Support our Nation today - please donate here
News

Ex-Minister Kirsty Williams criticised for not attending UK Covid Inquiry

30 Oct 2025 5 minute read
Former Welsh Education Minister Kirsty Williams

Martin Shipton

A group representing family members of people who lost their lives during the pandemic has criticised former Education Minister Kirsty Williams for not giving oral evidence to the UK Covid Inquiry.

In a statement, Covid Bereaved Families For Justice Cymru said: “We are outraged that Kirsty Williams has yet again avoided public scrutiny at the UK Covid Inquiry.

“Ms Williams, who served as Minister for Education during the pandemic and was the only non-Labour member of the Welsh Cabinet, has now twice refused to appear before the Inquiry. Her refusal denies families and the Welsh public the answers they deserve about how decisions affecting schools and young people were made.

“During Module 2B of the Inquiry in Cardiff in February 2024, families were told that Ms Williams would not appear due to personal reasons— but were reassured she would be questioned in Module 8, covering young people. That never happened. Families were shut out of that module entirely, and Ms Williams again failed to attend in person. Instead, she quietly submitted another written statement — one that nobody was allowed to question, not even the Children’s Commissioner for Wales, the sole Welsh core participant in that module.

“Our families have relived the most traumatic moments of our lives to give evidence. We’ve done it with courage, through tears, and under public questioning. The Inquiry makes it possible to give evidence remotely, and offers emotional support — so there are no excuses. If we can do it, so can a former minister.

“On September 24 2025, the Chair of the Inquiry, Baroness Heather Hallett, announced that Ms Williams would not be giving oral evidence due to ill health. Yet just six days later, she was well enough to start a powerful and high-profile appointment as Chair of Cardiff and Vale University Health Board.

“Subsequently, Ms Williams was well enough to take part in a public podcast event with Mark Drakeford, hosted by Labour MS Lee Waters.

“We are tired of the same excuses. We are told to be compassionate, and we are — but compassion cannot become a shield for evading accountability. Time and again, members of the Welsh Government have avoided scrutiny. This latest example is frankly insulting to the bereaved families who have faced this Inquiry with honesty and pain.”

The group claimed it was becoming impossible not to conclude Ms Williams’ failure to give oral evidence and face cross-examination was “another attempt by the Welsh Government establishment to dodge responsibility for its pandemic decisions”.

‘Confusion’

The statement continued: “Adding to the confusion, rather than the subsequent Education Minister Jeremy Miles – who was appointed to the role in May 2021, halfway through the Inquiry’s period of scrutiny – it was former First Minister Mark Drakeford who gave evidence on education matters. This decision is utterly baffling. It raises serious questions about why the Welsh Government continues to shield ministers who were directly responsible during key parts of the pandemic from public questioning.

“If the Welsh Government truly believes in learning lessons, then its former ministers should stop hiding behind written statements and face the public they served. This is yet another reason why Wales must have its own Covid inquiry.”

A note published in the name of Baroness Hallett on the UK Inquiry’s website shows that Rocio Cifuentes, the Children’s Commissioner for Wales, wanted Ms Williams to give oral evidence.

Oral evidence

It states: “The Inquiry received written submissions from the Children’s Commissioner for Wales who, while sympathetic to Ms Williams’ personal circumstances, noted she had not seen the medical evidence or any other information regarding Ms Williams’ health. She said that in the absence of such evidence or information, she could not form a full view of the request or make alternative suggestions to secure Ms Williams’ oral evidence.

“She also emphasised the importance of Ms Williams’ oral evidence in relation to the impact of the pandemic on children in Wales. Consequently, she was minded to object to Ms Williams’ non-attendance.

“Having considered these representations carefully together with the medical evidence relating to Ms Williams’ health, I am satisfied that there are no measures the Inquiry could put in place to enable her to give oral evidence before the end of the Module 8 hearing and the Inquiry’s programme of hearings more generally.

“ I understand the importance of Ms Williams’ evidence to the issues being investigated in Module 8, and note that Ms Williams has provided a written statement which will be adduced in evidence during the Module 8 hearing. While I would wish to hear from her orally in addition if this were possible, it is not.

“I will therefore hear oral testimony from Mark Drakeford (former First Minister for Wales) on October 22 2025. He will give evidence on some of the matters which would have been put to Ms Williams and while this does not diminish the importance of Ms Williams’ evidence, he is ‘the next best’ witness, as the Children’s Commissioner for Wales has agreed.

“Accordingly, I confirm my decision to excuse Ms Williams from giving oral evidence to this Inquiry.”

We asked Ms Williams, who did not stand for re-election to the Senedd in 2021, to respond to the criticisms about her non-attendance at the UK Covid Inquiry expressed by the Children’s Commissioner and Covid Bereaved Families For Justice Cymru.

She said: “I submitted written evidence to the Inquiry. If there is an issue about my non–attendance at a hearing, that should be taken up with the Chair of the Inquiry. Who appears at the Inquiry is a matter for the Chair.”


Support our Nation today

For the price of a cup of coffee a month you can help us create an independent, not-for-profit, national news service for the people of Wales, by the people of Wales.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

14 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Frank
Frank
1 month ago

There seems to be an increase in absentees from government meetings lately. Where are they and what are they doing instead? There is a need to penalise these members for shirking their duties. They are getting too big for their boots.

smae
smae
1 month ago
Reply to  Frank

Kirsty has no business going to a UK government meeting, she’s not a member of the UK government and quite frankly, the UK trying to judge Wales for a devolved matter grinds my gears.

Amir
Amir
1 month ago

At least she replied to nation.cymru. Unlike the Deform lot.

Chris Davies
Chris Davies
1 month ago

How will answers from the (former) Education Minster effect the bereaved families group exactly?

Amir
Amir
1 month ago
Reply to  Chris Davies

Good question.

David Richards
David Richards
1 month ago
Reply to  Chris Davies

The issue is Williams’ repeated non attendance of the inquiry…..

smae
smae
1 month ago
Reply to  David Richards

Then perhaps Wales should have its own inquiry instead, not being lectured by a UK inquiry on a devolved matter. Wales held its own inquiry in 2024.

Frank
Frank
1 month ago

Perhaps she was with Vaughan Gethin.

hdavies15
hdavies15
1 month ago

These inquiries cost a fortune to undertake yet Ministers and former Ministers tend to use them to justify their conduct of business during their tenure They add the usual cliches like “lessons learned” and “relying on advice of experts” to render the whole thing pretty useless. One thing for sure the next crisis will not replicate the last thus proving that the best preparation is having a robust well resourced Health Service

Buzby
Buzby
1 month ago

Unfortunately this inquiry seems to be inching towards a “lessons learned for the next pandemic” conclusion, to be collected, filed and forgotten in an SW1 basement archive. What it should be doing is using the pandemic to identify and fix all the areas of government, governance and intergovernmental working that failed because they’re broken and causing problems on a daily basis, not just because there was a pandemic.

Amir
Amir
1 month ago
Reply to  Buzby

So true.

smae
smae
1 month ago
Reply to  Buzby

That’s always the case. I had this naive idea that once a lesson was learned that procedures would be put in place and a system would basically auto activate on the execution of a pandemic health emergency, automatically bequeathing funds, resources and dictating what should and should not happen and how long for, to be scrutinized by the public, subjected to a referendum and then enforced, only to be modified by an evidence based inquiry later. “We modified this line because of evidence in Annex 23, this next line was modified because of evidence in Annexes 26,27,28 and 29 which… Read more »

David Richards
David Richards
1 month ago

“I submitted written evidence to the Inquiry. If there is an issue about my non–attendance at a hearing, that should be taken up with the Chair of the Inquiry. Who appears at the Inquiry is a matter for the Chair.”….she knows perfectly well there’s a ‘issue’ with her non-attendance….(not once but twice) with the Covid Bereaved Families For Justice in particular rightly incandescent at her repeated refusal to attend and be made to account for her actions during the pandemic. And while ‘health reasons’ have been cited as justification for her unwillingness to appear in the recent evidence taking session… Read more »

smae
smae
1 month ago

The Senedd does not answer to the UK Parliament and its members should not be interrogated by an England inquiry. It is, in many respects, particularly Health, devolved.

This is a matter for Wales, the Senedd (who is responsible for running Welsh Inquiries), the Welsh Government who appointed her to post and the constituents of Wales who elected her as an MS.

Kirsty can and should refuse as should any other MS. If they want answers, maybe they should liaise with Jo Stevens.

Our Supporters

All information provided to Nation.Cymru will be handled sensitively and within the boundaries of the Data Protection Act 2018.