By Ben Kerrigan-
The COVID-19 inquiry has unveiled startling revelations regarding the UK government’s handling of the pandemic crisis.
Testimonies and behind-the-scenes insights have shed light on the failures within the Cabinet Office and the internal tensions within No. 10, offering a candid look at the decision-making process during a tumultuous period.
At the heart of the inquiry is the testimony of Michael Reynolds, (pictured)a former political private secretary (PPS) to Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
Reynolds’ account highlights critical issues that plagued the government’s response to the COVID-19 crisis.
Reynolds said that the primary problem resided in the Cabinet Office’s incapacity to transition effectively from the planning phase to the operational phase of response.
The former aide changed the settings on a senior government WhatsApp group to delete messages automatically while the official Covid inquiry was being organised, the inquiry has heard.
The WhatsApp group, called ‘PM Updates’, contained Boris Johnson’s closest advisers and discussions within the group touched on key Covid policies – such as shielding the clinically vulnerable, and the Department of Health and Social Care’s plans for responding to the pandemic.
However, as plans for the inquiry took shape, Martin Reynolds – Johnson’s principal private secretary at the time – set the group so that messages sent would vanish after a period of time. It means potentially key discussions that took place are unavailable as evidence.
Hugo Keith, counsel to the inquiry, told Reynolds: “This was hugely important information. You were telling the prime minister, daily, hourly, by minute, information he needed to know.”
The lack of preparedness at the departmental level is a glaring shortcoming that Reynolds acknowledges.
Plans were not adequately in place, not only within individual departments but also at the Cabinet Office itself, where the machinery to manage the crisis should have been well-oiled.
This failure is indicative of the larger problem at hand—the Cabinet Office’s inability to fulfill its essential role in operating the crisis response mechanism.
When pressed further, Reynolds concedes that the Cabinet Office failed in its duty. It was incapable of taking command of the situation and ensuring a cohesive and effective response to the pandemic.
In response to a question by Hugo Keith as to whether there was a “plan” to deal with coronavirus, Mr Reynolds said there were existing structures, but they were “inadequate” for the scale of the COVID crisis.
“It was very clear that plans were inadequate,” he says, before explaining that “everyone is having to operate without a proper playbook”.
Asked if Boris Johnson ever said that Covid was not a big deal, that it would be like swine flu, and that the biggest danger was talking the economy into a slump.
(Many accounts, including from people like Dominic Cummings, say this is exactly what Johnson thought at this point.)
Reynolds said he cannot remember that. But he does think Johnson thought that “if we reacted in certain ways, we could generate a sense of panic and concern that could be counterproductive”.
Lead barrister, Hugo Keith KC, asked Martin Reynolds whether Boris Johnson’s concern about the health of the economy impeded swift and decisive action to limit the transmission of the virus.
Mr Reynolds said “panic and concern” would have been counterproductive, adding many government departments were not “crisis ready,” which meant the government was playing “catch up” in a vast number of areas.
Downing Street has said the use of disappearing WhatsApp messages is permitted as civil servants and ministerial private offices are required to record and log official decisions for the official record.
Asked if Rishi Sunak thinks something should be done about the use of the feature by ministers and officials, the PM’s spokesman said: “There are rules set out for this already that were updated in the guidance from March that says the use of disappearing messages is permitted as civil servants and ministerial private offices are required to record and log official decisions and views for the record, where it is relevant and appropriate.”
The inquiry heard that Reynold changed the settings on a senior government WhatsApp group to delete messages automatically while the official Covid inquiry was being organised.
AD: Capeesh Restaurant
The WhatsApp group, called ‘PM Updates’, contained Boris Johnson’s closest advisers and discussions within the group touched on key Covid policies – such as shielding the clinically vulnerable, and the Department of Health and Social Care’s plans for responding to the pandemic.
But as plans for the inquiry took shape, Martin Reynolds – Johnson’s principal private secretary at the time – set the group so that messages sent would vanish after a period of time.
The implication was that potentially key discussions that took place are unavailable as evidence.
AD: Oysterian Sea Food Restaurant And Bar
Hugo Keith, counsel to the inquiry, told Reynolds: “This was hugely important information. You were telling the prime minister, daily, hourly, by minute, information he needed to know.”
“Why did you turn on the disappearing message function around the time that the PM announced a public inquiry into the Covid pandemic?”
Reynolds said: “I can guess or I can speculate, but I cannot recall exactly why I did so… I don’t believe it was intended to prevent the inquiry from having sight of this.”
He also admitted that discussions about establishing the official inquiry were well under way when he took this decision to automatically delete messages.
Reynolds was reminded of Johnson’s own statements to Parliament when announcing the Covid inquiry in May 2021.
Johnson had said: “This inquiry must be able to look at the events of the last year in the cold light of day and identify the key issues that will make a difference for the future, free to scrutinise every document
Number 10 has said the use of disappearing WhatsApp messages is permitted as civil servants and ministerial private offices are required to record and log official decisions for the official record.
Asked if Rishi Sunak thinks something should be done about the use of the feature by ministers and officials, the PM’s spokesman told journalists: “There are rules set out for this already that were updated in the guidance from March that says the use of disappearing messages is permitted as civil servants and ministerial private offices are required to record and log official decisions and views for the record, where it is relevant and appropriate.”
No. 10’s Internal Turmoil
AD: Heritage And Restaurant Lounge Bar
The turmoil within No. 10 Downing Street, the Prime Minister’s official residence, is another aspect unveiled in Reynolds’ testimony. The inquiry delves into the extent to which internal tensions, driven by Boris Johnson’s inexperience and divergent priorities from Dominic Cummings, hindered the government’s response to the pandemic.
Reynolds paints a picture of a significant shift following the 2019 general election. Before the election, the government’s focus was heavily on Brexit.
However, after securing a majority and achieving Brexit, the agenda underwent a substantial transformation.
Decision-making now revolved around a long-term program, as Reynolds recalls meetings at Chequers where far-reaching choices were being made. This shift in focus opened the door to internal tensions and unease in the civil service.
Dominic Cummings, who held significant influence as the Prime Minister’s chief adviser, held a different vision from Boris Johnson, leading to a divergence in political priorities. Cummings’ reference to recruiting “weirdos and misfits” for No. 10 further contributed to an atmosphere of unease.
One particularly telling point of contention was the existence of a “shitlist” containing names of staff whose jobs were considered at risk. This environment of uncertainty and internal conflict diverted energy and attention away from critical issues, leaving No. 10 distracted as the pandemic loomed.
The Optimism Bias
Reynolds’ testimony also delves into the optimism bias that permeated the government’s approach to COVID-19 in February 2020. Boris Johnson, as described by Reynolds, is instinctively optimistic and sees it as his leadership duty to exude confidence. This optimism was widely shared at the highest levels of government.
However, the key point of contention, as noted by Dominic Cummings, was whether this optimism was justified by the facts.
Reynolds highlights a note from February 2020 that seemed to indicate the government had a firm grip on the challenge posed by the pandemic.
However, within a few weeks, the government was planning substantial changes in response to the growing crisis. Reynolds concedes, “With the benefit of hindsight, it does appear that we should have been far more vigorously testing our arrangements for what was coming, and that would arguably have made a big difference when the crisis hit.”
Reynolds’ Relationship with Boris Johnson
The inquiry also explores Reynolds’ relationship with Boris Johnson, with specific focus on whether Reynolds was too deferential to the Prime Minister.
Reynolds contends that he provided clear advice to Johnson when it was warranted, emphasizing that this advice was primarily related to organizational arrangements.
Cobra Meeting
Martin Reynolds was asked after a short break about an email chain from January 2020, which mentioned the need for a COBRA meeting in the wake of suspected COVID case being detected in Glasgow.
Hugo Keith, counsel for the inquiry, described this as an example of Mr Reynolds being informed of an “important event”.
Boris Johnson, then the prime minister, “did not chair this COBRA”, Mr Keith says.
Instead, the meeting was chaired by the then-health secretary, Matt Hancock.
Mr Reynolds says it was the prime minister’s view that there should be a COBRA meeting held. However, he says he “cannot” answer why it was not chaired by Mr Johnson.
The former civil servant is asked if he was aware by the date of the email – 23 January 2020 – the “extent to which the virus had spread” abroad.
Former principal private secretary to Boris Johnson, Mr Reynolds, said he would have been aware of some elements of this.
Mr Reynolds said it isn’t his view that having the health secretary chair a COBRA meeting at this time was “inappropriate”.
The inquiry is then shown an email between cabinet secretary Mark Sedwill and Martin Reynolds, which says Mr Johnson had a “strong desire” to be spending “more time discussing these issues with his ministers”.
Reynolds’ candor throughout his testimony, along with his willingness to provide insights into key decisions and internal tensions, has offered a rare glimpse into the inner workings of the UK government during the early days of the COVID-19 crisis.
The inquiry continues to unravel the complexities of the response to the pandemic, raising important questions about preparedness, decision-making, and leadership at the highest levels of government.