Not the OP, but one thing that is vital is that those in power are inscrutably honest and value scientific method, IMO.
If a politician stands between the scientific advisors and the people then when they make pronouncements saying "this is for medical reasons" when in fact the reasons are primarily financial, or tempered by the interests of other parties (their personal backers), that needs to be made clear.
When the UK said "we're using different models" they should have been publishing those models, among with the facts they were relying on, published a list of all people who had input to that decision and the context.
A rolling diary of all people any senior politician had contact with; a list of every shareholding by any member of a politician's family; and such information need to be openly accessible in real time.
Basically we need to treat them as an obsessive helicopter-parent would treat their teenage children, they need to have tracking devices, they need to have "friends" (employees of opposition parties) that attend every meeting they go to, they've down they simply can't be trusted.
But of course you can't do any of those things because corrupt politicians won't vote for it. We're stuck at a local minima of democraacy, IMO.
How to progress? I don't see a way, politicians have enough of the population in their thrall (eg using media manipulation) to sustain the current system. Two things that may help are to have bodies parallel to government adopted ones, like UK's SAGE but excluding the politicians, and have media that will report direct from those bodies to the people rather than via a filter of politicisation. Maybe then enough people can get onboard to bit-by-bit elect trustworthy officials interested in government for the good of the people.