header-logo header-logo

The COVID inquiry: what’s relevant?

29 June 2023 / John Gould
Issue: 8031 / Categories: Opinion , Covid-19 , Public
printer mail-detail
128487
Who gets to decide what information the COVID inquiry should see? John Gould suggests that the government, by objecting to handing over material, may have forgotten its proper role in supporting the work of a public inquiry

Nearly as many people have died in the UK from COVID as British military personnel died in the six years of World War II. It is hard to overestimate the importance of establishing the facts of the pandemic, without doubt or spin—not only for the victims, but also so that hindsight may help us when, inevitably, the next pandemic comes.

Few would doubt the wisdom of establishing a public inquiry independent of those who found themselves having to make decisions in the most challenging of circumstances. It was obviously right that the inquiry be established under the Inquiries Act 2005 (IA 2005) so that witnesses could be compelled to attend and documents demanded with the reinforcement of criminal sanctions for non-compliance.

Now, an esoteric dispute has arisen between the inquiry and the government

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll