Former vaccine tsar describes ‘open warfare’ within UK government during Covid pandemic

There was “open warfare” between Britain’s public services during the pandemic, the former vaccine czar has said, and the failure to prioritize the needs of clinically vulnerable, immunocompromised individuals was ethically and morally wrong.

Dame Kate Bingham led the Vaccine Taskforce (VTF) – based in the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) – between May and December 2020 and played a crucial role in persuading the Government to develop a portfolio of potential vaccines to support. jabs, and securing contracts for millions of doses.

But Bingham has told the Covid inquiry that she discovered a conflict when establishing the VTF’s remit.

“Therapeutics is obviously my background, so that’s the natural area I have to include in my assignment,” she said. “What I did is what I would always do: talk to the people involved, including from the industry. And it was very clear that there was open war between BEIS and the Department of Health.”

While the VTF did not take control of the therapies, it did include both therapeutic antibodies – which could be given to people already infected with Covid – and prophylactic antibodies which could be given to people to protect them from infection. The latter included Evusheld, the prophylactic antibody cocktail produced by AstraZeneca.

Bingham said the decision was in line with the VTF’s original mandate to protect the relevant UK population from Covid. “That was not just to protect the people who could respond to a vaccine, but to protect all people, including those with weakened immune systems,” she said.

However, when Hugo Keith KC, counsel to the inquiry, asked whether she had ever had the impression during her time at the VTF that the issue of prophylactic development was being left behind, Bingham agreed.

“I definitely felt that, yes, starting at the end of October 2020,” she said.

The government did not pre-purchase Evusheld and it was never delivered, much to the dismay of charities who warned of the consequences for immunocompromised people, even though it was privately available.

Bingham said the direction of travel on Evusheld was clear to her before she left her post in December 2020, adding that she strongly disagreed.

“I felt very strongly that we were pursuing a strategy that was not in line with the Prime Minister’s objectives,” she said. “So the government followed a very clear two-pronged strategy where clinically vulnerable, immunocompromised patients were not prioritized in favor of those who could receive vaccines. And I felt that that was clearly wrong, both ethically and morally, but it also did not follow the goals that we were set, which was to protect the entire population.”

Bingham also revealed frustrations with Whitehall, noting that no one within BEIS had relevant expertise when she arrived, and criticizing ‘groupthink’ within the government.

“And more importantly, no one ever did anything. They are all busy writing policy documents and sending cases for review. None of that actually gets to the heart of what they’re trying to do. What are they trying to achieve? And are they measured against the achievement of their goals? And the answer is no,” she says.

“In the private sector you don’t achieve your goals, you’re left without a job and you have to move on. And in the private sector, you’re referenced, and if you don’t perform, people know about it. That’s not how government works.”