The Prime Minister misled Parliament when he claimed that ministers did not know that Covid-19 could be passed on by people without symptoms at the start of the pandemic, Labour have claimed.
The High Court ruled on Wednesday that the Government had acted unlawfully when it ordered the transfer of patients from hospitals to care homes without testing them for coronavirus in March 2020.
Bereaved families say the policy allowed the virus to rip through care home residents and cause a “shocking death toll”.
At PMQs after the ruling, the Prime Minister said: “What we didn’t know in particular, was that Covid could be transmitted asymptomatically in the way that it was.”
Yet the High Court judgment listed at least 20 occasions between January and March 2020, before the policy was introduced, when the risk of asymptomatic transmission was raised by top scientific advisers and even junior ministers.
Raising a point of order in parliament on Thursday, shadow Commons leader Thangnam Debbonaire said: “I am afraid that I believe the Prime Minister may have inadvertently misled the House, because on 28 January 2020 advice from the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies … on asymptomatic transmission included that ‘early indications imply some is occurring’.
“On 24 February The Lancet … published a paper which stated that ‘infected individuals can be infectious before they become symptomatic’, and on 13 March the chief scientific adviser, Sir Patrick Vallance, told the Today programme that ‘it’s quite likely that there is some degree of symptomatic transmission’.
“Yet it was not until 15 April that the Government guidance was changed to require patients to be tested before being discharged to care homes.
“That appears to us to contradict what the Prime Minister said yesterday. I am sure that is inadvertent, but can you, Mr Speaker, advise me on how we can best ensure the Prime Minister returns to the House and corrects the record?”
Commons Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle replied that it was “vital that statements made in the House are accurate” adding: “What I would say is that I am sure nobody would want to leave an inaccuracy, and I would have thought they would wish to correct the record so that it is not left in abeyance.”
The Speaker said he was sure “a correction will be forthcoming if one is needed; I would think it is better for the House to have accurate information, so let’s see what we can do”.
However the Prime Minister’s official spokesman denied that Mr Johnson had misled the Commons.
He said: “No, I think the Prime Minister was being clear. I’m sure you’ll remember there was a great deal of characteristics about this virus being reported at this time – the Government cannot simply act on unsubstantiated reports, it’s the Government’s job to consider all the advice and act accordingly.”
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.