A couple of points and no disrespect to Beth (and I remember the post) but we shouldn't say how good or bad someone is in a job or meeting when we are not present? I think most would agree with that.
Furthermore, I would say Sunak is also 'quite new at his job' has been brilliant. Sometimes people just step up to the plate.
For me, the comments on these meetings are just another example of political point-scoring. The Guardian is on a witch hunt and spends all its time moaning about comings. That reporter who I quoted on Sunday was spot on.
Once again your last paragraph questions the 'specialism' of the scientists and who is in there.
The government will have the best people in those meetings and we need to trust the scientific advice otherwise we only have the experts on here? Trust me that is not a good thing.
Quite a lot of assumptions there because you trust the government to do the right thing. Somewhere along the line we’ve got it badly wrong going simply on the death tolls. No one has said Whitty is a bad CMO. It’s not like I have a CMO to compare him to. Just that he’s relatively inexperienced. It’s just a hypothesis that he might not get heard enough in meetings when there are some bigger characters. We simply don’t know either way.
Sunak spoke well a month or so ago. There’s a long way to go with his promises to decide he’s been anywhere near successful. Some of those on here who are having to apply for the self-employed help will know better than either of us how smoothly that’s going in reality. It was a good speech though.