Source · Select Committees · Science, Innovation and Technology Committee
Recommendation 11
11
Not Addressed
Paragraph: 86
Transparency in the evidence behind Government decisions enables higher quality decision-making through scrutiny, and better...
Recommendation
Transparency in the evidence behind Government decisions enables higher quality decision-making through scrutiny, and better understanding of the reasons for those decisions. While calls for the publication of SAGE evidence from this Committee and many others were eventually heeded, it is regrettable that a significant amount of time passed before a regular publication rhythm was established. However, we acknowledge that in emergencies, where evidence is subject to great uncertainty, careful thought must be given to the way information is communicated and presented, given the context at the time. During those crucial early weeks of the pandemic—in which important decisions were made by the Government—public understanding and scrutiny was hampered by a lack of transparency. For example, when details of the 16 March Imperial College report were made public, it was not known what other evidence was being considered by SAGE and the Government. It is regrettable that a repeat of this scenario occurred on 31 October, ahead of the The UK response to covid-19: use of scientific advice 77 second national lockdown in England, where there was a delay in publishing the data behind the modelling used by SAGE. Presenting a graph to the public including a scenario of 4,000 deaths per day—based on out-of-date information and without a clearly marked source—risked, as indicated by the Office for Statistics Regulation, causing public confusion and undermining confidence in the statistics, and in our view, causing public alarm beyond what was justified. We agree with the assessment of the Office for Statistics Regulation and urge the Government and its advisers to ensure that analysis selected for public presentation meets high standards of rigour and relevance.
Government response summary AI-generated
The government's response describes its efforts to understand the wider health impacts of Covid-19 and the methodology for reporting deaths, but it does not address the committee's specific recommendation regarding the rigour and relevance of analysis selected for public presentation to avoid public alarm.
Summary of the government's response below — read the verbatim text to verify.
Paragraph Reference:
86
Government Response
Not Addressed
HM Government · verbatim extract
Not Addressed
The Government is committed to working in a way that is open and transparent about the relevant data and scientific advice used to inform the response to the pandemic. The Government will publish scientific advice in a timely fashion subject, always, to the well-established principles of protecting national security, respecting commercial confidentiality when necessary, allowing space for policy development, and the need to protect the rights of individuals. Therefore, decisions around the release of scientific advice will continue to be made as circumstances dictate but with the default position being that data and advice should be released. The Joint Biosecurity Centre (JBC), as a Directorate of NHS Test and Trace within the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC), gathers, interprets and analyses a range of data. The Government has always sought to be as clear and transparent as possible during the pandemic about how data has been used to inform decisions regarding national and local restrictions designed to limit the spread of the virus. The vast majority of the data used by the JBC to advise Ministers is already publicly available, including testing data, the information that Public Health England (PHE) publishes, and data from the Office for National Statistics (ONS). The Government Office for Science (GO-Science) is committed to being as transparent as possible with regards to the science advice that informs decisions. Due to the nature of the Covid-19 emergency, its duration, and the intensity of the public’s interest GO-Science has, while the pandemic has been in progress, released 684 papers and minutes (as at 30.04.2021) tabled to Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE). However, the right balance must continue to be achieved between the requirement and ambition for transparency, the need to maintain the trust of scientists who provide advice, protecting personal information and national security information. Space also needs to be protected, as part of the policy-making process, for the due consideration of the advice by Ministers and officials.
Read the full response on Parliament ↗