Dominic Cummings was “the most empowered chief of staff Downing Street has seen” and brought an “unusual dynamic” to Number 10, the UK Covid-19 Inquiry has heard.
Mr Cummings, then-prime minister Boris Johnson’s former chief adviser, became well-known to the public when it emerged he had driven to County Durham beauty spot Barnard Castle during the first lockdown.
He is due to give evidence to the inquiry on Tuesday.
His name was repeatedly referenced in Monday’s session, as Mr Johnson’s then-principal private secretary Martin Reynolds described the power he believed Mr Cummings was able to wield in Downing Street.
Giving evidence, Mr Reynolds told the inquiry there had been an “unusual dynamic around Dominic Cummings”.
He added: “In my view, he was the most empowered chief of staff Downing Street has seen and was the person whose writ ruled, who was able to drive things through the machine in the way I suspect few other chiefs of staff have done.”
Mr Reynolds described how there had been an “unease” around a so-called “shitlist” of civil servants, as the inquiry heard about the internal workings of Downing Street and the Cabinet Office before the pandemic.
Mr Reynolds said: “There was, I think, quite a bit of unease in the civil service around, and excuse my language, the so-called shitlist of people who were thought to be risks in what was perceived to be a potentially more muscular approach to the civil service.”
Mr Reynolds also rejected a suggestion made by Mr Cummings in his statement to the inquiry that the former principal private secretary was “too deferential” to Mr Johnson and had “shied away from confronting him with hard issues”.
Mr Reynolds said he had given Mr Johnson “very clear advice when I disagreed with him”, but added that those occasions related to “issues where I felt it was my role as the principal private secretary to step in and give that advice”.
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