If you want nothing done, set up an inquiry. That appears to be the message from the current UK Covid-19 Inquiry which seemed to grind to a start and has since achieved virtually nothing. Not that anyone in the Covid sceptical camp ever expected it to. So exhausted are the inquiry team by their efforts to date, having only started earlier this year, they are now having a break until October. It does not exactly convey a sense of urgency to get to the root of what happened and who was responsible for what during the ‘pandemic’ years. Not that anyone in the Covid sceptical camp ever expects it to.
The inquiry has completed ‘Module 1’ on ‘Preparedness and resilience.’ In preparation for this module the inquiry member were shown a video recording of the experiences of people who lost loved ones during the ‘pandemic’ or were diagnosed with Covid-19 themselves. The video is less than 20 minutes long and, while the start is unpromising, it is worth persevering as towards the end there is some anger conveyed about the insensitive conduct of funerals and being unable to sit with elderly relatives while they were dying. It remains to be seen which aspects of the video the inquiry considers.
If you can be bothered—and I would not encourage it unless you suffer from insomnia—then the proceedings are filmed and available on You Tube. They are also being summarised weekly in The Daily Sceptic by Drs Carl Heneghan and Tom Jefferson, Professor of Evidence-Based Medicine and an epidemiologist, respectively, at the University of Oxford. Both were critical of the Covid narrative from the early days, committing the crime of refusing to join in with the catastrophising. However, while both are authoritative and interesting when ‘on their game’ writing about their fields of study, these reports are not exactly gripping.
The fact is that the Inquiry is still footering about in the foothills. Even the most recent of the monthly newsletters has little to say except what the timetable will be when the inquiry resumes. They are, however, investigating ‘pre-pandemic’ structural racism and have appointed a team of experts to report on this. I think we can predict the outcome of Module 1 and the investigation into structural racism: we were not prepared for the ‘pandemic’; more money needs to be wasted on public health; and that society is riven with structural racism. You heard it here first.
Each monthly newsletter is headed up by a different person from the team administering the inquiry and they seem keen to point people towards a tab on the main inquiry website called ‘Every Story Matter’ where anyone with a mind to do so can answer a few questions which are designed to gather their experiences during the ‘pandemic’. Whether these responses will eventually be published is not clear. That probably depends on how many people go along with the Covid narrative and get the words ‘the pandemic’ in to their responses as frequently as possible. It will be interesting to see if there are any stories about the side affects of the Covid-19 vaccines.
It is not clear what people’s experiences have to do with the inquiry other than to make members of the public feel that their voice is being heard, if not actually listened to. In the same vein there is a ‘Tapestry’ tab where artists are invited to represent visually aspects of the ‘pandemic.’ This also seems like an entirely pointless exercise. The inquiry should be concerned with facts and not feelings: what were the initial predictions and how many people actually died; what was the cause of those deaths’; is there evidence that any of the public health measures were effective; and were the vaccines necessary, effective and safe?
After some pressure by people responding to the initial terms of reference the inquiry was clearly forced to include a module (Module 4) on ‘Vaccines and therapeutics’ which was not initially included. Of the current modules it is the last one (two further ones are planned). Given that the results of Module 1 (completed) will not be published until late in 2024 and that evidence for this particular module will not be gathered until summer 2024 we probably cannot expect an outcome until late in 2025. It seems to have escaped the inquiry members that, while the ‘pandemic’ has been declared over, people are still being encouraged to take Covid-19 vaccines, continue suffering dreadful side-effects and dying…now!
Your correspondent has little faith that the inquiry will arrive at any sensible conclusions. That the inquiry members are signed up to the Covid narrative was made obvious by the fact that they are making people who wish to attend take weekly lateral flow Covid-19 tests. The costs of the inquiry are exorbitant and will mainly end up in the pockets of lawyers. The inquiry either needs to be stopped or to address the following questions, already posed in these pages:
- Did you appoint an arch-catastrophist with a 100% record of always being wrong to predict the likely number of deaths from Covid-19?
- Did you consider the potential for the detrimental effects of lockdown on society, the economy, health and education?
- Was the policy to impose the wearing of face masks evidence-based; and what was the evidence?
- Did you participate in the rollout of untested vaccines?
- Why was the Astrazeneca vaccine withdrawn?
- Are you going to investigate vaccine harms and deaths?
- Was freedom of speech curtailed during the ‘pandemic’ and why?
- Will you publicly rehabilitate people cancelled and persecuted during the ‘pandemic’?
- Who was responsible for the decisions taken during the ‘pandemic’?
- Will prosecutions ensue the inquiry; if not, why not?
Roger Watson is a retired academic nurse who lives in the UK.
He is currently engaged in a range of professional consultancies in the UK, Europe and China. He writes regularly for several outlets including The Daily Sceptic, The European Conservative, Country Squire Magazine and The New Conservative.
