The presence of the British Prime Minister’s scientific adviser, Dominic Cummings, at the meeting of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies, generally known by the acronym, Sage, has caused a flutter in the roost of one of the countries acutely affected by coronavirus though both Boris Johnson and Prince Charles are now said to be recovering after having tested positive.
Sage is an entity of experts who are “guided by science” while handling specific crises. With a Conservative party heavyweight in attendance, Whitehall is rather embarrassed that Cummings might have denuded the importance of Sage and obviously on instructions from 10 Downing Street.
Hence the speculation that Johnson’s closest aide could have distorted a discussion that was meant to narrow down perceptions through debate. Sage meetings are closed affairs, its recommendations private and its minutes, if they are ever published, are advanced weeks late.
No pun is perhaps intended in the query posed by experts as to whether Cummings is in a position to offer ‘Sage advice’. The scientific advisory panel’s meeting was convened at the peak of the crisis amidst speculation in London whether ministers are guided only by the science they want to hear. Reports from the UK do suggest it was the presence of Cummings at the meetings rather than of the scientists that made headlines.
In a sense, Britain has stumbled into the crisis. Sage was meant to offer a clearer separation between scientific truths and political values. It has allowed ministers to claim that they are being guided by objective reasons rather than ideology. But having a political adviser of Cummings’ importance, and a data analyst who worked with him on the Leave campaign, at Sage has effectively binned that argument.
Sage recommended less stringent social distancing measures whereas other European capitals have implemented tough policies. Its experts underestimated the percentage of people who would have to be hospitalised. The conventional response of lockdown, mass testing and tracing was initially questioned in favour of what they call “herd immunity”.
WHO had advocated the “test, trace and isolate” regime that Britain only woke up to after allowing the virus to spread unimpeded through the population. Sage’s lack of any public health experts was a mistake in the light of the government’s current strategy. Cummings is known to be disagreeable.
He may single out a troublesome academic who questioned whether it was right, for example, for Boris Johnson to announce he had shaken the hands of people infected with coronavirus. It is possible that Cummings, in league with Johnson, has blurred the distinction between scientists and the political class. Pray why? Even in India, it is the political class that is holding forth on coronavirus rather than the medical fraternity.