Matt Hancock wanted to decide ‘who should live and who should die’ if the NHS became overwhelmed during the pandemic, the UK Covid Inquiry heard today.
In a witness statement, Lord Simon Stevens, the former chief executive officer, said the comments were made during a February 2020 planning meeting.
He said the former Health Secretary ‘took the position’ that he – rather than medics or the public – should ‘should ultimately decide’ which patients should be cared for.
While noting that this situation ‘never crystallised’ during the Covid crisis, he said he would ‘discourage the idea’ that any individual should make this decision.
Lord Simon Stevens’s witness statement said: ‘The secretary of state for health and social care took the position that in this situation he – rather than, say, the medical profession or the public – should ultimately decide who should live and who should die’
In his written submission to the inquiry, Lord Stevens shared details about a planning exercise on February 12, 2020.
Lord Stevens wrote: ‘My sense at the time was that it helpfully sensitised a wider range of Government departments (beyond the health sector) to the type of pressures the UK might experience.
‘It did result in – to my mind at least – an unresolved but fundamental ethical debate about a scenario in which a rising number of Covid patients overwhelmed the ability of hospitals to look after them and other non-Covid patients.
‘The Secretary of State for Health and Social Care took the position that in this situation he – rather than, say the medical profession or the public – should ultimately decide who should live and who should die.
‘Fortunately this horrible dilemma never crystalised.’
Counsel Dermot Keating noted that former Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt believed that the decision on which care should be rationed should be taken by clinical staff.
He asked Sir Stevens whether Mr Hancock’s stance was ‘an appropriate line to take’ or ‘desirable’.
Sir Stevens said: ‘I thought it would be highly undesirable except in the most extreme circumstances.’
He added: ‘I certainly wanted to discourage the idea that an individual Secretary of State, other than in the most exceptional circumstances, should be deciding how care will be provided.
‘I felt that we are well served by the medical profession in consultation with patients, to the greatest extent possible making those kind of decisions.’
***
Read more at DailyMail.co.uk