Lack of transparency within SAGE

Anyone know if the Alice Cummings who has been given the contract for the trace app is related to Dominic or is that just a "strange co incidence" after all its only worth £250 MILLION !

Surely not jobs for the boys/girls ?

Signed,

One of "the lot"

Davidhs You're missing the point. I'm not qualified to judge whether mistakes were made, especially in the delays on lockdown, although I suspect they were. The point is the responsibility for delaying lockdown. Somebody claimed that Dominic Cummings argued for an earlier lockdown - if so, why isn't he shouting that from the roof now?

The government is claiming that it followed "the science", a group of supposed experts, but did it? I don't know the answer to that, but it does seem that the politicians have found themselves a scapegoat. But what if "the science" was actually being influenced by the government all along and wasn't actually independent advice?

It appears that SAGE has now been forced to be more publicly accountable by the pressure being put on it. Nobody would expect MI5 or MI6 to be transparent, but SAGE? What advice is it giving that's so secret? What happened to the "will of the people"?

Is Marc Warner's contact tracing app really the best way to stop the spread of infection? What about the 18,000 contact tracers people are saying are needed? Unfortunately, the people who would be best placed to do that aren't there because local public health services have been decimated.

It's always going to be a balance between losing lives and the needs of "business", so how are those decisions being made? What are the facts? How many lives is it estimated will be lost if shops and schools reopen? Who's making the decisions that the balance is right? On what basis? What part did "the science" play in the decisions?

Too many questions remain unanswered and there's too much scope for a blame game. The public deserves transparency.

I don't understand why it's putting a negative twist on anything to want to hold the government to scrutiny.

Surely any responsible citizen would want to do this unless they can't because they live in a dictatorship?

Still wondering who are the "You lot " referred to by Jane....;northeners ?blonds ? Mail readers ? It is very dismissive and also very bad mannered , but then there does seem to be a lot of this nasty attitude cropping up .
It's a shame but if they are" you lot " what should those who call them that be called ?

Yup. 20/20 hindsight is a wonderful thing. As 'you lot' obviously know!

The media will always put a negative twist, if one so called expert happens to suggest a better path he will be a hero - with hindsight

Not me ?I had a shower this morning and have even washed my hair.

Is you lot the same as the great unwashed?

Davidhs. We live in a so called democracy, and so yes I do expect transparency.

Jane , who is you lot ?

Hello,
I'm not wanting to put any twist on anything to do with this very complex situation but we do need to have more transparency about who suggests what when and why....

OR we will end up in an Iraq war situation....

Some people will always put the most negative twist on anything they hear if it's said by someone or some organisation they dislike.

Don’t expect transparency!.

Expect politics, expert advice is always going to be on the cautious side, which means ANY risk is bad. The government want to get back to normality quicker than that so there is always going to be some advice that is not taken.

‘You lot’ *Jane^ what exactly do you mean by that? And you’ve missed the point completely - it’s how Cummins and Johnson manipulate what we are told is happening and refuse to allow us access to the minutes and research that concerns ‘us lot’. Doesn’t that worry you? At all?

Chris Whitty was unequivocal that we won't be back to normal any time soon. He is highly respected and so are the various chief scientific officers, public health chiefs etc. It's pretty insulting to imply that they are cynically political.
Of course there is a massive economic aspect to it all. I really don't understand how you lot don't get what a complicated situation it all is trying to meld all the issues into an integrated outcome or the series of outcomes that is required.
Of course you can't please everyone ?

There is an apparent rush to get back to normal life..... Who is pushing this?

My guess would be the business sector and financiers.

I agree suzie.
There is an apparent rush to get back to normal life, if the headlines are to be believed. Who is pushing this? Is it being suggested by SAGE? I’m certain there will be another spike in deaths if we rush into this, not that I’m a scientist, so I would like to know who is pushing this agenda and what SAGE are saying about it. I’m really concerned about this and who is behind it.

I think it is very positive that names of some members of SAGE have been published. Two members apparently refused. It is a pity that this has only been done under pressure.

I agree Jane10 that scientists on SAGE may be independent thinkers, but my concern has been why wasnt the government more open about the evidence upon which they were decision making, which would have given members of the public more confidence that there hasn't been political interference.

Why does it have to be squeezed out of them?

Jane it’s much more complicated than that - for one thing! Cummins is not a scientist and apart from that, if you are independent, then prove it - attendees, minutes of meetings, research papers which informed the discussion, and most of all, refuse admittance to SPADS.

Yes Maizie I was extremely disappointed with JF. Anyone who hasn’t heard the interview, should do so and then reflect on whether you’d change your behaviour at the moment based on anything that SAGE ‘apparently’ advised.

I’m also worried about this. I would like more transparency about both who the members of SAGE are, and what they are advising. As Daisymae has said, SAGE has appeared to advise the exact opposite of what other scientists have advised.

Thanks for the link growstuff. The chap (didn't catch his name) who was doing the YouTube intro was describing why the new group was formed, but didn't yet have a link to the actual broadcast, which will take place later today.

I expect we will hear when it does, and hopefully link will be publicised. I am so pleased that we will hear a group of other renowned scientists views and evidence, some of which seems to be at odds with the government's, and we may be more able to make a reasoned judgement.

I have been concerned since the beginning of this pandemic about lack of transparency, and totally endorse your concerns growstuff.

It's about time the government stopped patronising us.

Just because a scientist happens to be paid directly or indirectly by government doesn't stop them being good at their jobs, independent thinkers and contributors.

Just heard on Radio 4 that list of SAGE members has just been published. Fifty of them? I think there’s been many more contributors called in for advice but not actually members.

That could be the case Oopsminty. What bothers me (and other scientists, so it would appear) is the lack of transparency and independence. The government is forever claiming to be following "the science", but apparently at least 16 members of SAGE are government employees. It's not a group of independent scientists, which is what the government claims it is.

I'm also very concerned about Marc Warner's tracking app. Apparently, Singapore had something similar, but even in Singapore (where the population is very tech savvy) there was only a 20% take up and it wasn't really effective. Given Cummings' history with dodgy use of data, I am extremely reluctant to let anybody to do with him know anything more about me than is already in the public domain. There's a very strong smell of fish about the whole thing - apart from the £250,000!