A COVID adviser to the Scottish Government has said she was “really frustrated” by England’s strategy for managing the virus.
Devi Sridhar, who is the chair of global public health at the University of Edinburgh, was questioned at the UK Covid-19 Inquiry about an article she had contributed to entitled “Scotland could eliminate coronavirus if it were not for England”, which was published in June 2020.
In a statement she submitted to the inquiry, she explained how she offered her opinion on the two different approaches taken by England and Scotland.
She said the Scottish strategy “seemed to aim for maximum suppression”, while England’s approach appeared to be “to keep Covid-19 within NHS capacity and try to get back to normal as soon as possible”.
Throughout the questioning by Jamie Dawson KC, she talked about difficulties with achieving consensus between the two nations which she felt there needed to be more of.
READ MORE: Jason Leitch responds to 'pre-bed ritual' WhatsApp row
Asked if she felt this article and her contribution to it helped with that, she revealed her frustration with England’s approach.
She told the inquiry: “No it didn’t [help] but I should say when you talk to journalists you don’t know what the title is going to be, you don’t know what you’re going to be quoted on, you don’t know what’s going to be in it and if you take away the title – and I went back to read the article – I actually was emphasising we needed to have cohesion across the approaches.
“If I’m honest, I was really frustrated with not understanding England’s strategy because we are linked together.
“It did seem to be so clear that given the levels of immunity, given the level of death, given we didn’t want to have another lockdown, which was catastrophic in terms of the harms it raised, why you wouldn’t go for maximum suppression and just try to simmer Covid within a level.
“You could make a whole book about all my missteps with journalists and articles and media coverage, but the point was we didn’t have consensus and I really felt we should have consensus because it seemed clear to me what should be the steps going forward.”
READ MORE: Nicola Sturgeon WhatsApp: The Scottish Government policy, explained
Sridhar earlier said there was a level of “frustration” around science being reserved as she branded Sage – the UK’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies – “incredibly secretive”.
The inquiry also heard how Nicola Sturgeon had warned Sridhar – who said she was subjected to death threats while she was an adviser - that the media could “twist” her words.
In a message exchange, Sridhar told the former first minister her words had been “twisted” in some articles by the media.
Sturgeon responded saying: “Don’t worry – I fully understand how the media can twist words, sometimes deliberately.
“I think what you say is powerful and clear though – and has had a big influence on my thinking.”
Sturgeon additionally said to Sridhar when she expressed concerns about breaking protocol that tackling the virus was more important.
Messages on Twitter/X between the pair in June 2020 showed Sridhar told Sturgeon she had drafted a note for the chief medical officer on key steps to managing outbreak in Scotland looking forward.
She said: “I’m happy to share a draft with you as well but don’t want to overstep or break protocol.”
Sturgeon replied: “That would be very helpful, (Don’t worry about protocol – tackling the virus more important than that and I’ll handle any issues on that front).”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel