UK Covid inquiry begins first hearings in Edinburgh

The inquiry has moved to Edinburgh for a series of hearings known as Module 2A, which covers political decision-making by Scottish officials in response to the pandemic.

Sessions will also be held in Wales and Northern Ireland, with Baroness Heather Hallett emphasising that the inquiry is "for all four nations of the United Kingdom".

READ MORE: 

• Scottish ministers 'will be quizzed on WhatsApps' as 28,000 messages handed over 
• Why is the UK Covid inquiry coming to Scotland?
• Review of the Year: What have we learned from the Covid inquiries in 2023?

It follows on from weeks of evidence towards the end of 2023 which was focused on the response at a UK Government level.

In an opening statement to the inquiry, Mr Dawson said that Scotland had recorded comparatively lower levels of excess mortality versus the UK as a whole during the first and second Covid waves - which peaked in April and December of 2020.

However, "throughout mid to late-2021 Scotland had higher levels of excess mortality" and the impact of the disease "did not fall equally".

Up to the end of 2022, 70% of Covid deaths had occurred in people aged 75 or older.

Mortality was 2.5 time higher in the most deprived parts of Scotland with Pakistani communities and people with disabilities - particularly learning disabilities - disproportionately affected, added Mr Dawson, along with patients living with non-Covid conditions who "went unmonitored and untreated".

Aamer Anwar, lawyer for the Scottish Covid Bereaved, outside the UK inquiry in Edinburgh (Image: PA)

The day's proceedings began with emotive video testimonies from Scots who were directly affected by Covid and the measures taken to suppress it, including those who lost loved ones to the disease, whose lives have been ruined by long Covid, and whose physical and mental health deteriorated as services were suspended - some of which have never resumed.

In a statement solicitor Aamer Anwar, representing the Scottish Covid Bereaved group, said: “In the coming days we will hear testimony from those senior government ministers in Scotland and the former first minister, as well as senior civil servants.

"If the protection of life is the pre-eminent duty of every government owed to the people, then the massive numbers of those who died is the marker against which each government must be judged."

The inquiry also heard that some 20,000 small businesses closed during the pandemic and that 32% of Scotland's workforce was furloughed.

Mr Dawson said: "What we seek to do in this module is to understand decisions which were taken, why they were taken, in order to understand and ultimately assess whether they were reasonable, evidence-based, and in the best interests of the people of Scotland."

Summarising previous evidence to the inquiry relating to Scotland, Mr Dawson noted that relationships between the UK and Scottish Governments at a ministerial level had been "unusually poor" in the run up to Covid - partly due to a rift over Brexit and no-deal planning - and that, even prior to Covid, the capacity of NHS Scotland to provide healthcare was "already limited" as reflected by rising waiting times.

According to evidence from Professor Thomas Hale - who heads Oxford University's Covid-19 Government Response Tracker - Scotland ranks 38th globally for its death rate per capita from 2020 to 2022 and 66th for its stringency of measures.

Prof Hale had previously told the inquiry, said Mr Dawson, that the UK "was slower than the average country to adopt stricter measures across nearly every domain of response".

Mr Dawson added: "Speed matters. He was of the view that even a single day could have have significant impact on death tolls.

"However, he also expressed the view that once a certain scale of infection was reached, it was much harder for any policy involving the imposition of [non-pharmaceutical interventions] to have an effect."

Prof Hale had been supportive of lockdown "at least as far as suppressing the virus was concerned", said Mr Dawson, but it was clear that other countries had demonstrated that a rapid and comprehensive system of test, trace, and isolate - coupled with NPIs and limited lockdowns to respond to outbreaks - was a "viable" alternative.

Scotland hearings for the UK Covid inquiry are expected to continue until February 1 (Image: PA)

Mr Dawson said the inquiry will examine whether the Scottish Government should have acted sooner.

"Some may suggest it ought to have done so, despite the limitations of the constitutional framework," said Mr Dawson.

He noted that Professor Mark Woolhouse, an expert in infectious disease epidemiology, had written to Scotland's then-chief medical officer Dr Catherine Calderwood back in January 2020 warning of an impending catastrophe.

Prof Woolhouse had written that projections at the time indicated that "at least half the population would become infected over a year, gross mortality will triple - more at the epidemic peak - and the health system will become completely overwhelmed", adding: "Please note, this is not a worst case scenario - this is based on the World health Organisation's central estimates. The worst case scenario is considerably worse."

Mr Dawson also noted that a high-profile outbreak of Covid in February 2020 on board the British cruise ship, Diamond Princess - leading to it being quarantined for two weeks off Japan - should have triggered alarm bells.

He said: "Of the some 2,600 passengers and 1000 crew, over 500 people became infected.

"Early reports showed that around 18% of people who became infected had shown no symptoms - how was the possibility of asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic spread factored into the thinking or planning within the Scottish Government?"

Mr Dawson added: "It might be said that it is inevitable in situations of this nature that information will be limited and will not ever meet the standard of conclusive proof, meaning that the imperative to act will always be based on incomplete or non-ideal information.

"We will examine the extent to which Scottish ministers did what they could to equip themselves with the information which was available to assess when it was reasonable for them to act.

"Should they have known more?

"Should they have acted more quickly in response to the emerging lethal threat...In light of the emerging threat, why did Scottish Ministers not take - or seek to persuade the UK Government of the need to take - swifter, more decisive action, including ramping up testing capacity, other surveillance and supplies of personal protective equipment?"

The inquiry is expected to hear on Wednesday in relation to Covid statistical information available to ministers in Scotland.