The Covid Inquiry has been deeply flawed in its exposure of the Government’s response to the pandemic. Its latest report calls for an increase to the current £120,000 limit payable under the vaccine-compensation scheme, and for the process to be hastened. The report also proposes an adjustment to the current minimum level of vaccine-induced disability of 60%. These are all welcome findings. But there is a glaring omission here: the Inquiry fails to engage with the underlying ethical breach of the Government’s vaccine mandate campaign.

The argument advanced by the Inquiry for compensation is that the vaccine was recommended by public authorities, who therefore have a duty to those who have been adversely affected. However, the UK authorities did not just recommend the vaccine: they used fear and shame to pressure the public into taking it, going against basic principles of public health. Much of this is laid out in the Inquiry report, yet it inexplicably absolves the Government of wrongdoing.

Take the example of the 81 tragic deaths from thrombosis caused by the AstraZeneca vaccine. The report lays out how, despite having credible evidence that some deaths had likely been caused by the vaccine, the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation deliberately chose to delay alerting the public. Instead of condemning this suppression of vital safety information, the Inquiry concludes that “the UK’s regulatory and advisory systems responded appropriately.”

Additionally, the report discusses the care home mandate, which forced care workers to be vaccinated or risk losing their jobs. There is no mention of the evidence that the mandate did not result in any observable reduction in care-home mortality. Nor does the report address the fact that thousands of care workers left the sector at a time when care homes were facing a staffing crisis. There is also no mention of the vaccine certification scheme, which mandated vaccination for all those attending large-scale events and nightclubs.

The Government’s obsession with increasing uptake rates, irrespective of the ethics or public-health benefits, had consequences which are still being felt today. There is a lower uptake rate of common childhood vaccines and a more general loss of trust in vaccination safety. Notably, the pressure used to increase uptake rates was focused largely on young people, for whom the risks of vaccination almost certainly outweighed any potential benefit.

Blame should also be apportioned to the press. Not only did media outlets largely fail to challenge the Government’s approach, but they often colluded with it directly. In March 2021, the Times dutifully told us that “we needn’t worry about the AstraZeneca vaccine, blood clots are a fact of life.” Just a few months later, when official data was starting to show the limited effectiveness of vaccination in preventing infection, the paper led a campaign for the Government simply to stop publishing that data out of fear that it could encourage conspiracy theorists.

The Covid Inquiry has had the opportunity to call for a return to long-held public health principles based on informed consent and transparency. It has not. Realistic change requires accountability, and it is disappointing that those who are responsible for the failures of the vaccine rollout are not being held to account. It is not just those physically injured or killed following vaccination who have been let down. There are also those who were pressured into getting jabbed, those who lost their jobs rather than follow mandates, and the many who have lost trust in all vaccinations. They deserve better.

---

David Paton is a Professor of Industrial Economics at Nottingham University Business School.

cricketwyvern

---