What, hire another person to do that work so they can fire them just like the last one who didn’t agree with them about what they’re doing??
He in effect said that evidence doesn't support it, that the move is politicized and that he won't be lying to the public about harms.
https://www.npr.org/2009/10/30/114335303/u-k-drug-adviser-fi...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8334774.stm
So this is like that: you keep hiring until you get the one that says what you want. This is how the mass media always managed to get a "climate emergency sceptic" - in the sea of 99% scientists agreeing to the point there's also some kooks ready to present their case for money.