in a casual or wanton way - it had been opened with a significant set of restrictions including social distancing which limited and reduced significantly the typical occupancy of a restaurant, with one way systems, with signage, with screens, with shift work, with contactless payments.
"There were 55 pages of government guidance for the hospitality industry."
Mr Sunak denied suggestions the scheme had been cut short due to concerns it was boosting transmission, insisting that it was "always intended to be temporary".
Scientists have the told the inquiry that some of the increase in Covid cases and deaths around August 2020 may be linked to the extra mixing Eat Out to Help Out encouraged, but Mr Sunak stressed that countries including France and Spain had experienced much sharper surges without any equivalent initiative.
Eat Out to Help Out "was in no way responsible for second wave, which happened in every other country in Europe", said Mr Sunak.
Aamer Anwar, lead solicitor for the Scottish Covid Bereaved, said the Eat Out to Help Out scheme "subsidised the spread of the pandemic into autumn", adding: "He was projected as the ‘golden boy’, but he failed to extend the furlough scheme, refused financial levers to the devolved nations or the metro mayors, he failed to increase statutory sick pay, forcing front-line workers, the poor and vulnerable back to work."
Mr Sunak also told the the inquiry there was less consensus among the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) during the pandemic response than was being communicated to the public.
"The science itself was not certain," he said.
"It was not singular, there was more debate about it. I'm not sure that nuance was communicated, perhaps, as much as it should have been so that people could understand the decisions we were making.
"It wasn't as simple as crystal clear science view, crystal clear some other view. The science itself had a range of views."
While previous witnesses have painted a picture of Number 10 as "dysfunctional" during the run up to the first lockdown, with former Prime Minister Boris Johnson portrayed as an indecisive "trolley" flip-flopping on policy, Mr Sunak stressed that this was not his experience.
He said it situation in Number 10 "felt fine to me" and he did not feel "shut out or unable to participate", though he added that economic advice "was not driving the conversation" during March 2020.
Mr Sunak said it was his "strong recollection" that the then-PM "acted on the advice put in front of him from SAGE" and only changed course if circumstances or advice changed.
However, he said there would be "vigorous debate" prior to decisions, which was "right...because these were incredibly consequential decisions for tens of millions of people".
Hugo Keith KC, lead counsel to the inquiry, asked Mr Sunak whether he was "surprised" by the "relative absence of debate" on March 23 2020 as to whether a mandatory stay-at-home order should be postponed pending the impact of measures already taken - including the closure of schools, hospitality, leisure and non-essential retail.
Data presented over the weekend of March 14 and 15 2020 appeared to show the virus spreading more quickly than scientists had expected, leading to fears that the NHS was at “imminent” risk of being overwhelmed.
As a result, the NHS suspended all non-urgent elective activity and routine screening.
However, in hindsight it became clear that the spread of Covid had already slowed prior to lockdown and at the peak of the first wave Covid patients were occupying around a third of all available beds.
Mr Sunak said that by March 23 "what people talked about a lot was Lombardy" - a reference to the northern Italian region where hospital beds ran out due to soaring Covid admissions.
He added: "That was very much in people's consciousness and needing to avoid that happening in the UK.
"That was the emotional backdrop."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel