“p not accept his apology. we stood up in the background, silently, and held up these signs. [30 in the background, silently, and held up these signs.— in the background, silently, and held up these signs. do you feel, thou~h, held up these signs. do you feel, though. that _ held up these signs. do you feel, though, that there _ held up these signs. do you feel, though, that there is, _ held up these signs. do you feel, though, that there is, that - held up these signs. do you feel, | though, that there is, that maybe you need to come to this inquiry with an open mind, because he has to have his moment to give his opinion? you might change your opinion, you never know. you might change your opinion, you never know— never know. unfortunately, as we were asked _ never know. unfortunately, as we were asked to _ never know. unfortunately, as we were asked to leave, _ never know. unfortunately, as we were asked to leave, we - never know. unfortunately, as we were asked to leave, we haven't l were asked to leave, we haven't heard any of the evidence this morning, we will have to review it later, our minds unfortunately will not be as open as he might wish because we are all grieving for people who are dead, he didn't need to dive. is people who are dead, he didn't need to dive. , ., , people who are dead, he didn't need to dive. , . , u, to dive. is there anything he can sa toda to dive. is there anything he can say today that — to dive. is there anything he can say today that we _ to dive. is there anything he can say today that we change - to dive. is there anything he can say today that we change our i to dive. is there anything he can . say today that we change our mind, that could give you some closure, make you feel better? he. that could give you some closure, make you feel better?— that could give you some closure, | make you feel better?- we make you feel better? no, no. we heard in that _ make you feel better? no, no. we heard in that first _ make you feel better? no, no. we heard in that first hour, _ make you feel better? no, no. we heard in that first hour, just - make you feel better? no, no. we heard in that first hour, just over l heard in that first hour, just over an hour of evidence, he made it very clear he wanted to be apologetic, wanted to say sorry, took personal responsibility for many of the decisions made, after all it was his decision, he was the prime minister

at the time. but we hear that the decisions he made, there is nothing he can say to you that can improve things. what would you like him to say? things. what would you like him to sa ? �* , ., , things. what would you like him to sa ? �* , . , ., things. what would you like him to sa? say? anything he has to say could have been said _ say? anything he has to say could have been said a _ say? anything he has to say could have been said a long _ say? anything he has to say could have been said a long time - say? anything he has to say could have been said a long time ago i say? anything he has to say could l have been said a long time ago that we are nearly four years since the beginning of the pandemic. it is continuing, people are continuing to die every week. i don't think he has got anything helpful to say at this point other than to tell the truth about why decisions were made and why failures happen in the kale that was at the heart of his government. do you think he can be useful as the inquiry tries to learn lessons, to make sure that should there be another pandemic, mistakes like this are not made again? i’m another pandemic, mistakes like this are not made again?— are not made again? i'm sure he could be useful, _ are not made again? i'm sure he could be useful, whether- are not made again? i'm sure he could be useful, whether he - are not made again? i'm sure he could be useful, whether he will| are not made again? i'm sure he . could be useful, whether he will be, i don't know. it is unfortunate none of his messages have been discoverable, that's a big failure. we should be able to see and hear everything going on within government at that time. thank you

for our government at that time. thank you fervourtime- _ government at that time. thank you fervourtime- i _ government at that time. thank you for your time. i assume _ government at that time. thank you for your time. i assume you - government at that time. thank you for your time. i assume you will- government at that time. thank you for your time. i assume you will be i for your time. i assume you will be catching up, another day of evidence after this, will you continue to come to be here while borisjohnson is giving evidence? yes. come to be here while boris johnson is giving evidence?— is giving evidence? yes, we will be here, is giving evidence? yes, we will be here. don't — is giving evidence? yes, we will be here, don't know _ is giving evidence? yes, we will be here, don't know if _ is giving evidence? yes, we will be here, don't know if we _ is giving evidence? yes, we will be here, don't know if we will - is giving evidence? yes, we will be here, don't know if we will be - here, don't know if we will be allowed in but we will be outside. thank you. that was fran who was one of the protesters who was inside the inquiry room today, she felt, she along with a number of protesters built and they needed to stand up, hold pictures of their loved ones, to present to the prime minister, former prime minister, how they felt about borisjohnson and he... decisions he made that impacted on their lives. other important members we heard this morning were boris johnson talking about the gender balance within his top team. and how he felt when he was mayor of london he felt when he was mayor of london

he felt when he was mayor of london he felt he had a gender balance of about 5050, in downing street he said there is too often male dominated in his team and it had an impact on a number of the decisions that were made. he also appeared to her defend his health secretary matt hancock, we have heard plenty of evidence on the past weeks about how matt hancock had been, some people accused have come of lying and under delivering, borisjohnson today seemed to say, to defend the health secretary and said he had been a good communicator and always worked hard. we have heard from fran, earlier i spoke to another couple of protesters who were also here to listen to borisjohnson's evidence. i caught covid in march 2020, pre—selected for the olympics, my career is over. i have had to retire and i'm here to represent the 1.9 million people in the uk that also are suffering with this disease.

what does it lean for you to icb here? you have travelled down here, come off as they won't get to speak to borisjohnson but you felt come off as they won't get to speak to boris johnson but you felt you needed to witness it? yeah, watching it on tv and living the experience of it and watching it commit very dissociating experience. boris johnson has _ dissociating experience. boris johnson hasjust _ dissociating experience. boris johnson hasjust seemed - dissociating experience. boris johnson hasjust seemed to l dissociating experience. err" 3 johnson hasjust seemed to be completely oblivious to the damage that this virus has done. i want to just see what he has to say for himself, to see him in person and it will be an interesting experience. talking through your experience, it is not as yours, that'll be a daughter as well.— is not as yours, that'll be a dau~hter as well. , ., daughter as well. both my daughter and i daughter as well. both my daughter andi not daughter as well. both my daughter and i got covid _ daughter as well. both my daughter and i got covid in _ daughter as well. both my daughter and i got covid in march _ daughter as well. both my daughter and i got covid in march 2020 - daughter as well. both my daughter and i got covid in march 2020 and l and i got covid in march 2020 and now living — and i got covid in march 2020 and now living with disability, pc fit and healthy and strong. i have not been _ and healthy and strong. i have not been able — and healthy and strong. i have not been able to return to work as a health_ been able to return to work as a health coach and she has not been able to— health coach and she has not been able to continue with her studies. missed _ able to continue with her studies. missed two years of education. we setup _ missed two years of education. we setup a _ missed two years of education. we set up a charity and we represent 62.000 — set up a charity and we represent 62,000 children living in the uk

with long — 62,000 children living in the uk with long covid, who are experiencing it. with long covid, who are ex-aeriencin it. , .. _ , experiencing it. obviously boris johnson initially _ experiencing it. obviously boris johnson initially we _ experiencing it. obviously boris johnson initially we had - experiencing it. obviously boris johnson initially we had as - experiencing it. obviously boris johnson initially we had as part| experiencing it. obviously boris l johnson initially we had as part of the evidence at the inquiry didn't seem to take long covid very seriously, i won't use the word that we have heard that he said about long covid because i couldn't mention it on the television, but the feeling was it simply wasn't taken seriously early enough. exactly right, and that has been our experience — exactly right, and that has been our experience throughout, the advocacy we have _ experience throughout, the advocacy we have done over the last three years. _ we have done over the last three years. that — we have done over the last three years, that long covid hasn't been to confuse — years, that long covid hasn't been to confuse a commit never featured on the _ to confuse a commit never featured on the dashboard, not mentioned in briefings. _ on the dashboard, not mentioned in briefings, and it is a serious consequence of the pandemic. one of a number of — consequence of the pandemic. one of a number of issues _ consequence of the pandemic. one of a number of issues he _ consequence of the pandemic. one of a number of issues he will _ consequence of the pandemic. one of a number of issues he will no - consequence of the pandemic. one of a number of issues he will no doubt i a number of issues he will no doubt be questioned about over the next couple of days. do you have an open mind? we already know that he is likely to apologise today stop do you have an open mind that he might change your mind, he was only human, politicians are only human? flat

change your mind, he was only human, politicians are only human?— politicians are only human? not sure about that! and _ politicians are only human? not sure about that! and we'll— politicians are only human? not sure about that! and we'll see _ politicians are only human? not sure about that! and we'll see what - politicians are only human? not sure about that! and we'll see what his i about that! and we'll see what his responses are but fundamentally the uk along with the us and brazil, brazil have had the worst pandemic response, spent more money, we spent longer in lockdown, more deaths, we don't have statistics along covid but we know it is bad. looking after the lives of the nation is the primary responsibility, the basic responsibility of our leaders. he continuously put his ego and self—interest ahead of that. this is one of the tools of the state we have to get some accountability and we really hope to see that today. i was meant to say to you, i apologise for some of the language be broadcast earlier, the decision was made to broadcast this inquiry live, there is a three minute delay but some of the language used from the whatsapp messages, some of it has been rather choice and fruity at times. we apologise for that. i

think we canjoin our times. we apologise for that. i think we can join our political correspondence rob watson. i wanted to ask you, this is obviously a very political day, borisjohnson is no longer prime minister, but some insight into the politics at the time and westminster at the time. absolutely, i happen abstract by two things, i am absolutely, i happen abstract by two things, iam mindfulwe absolutely, i happen abstract by two things, i am mindful we will not need to be shutting up at any in rather demure but also utterly defiant in the sense that he is insisting that based on what we knew at the time the government did its best, did its best to protect lives and the nhs. secondly he is also defined in his defence of his style of government. we have had all these rather fruity whatsapp messages indicating astonishing tension, bad language, and real grief at the heart of his government. but he has said, this is because people were

under stress, they were trying to work hard, of course they would be critical of each other and some of the mine which was going to be choice. that has happened and other governments, it is because we were doing our best. you can see in that is the overall shape of things, this idea of demure but defiant and determined to defend his record. touching on the folk you had with you, i suspect in terms of the broader public relations that with this inquiry those who have made up their minds, that putsjohnson is both incompetent, untrustworthy and in many ways, as they would see it, rather unpleasant, none of what he says will change their minds. that rather large chunk, a large minority in this country take the view of good old boris, he did asbestos he could in difficult circumstances, they will not change their view either. we will wait and see. —— needed as best as he could. the

chair of the _ needed as best as he could. the chair of the inquiry has said a couple of times last week that she did not want to proportion any personal blame to anyone and was not interested in what she called the tittle tattle and indeed all the swearing. i think they can go back to the inquiry where there may well be somewhat titl title and indeed some more swearing, apologies in advance. to some more swearing, apologies in advance. .. some more swearing, apologies in advance. ., , , advance. to boot this in its chronological _ advance. to boot this in its chronological place, - advance. to boot this in its chronological place, the i advance. to boot this in its i chronological place, the first advance. to boot this in its - chronological place, the first sage had taken place injanuary, the first cobra in the 24th, he says however in his witness statement that he called you directly on at least four occasions during january to impress upon you his concerns. although he does not say so, the implication is is that he was at pains to alert you to the problems he saw and was required to raise the matter with you repeatedly. do you recall a repeated number of attempts to raise the alarm with you in that

way? i to raise the alarm with you in that wa ? . . , way? i certainly recall the conversation _ way? i certainly recall the conversation on _ way? i certainly recall the conversation on the i way? i certainly recall the conversation on the 7th . way? i certainly recall the| conversation on the 7th of way? i certainly recall the - conversation on the 7th of january, and the context, i remember thinking about it and saying, keep an eye on it, and i said out in my statement my initial instinct about it. i don't, to be frank, remember all those conversations but it is too that we would have spoken many occasions because we generally spoke quite a lot. i think that in that period, january really to the end of february, towards the end of february, towards the end of february, covid was pretty much like a cloud on the horizon no bigger than a man because my hand and you didn't really know whether it would turn into a typhoon or not. and i

certainly didn't. i was unsure. it became clear much later. the matter was first raised _ became clear much later. the matter was first raised with _ became clear much later. the matter was first raised with your _ became clear much later. the matter was first raised with your cabinet i was first raised with your cabinet secretary, formally on the 21st of january, which was the date of the world health organization first novel coronavirus situation report. do you recall when the matter was first brought officially to your attention? you were always the away from news reports and you would have been away from conversations with mr hancock as to the possible crisis or emergency of this virus in china, but when officially you recall it was put before you? i’m but when officially you recall it was put before you?— but when officially you recall it was put before you? i'm sure it is in my comment — was put before you? i'm sure it is in my comment what _ was put before you? i'm sure it is in my comment what i've - was put before you? i'm sure it is i in my comment what i've submitted. i think it would be, certainly there are cabinet discussions injanuary and in february, and a crescendo

activity about it. but in government, it wasn't yet being escalated to me as something of really truly national concern. indeed. at cobra was convened, chaired by mr hancock the 24th of january. then he chaired after the cobra meeting on the 29th of january then the fifth of favourite, 18th and fabio, 26 february. it is playing that was permissible. this cobra doesn't have to be chaired by a power minister. but the sheer frequency of those cobras, five within one month, all on the same issue of this emerging virus. didn't the seriousness of the position in late january make itself planed to you worth how could there have been a need for a cobra every week for

five weeks in relation to energy that didn't require your direct involvement as a prime minister? for the reason you have given wages that a cobra is a regular occurrence in government when there is something, particular government department is leading on, in this case it was health. the possibility of a coronavirus pandemic, which was only declared by the who on the 12th of march, was not something that had yet, had it really broken upon the political world in my consciousness. as something of real potential, a real potential national disaster. in that period, end ofjanuary, beginning of february, it is not much in the political world. i wasn't asked about it at all at

pmqs. ~ , .. wasn't asked about it at all at pmqs. ~ , ., ., ., wasn't asked about it at all at pmqs. ~ ., ., ., ~ pmqs. were you even aware that mr hancock was — pmqs. were you even aware that mr hancock was chairing _ pmqs. were you even aware that mr hancock was chairing cobras - pmqs. were you even aware that mr hancock was chairing cobras to i pmqs. were you even aware that mr hancock was chairing cobras to deal| hancock was chairing cobras to deal with a new and emerging respiratory virus on those fine dates? i with a new and emerging respiratory virus on those fine dates?— virus on those fine dates? i think that i virus on those fine dates? i think that i was — virus on those fine dates? i think that i was aware _ virus on those fine dates? i think that i was aware that _ virus on those fine dates? i think that i was aware that matt i virus on those fine dates? i think that i was aware that matt was i that i was aware that matt was handling it, i couldn't swear that i was aware that he was handling it in that way on those particular dates. my that way on those particular dates. my instructions to him were to keep me posted and i would do whatever i could. but by the end of the month, clearly by the end of february, and i am getting anxious about what we're doing. we i am getting anxious about what we're doing-— i am getting anxious about what we're doing. i am getting anxious about what we're doinu. ~ we're doing. we will come there. do ou recall we're doing. we will come there. do you recall having _ we're doing. we will come there. do you recall having any _ we're doing. we will come there. do you recall having any debate - we're doing. we will come there. do you recall having any debate with i you recall having any debate with your advices as to whether or not your advices as to whether or not you should be chairing those cobras are whether or not the seriousness of the position required to you to chair the cobras at the end of january and throughout february? yes, i think there is an exchange... i remember talking to my private office and saying, you know, this is

clearly becoming an issue of national... clearly becoming an issue of national. . ._ clearly becoming an issue of national... ., , �* ., national... 24th of february. before that date, national. .. 24th of february. before that date. for— national... 24th of february. before that date, for the _ national... 24th of february. before that date, for the month _ national... 24th of february. before l that date, for the month beforehand, did you think to say to your officials, the secretary of state for health is chairing a cobra on a weekly basis to do with a fatal viral pandemic, which currently is...? it viral pandemic, which currently is. . . ? . , viral pandemic, which currently is...? . , . ., viral pandemic, which currently is...? . , .. ., is. . . ? it had it been declared a pandemic- _ is. . . ? it had it been declared a pandemic. but _ is. . . ? it had it been declared a pandemic. but by _ is. . . ? it had it been declared a pandemic. but by the - is. . . ? it had it been declared a pandemic. but by the 16th i is. . . ? it had it been declared a pandemic. but by the 16th of l is. . . ? it had it been declared a i pandemic. but by the 16th of january it had spread — pandemic. but by the 16th of january it had spread to _ pandemic. but by the 16th of january it had spread to thailand _ pandemic. but by the 16th of january it had spread to thailand and - pandemic. but by the 16th of january it had spread to thailand and japan, | it had spread to thailand and japan, the scientists in the uk had reported on the 12% hospitalisation rate, it was clear from the material in government that only a small fraction of the infections in wuhan were being detected and there was already evidence of limited human—to—human transmission of buy the 17th of january. human—to—human transmission of buy the 17th ofjanuary. in human—to—human transmission of buy the 17th of january. in an overarching sense, why do you think that the prime minister, yourself, was not informed earlier as to those

extremely worrying features of this emerging virus?— emerging virus? here is what i really think— emerging virus? here is what i really think happened. - emerging virus? here is what i really think happened. i i emerging virus? here is what i really think happened. i think. emerging virus? here is what i i really think happened. i think that actually, — really think happened. i think that actually, everybody, had they stopped — actually, everybody, had they stopped to think about it, could see that the _ stopped to think about it, could see that the implications of the data, the implications of what was happening, the numbers, the percentage of fatalities in china, but i _ percentage of fatalities in china, but i do — percentage of fatalities in china, but i do not think that the... necessarily drew the right conclusions in that early phase. which _ conclusions in that early phase. which is — conclusions in that early phase. which is no _ conclusions in that early phase. which is no fault of theirs, what happened — which is no fault of theirs, what happened was something that was completely outside people's living memorv — completely outside people's living memory. what we were dealing with is like a _ memory. what we were dealing with is like a once _ memory. what we were dealing with is like a once in— memory. what we were dealing with is like a once in a century event. and i like a once in a century event. and hust— like a once in a century event. and iiust don't— like a once in a century event. and ijust don't think people computed the implications of that data and it

wasn't _ the implications of that data and it wasn't really escalated, it wasn't escalated — wasn't really escalated, it wasn't escalated to me as an issue of national— escalated to me as an issue of national concern until much later. as you _ national concern until much later. as you say, — national concern until much later. as you say, i_ national concern until much later. as you say, i said, look, i think i have _ as you say, i said, look, i think i have got— as you say, i said, look, i think i have got to _ as you say, i said, look, i think i have got to chair these cobra meetings. have got to chair these cobra meetings-— have got to chair these cobra meetinus. .. meetings. you were the prime minister. you _ meetings. you were the prime minister. you are _ meetings. you were the prime minister. you are obviously i minister. you are obviously extremely... skilled politician and you have direct intimate experience of running government. from the viewpoint of the bereaved and those who were terribly damaged and harmed by this pandemic, how could a government have generally failed to stop and think? the system is there to make you think. the risk assessment processes and civil emergency procedures are there to make sure that you do not have to stop and think — that it responds.

but on this occasion, generally, and it is not a personal point, generally, the system did not stop and think, this data shows there is and think, this data shows there is a greater problem than we currently understand. i a greater problem than we currently understand-— understand. i have tried in a way to rive ou understand. i have tried in a way to give you an — understand. i have tried in a way to give you an answer _ understand. i have tried in a way to give you an answer to _ understand. i have tried in a way to give you an answer to that. - understand. i have tried in a way to give you an answer to that. i i understand. i have tried in a way to give you an answer to that. i thinkl give you an answer to that. i think that what— give you an answer to that. i think that what really happened was that outside _ that what really happened was that outside our living experience, we had not _ outside our living experience, we had not seen something like this for a century— had not seen something like this for a century almost and unfortunately what we _ a century almost and unfortunately what we did remember was a not helpful — what we did remember was a not helpful. because what we did remember, what the system did remember, what the system did remember was things like sars and swine _ remember was things like sars and swine flu _ remember was things like sars and swine flu and so on. others will not it diseases — swine flu and so on. others will not it diseases that certainly had an impact — it diseases that certainly had an impact in — it diseases that certainly had an impact in asia which is what we were seeing _ impact in asia which is what we were seeing but— impact in asia which is what we were seeing. but ultimately where relatively if not wholly benign in

the uk — relatively if not wholly benign in the uk if— relatively if not wholly benign in the uk. ifi relatively if not wholly benign in the uk. if i had to guess an answer to your— the uk. if i had to guess an answer to your question, i would say that that was— to your question, i would say that that was probably the default mindset and that was basically because — mindset and that was basically because of people were operating on the basis _ because of people were operating on the basis of their live experience. a failed _ the basis of their live experience. a failed mindset? | the basis of their live experience. a failed mindset?— the basis of their live experience. a failed mindset? i think it was... a failed mindset? i think it was... a human. — a failed mindset? i think it was... a human, natural— a failed mindset? i think it was... a human, natural response i a failed mindset? i think it was... a human, natural response of- a failed mindset? i think it was... i a human, natural response of people based _ a human, natural response of people based on _ a human, natural response of people based on what they had themselves seen and _ based on what they had themselves seen and observed in their lifetimes.— seen and observed in their lifetimes. �* . ., .. lifetimes. but the context from the viewoint lifetimes. but the context from the viewpoint of _ lifetimes. but the context from the viewpoint of the _ lifetimes. but the context from the viewpoint of the efficacy _ lifetimes. but the context from the viewpoint of the efficacy and i viewpoint of the efficacy and competence of the government response, regardless of the psychological issues that may have been preying on its constituent individual parts, the government failed to wake up. did it not? it failed to wake up. did it not? it failed to wake up. did it not? it failed to understand the

significance of the crisis and it must follow failed to take steps speedily enough? i must follow failed to take steps speedily enough?— must follow failed to take steps speedily enough? i think it would certainly be _ speedily enough? i think it would certainly be fair _ speedily enough? i think it would certainly be fair to _ speedily enough? i think it would certainly be fair to say _ speedily enough? i think it would certainly be fair to say of- speedily enough? i think it would certainly be fair to say of the, i speedily enough? i think it would l certainly be fair to say of the, me, the entire — certainly be fair to say of the, me, the entire whitehall establishment, scientific— the entire whitehall establishment, scientific community included, advisers — scientific community included, advisers included, that we underestimated the scale and pace of the challenge. and you can see that very clearly — the challenge. and you can see that very clearly in those early days in march _ very clearly in those early days in march and — very clearly in those early days in march and late february, through to the sequence of lockdown is, you can seem _ the sequence of lockdown is, you can see... , ., the sequence of lockdown is, you can see- - -_ we _ the sequence of lockdown is, you can see---_ we were - the sequence of lockdown is, you can see. . ._ we were all. see... system failure? we were all collectively — see... system failure? we were all collectively underestimating i see... system failure? we were all collectively underestimating how. collectively underestimating how fast it _ collectively underestimating how fast it had already spread in the uk, we — fast it had already spread in the uk, we underestimated, we put the peak too _ uk, we underestimated, we put the peak too late. the first peak too

late, _ peak too late. the first peak too late, we — peak too late. the first peak too late, we thought it would be in may, june, _ late, we thought it would be in may, june, that _ late, we thought it would be in may, june, that was totally wrong. i do not blame — june, that was totally wrong. i do not blame the scientists for that at all. not blame the scientists for that at all that _ not blame the scientists for that at all. that was refuelling. and it 'ust all. that was refuelling. and it just turned out to be wrong. but the evidence before _ just turned out to be wrong. but the evidence before milady _ just turned out to be wrong. but the evidence before milady shows i just turned out to be wrong. but the evidence before milady shows that l evidence before milady shows that the scientists, at least in part, where aware by the end of january of the hospitalisation rate, the fact that the number of infections was grossly being, was being grossly underestimated, that there was a self—sustaining human—to—human transmission, they were aware by the beginning of february at their was no effective test trace control, isolate system and the knitted kingdoms once the virus spread beyond china, and became self—sustaining, there was no effective means of stopping its entry into the united kingdom. that was all known to the scientists. at least by the beginning of february. why wasn't it known to the...

ministers. why wasn't it known to the... ministers-— why wasn't it known to the... ministers. , .. ., ministers. on the test trace and isolate, the _ ministers. on the test trace and isolate, the whole _ ministers. on the test trace and isolate, the whole diagnostics l isolate, the whole diagnostics question, i think if you look at the evidence — question, i think if you look at the evidence you can see actually we were _ evidence you can see actually we were being assured, i was being assured — were being assured, i was being assured that we were in a good place until it _ assured that we were in a good place until it became clear that was not quite _ until it became clear that was not quite right. until it became clear that was not quite right-— until it became clear that was not quite right. forgiven, i am asking ou about quite right. forgiven, i am asking you about the _ quite right. forgiven, i am asking you about the system. _ quite right. forgiven, i am asking you about the system. if - quite right. forgiven, i am asking you about the system. if the i you about the system. if the scientists knew and had the data from which the government could draw the proper conclusions, why didn't the proper conclusions, why didn't the government systemically rise up in light of these alarm bells and do something? i in light of these alarm bells and do somethin: ? .. �* in light of these alarm bells and do something?— in light of these alarm bells and do something? i don't wish to say that we were oblivious, _ something? i don't wish to say that we were oblivious, because - something? i don't wish to say that we were oblivious, because we i something? i don't wish to say that| we were oblivious, because we were not. we were oblivious, because we were not and _ we were oblivious, because we were not. and actually, a lot of work went _ not. and actually, a lot of work went on. — not. and actually, a lot of work went on. a _ not. and actually, a lot of work went on, a lot of planning, a huge amount— went on, a lot of planning, a huge amount of— went on, a lot of planning, a huge amount of discussion. sol went on, a lot of planning, a huge amount of discussion. so i think, you know. — amount of discussion. so i think, you know. i— amount of discussion. so i think, you know, lam amount of discussion. so i think, you know, i am talking quite a lot now, _ you know, i am talking quite a lot now. i_ you know, i am talking quite a lot

now. ithink— you know, i am talking quite a lot now, i think ecm first brief to me about— now, i think ecm first brief to me about it _ now, i think ecm first brief to me about it on — now, i think ecm first brief to me about it on about the 4th of february— about it on about the 4th of february and we talk about what could _ february and we talk about what could happen. sage, as you say, is meeting _ could happen. sage, as you say, is meeting it's— could happen. sage, as you say, is meeting. it's not as though nothing is happening. no. ithink meeting. it's not as though nothing is happening. no. i think what is auoin is happening. i think what is going wrong, is happening. fin. i think what is going wrong, possibly, is that we are just _ going wrong, possibly, is that we are just underestimating the pace the contagious of the disease. and you know. — the contagious of the disease. and you know, you can see very clearly from _ you know, you can see very clearly from that — you know, you can see very clearly from that crucial moment of transition from the 12th—13th of march, — transition from the 12th—13th of march, how radically the scientific appreciation of the situation changed. sage on one was... forgive me, i am changed. sage on one was... forgive me. i am asking _ changed. sage on one was... forgive me, i am asking about _ changed. sage on one was... forgive me, i am asking about january i changed. sage on one was... forgive me, i am asking about january and i me, i am asking aboutjanuary and friday, we have not got to march yet. when did you first become aware that the test and trace system,

whilst extremely efficient in practice, could not be extended beyond the first few hundred cases? it was a system designed for high consequence infectious diseases? it dealt with travellers, index cases but could not really be expanded beyond ten or 20 index cases and five 600 contacts? you beyond ten or 20 index cases and five 600 contacts?— beyond ten or 20 index cases and five 600 contacts? you are going to have to forgive _ five 600 contacts? you are going to have to forgive me, _ five 600 contacts? you are going to have to forgive me, i _ five 600 contacts? you are going to have to forgive me, i cannot - have to forgive me, i cannot remember exactly when i became obvious— remember exactly when i became obvious test and trace was not going to work _ obvious test and trace was not going to work. there came a point quite early— to work. there came a point quite early on _ to work. there came a point quite early on when i think... chris patrick— early on when i think... chris patrick said _ early on when i think... chris patrick said look, test entries is not relevant any more because of the disease _ not relevant any more because of the disease -- _ not relevant any more because of the disease. —— chris or patrick. not relevant any more because of the disease. -- chris or patrick.— disease. -- chris or patrick. from which you — disease. -- chris or patrick. from which you then — disease. -- chris or patrick. from which you then of _ disease. -- chris or patrick. from which you then of course - disease. —— chris or patrick. m...” which you then of course appreciated if the virus spread outside china and was self—sustaining and... sorry, that was probably much later in march _ sorry, that was probably much later in march. you think that was much

later— in march. you think that was much later in— in march. you think that was much later in march? i think so but i could — later in march? i think so but i could not— later in march? i think so but i could not swear to.— later in march? i think so but i could not swear to. there is a box note from — could not swear to. there is a box note from the _ could not swear to. there is a box note from the beginning - could not swear to. there is a box note from the beginning of i could not swear to. there is a box i note from the beginning ofjanuary. note from the beginning of january. this is an e—mailfrom a member of your office, mrjohnson, to post the private office support team. grateful if you could include the below in the box tonight. to be aware the chinese government permitted the flight for british nationals to wuhan, concerned here with repatriation, if we then go over the page. there is a reference to who are expected to declare a public health emergency of international concern. and then also to be aware the fco is drawing down nonofficial staff across the network in china. the day before on the 29th of january, in china. the day before on the 29th ofjanuary, there in china. the day before on the 29th of january, there was a cobra 56226.

you are not of course at that cobra, you have explained how you did not share a cobra until march. if we look at page five, we will see that the chair, mr hancock, hears from the chair, mr hancock, hears from the cmo and public health england about the fatalities in china. there was evidence of human—to—human transition and germany had four confirmed cases. and then at paragraph three, the cmo said the uk planning assumption were based on a reasonable worst—case scenario. there were two scenarios to be considered. the first is that the spread was confined within china, the second was that this pride was not limited to china and there would be a pandemic like scenario with the uk impacted. the second scenario is possible not like to take weeks to months. the cmo sets out in cobra and milady has aired evidence on this, that it was understood if the second scenario came to pass there

would be a pandemic because once control had been lost, a viral wave was inevitable. control had been lost, a viralwave was inevitable.— control had been lost, a viral wave was inevitable. yes. this is a cobra that takes place _ was inevitable. yes. this is a cobra that takes place on that day, the 29th of january. the following day, you receive a box note which appears to be solely concerned with repatriation. the question is, why were you, the prime minister, not being told directly, this is a virus which is 50 escapes china will result in a pandemic —— if it escapes. there is information it already has a serious fatality rate and hospitalisation rate. why was that basic light bulb information not work to your attention so you could see the true nature of this emergent crisis? i could see the true nature of this emergent crisis?— could see the true nature of this emergent crisis? i cannot give you the exact reason _ emergent crisis? i cannot give you the exact reason why _ emergent crisis? i cannot give you the exact reason why that - emergent crisis? i cannot give you the exact reason why that cobra i emergent crisis? i cannot give you l the exact reason why that cobra was not brought to my attention or that detail— not brought to my attention or that detail of— not brought to my attention or that detail of the cobra was not brought to my—

detail of the cobra was not brought to my attention, but i can say that at that— to my attention, but i can say that at that stage, i think that even the concept _ at that stage, i think that even the concept of— at that stage, i think that even the concept of a pandemic did not necessarily imply through the whitehall mind the kind of utter disaster— whitehall mind the kind of utter disaster that covid was to become. that may— disaster that covid was to become. that may sound odd but what i am trying _ that may sound odd but what i am trying to _ that may sound odd but what i am trying to say is that i think people were _ trying to say is that i think people were still— trying to say is that i think people were still operating in the, they were _ were still operating in the, they were still— were still operating in the, they were still thinking about things like an— were still thinking about things like an influenza pandemic or some of the _ like an influenza pandemic or some of the other— like an influenza pandemic or some of the other diseases i have mentioned.— of the other diseases i have mentioned. , . ., ., ., mentioned. this material along with a lethora mentioned. this material along with a plethora of — mentioned. this material along with a plethora of other _ mentioned. this material along with a plethora of other document i mentioned. this material along with a plethora of other document showsi a plethora of other document shows that the reasonable worst—case scenario was already being envisaged and that was a reasonable worst—case scenario which was denoted deaths to the tune of 800,000 people. it could not have been unknown to whitehall but you say... i

not have been unknown to whitehall but you say- - -_ but you say... i did not see that fiaure but you say... i did not see that figure and _ but you say... i did not see that figure and ice _ but you say... i did not see that figure and ice are _ but you say... i did not see that figure and ice are different i but you say... i did not see that. figure and ice are different figure ithink— figure and ice are different figure i think towards the end of february. by i think towards the end of february. by which _ i think towards the end of february. by which time, our alarm was really truly raised — by which time, our alarm was really truly raised. but i am trying to give _ truly raised. but i am trying to give you — truly raised. but i am trying to give you my best explanation for why people _ give you my best explanation for why people were in the mindset that they were in _ people were in the mindset that they were in. . , . people were in the mindset that they were in. ., ., .. , people were in the mindset that they were in. .,, ., .. , ., were in. there was a cabinet on the 1st ofjanuary. _ were in. there was a cabinet on the 1st ofjanuary. if— were in. there was a cabinet on the 1st ofjanuary, if we _ were in. there was a cabinet on the 1st ofjanuary, if we go _ were in. there was a cabinet on the 1st ofjanuary, if we go to _ were in. there was a cabinet on the 1st ofjanuary, if we go to page i were in. there was a cabinet on the 1st ofjanuary, if we go to page ten| 1st ofjanuary, if we go to page ten we can see the nature of the debate. it was of course chaired by you. that afternoon. the secretary of state for health and social care mr hancock says to cases have been confirmed in the native kingdom. they had been confirmed on the 30th and 31st of january. it was a very serious problem in china, large number of cases and fatalities. in

the debate moves onto typical infection rate of 2.5—3 people and the mortality rate, 2%. if the reproduction value is 2.5 — three, thatis reproduction value is 2.5 — three, that is to say one person will infect 2.5—3 people in an un—immunised population and the mortality rate, 2% of people or perhaps confirmed cases, it is not clear, means a very, very large number of people will die. correct? that's right. the number of people will die. correct? that's right-— that's right. the debate in cabinet, .ae. that's right. the debate in cabinet, -a . e ten that's right. the debate in cabinet, page ten and _ that's right. the debate in cabinet, page ten and 11. — that's right. the debate in cabinet, page ten and 11, deals _ that's right. the debate in cabinet, page ten and 11, deals with - page ten and 11, deals with repatriations. the department for international development considers whether the spread of international disease was high. spread of the disease was high. spread of the disease globally would be a big

problem for those countries could mean further evacuation of british nationals. so the debate focuses almost exclusively on the position abroad, the repatriations issue and despite the reference to the mortality rate, and the knowledge which was already in the possession of government that there was confirmed cases outside china with sustained human—to—human transmission, nobody stopped to see this means inevitably a huge number of deaths. a wall of death. in this country, if it escapes china, being overrun by the virus.— overrun by the virus. yes, i think the word inevitably _ overrun by the virus. yes, i think the word inevitably there - overrun by the virus. yes, i think the word inevitably there is i overrun by the virus. yes, i think the word inevitably there is the l overrun by the virus. yes, i think. the word inevitably there is the one that i_ the word inevitably there is the one that i would pick up on. because i think— that i would pick up on. because i think if— that i would pick up on. because i think if you — that i would pick up on. because i think if you look at what the secretary of state for health pulled the cabinet, he said if the chinese -rip the cabinet, he said if the chinese grip it. _

the cabinet, he said if the chinese grip it, then it won't be a problem but if— grip it, then it won't be a problem but if china — grip it, then it won't be a problem but if china don't group it, then that could — but if china don't group it, then that could be very serious. but your point _ that could be very serious. but your point is _ that could be very serious. but your point is still— that could be very serious. but your point is still basically a good one, which _ point is still basically a good one, which is, — point is still basically a good one, which is, we had to think about what happened _ which is, we had to think about what happened if— which is, we had to think about what happened if china didn't grip it. and i_ happened if china didn't grip it. and i think we just have to... knew now. _ and i think we just have to... knew now. put— and i think we just have to... knew now. put our— and i think we just have to... knew now, put our hands up and say look, ithink— now, put our hands up and say look, i think because of the absence of collective — i think because of the absence of collective memory, because we were operating _ collective memory, because we were operating under the different set of assumptions, i don't think that we were _ assumptions, i don't think that we were able — assumptions, i don't think that we were able to comprehend the implications of what we were actually _ implications of what we were actually looking at. and i think that sorry. _ actually looking at. and i think that sorry, let me put it a different _ that sorry, let me put it a different way, i think if we as i said _ different way, i think if we as i said right _ different way, i think if we as i said right at the beginning, if we had collectively stopped to think about— had collectively stopped to think about the mathematical implications

of some _ about the mathematical implications of some of— about the mathematical implications of some of the forecasts that were being _ of some of the forecasts that were being made and we believe them, we might— being made and we believe them, we might have _ being made and we believe them, we might have operated differently. the problem _ might have operated differently. the problem was that i don't think we attached — problem was that i don't think we attached enough credence to those forecasts _ attached enough credence to those forecasts and because of the experience that we had had with other— experience that we had had with other diseases collectively in whitehall, there was not sufficient loud enough klaxon of an alarm. i blame _ loud enough klaxon of an alarm. i blame people because of the experience they had had all their lives _ experience they had had all their lives. . ., , ., , ., lives. the material shows how it vafious lives. the material shows how it various stages _ lives. the material shows how it various stages you _ lives. the material shows how it various stages you won - lives. the material shows how it various stages you won againstl various stages you won against overreaction. you made the point that sars and mars had not turned out to be as serious for the united kingdom as some had feared at the time. bse had not resulted in the levels of deaths some had forecast.

may we take it that you put yourself in that category of people who... sufficient credence? i in that category of people who... sufficient credence?— in that category of people who... sufficient credence? i was agnostic. i... ithought... — sufficient credence? i was agnostic. |... |thought... |— sufficient credence? i was agnostic. |. .. | thought... |took_ sufficient credence? i was agnostic. i... i thought... i took what- sufficient credence? i was agnostic. |... | thought... | took what matt i i... i thought... i took what matt had to— i... i thought... i took what matt had to say— i... i thought... i took what matt had to say very seriously. i thought he wasn't _ had to say very seriously. i thought he wasn't badgering me without a reason _ he wasn't badgering me without a reason. but on the other hand, i had had the _ reason. but on the other hand, i had had the experience that you describe. sol had the experience that you describe. so i was waiting for the advice _ describe. so i was waiting for the advice and — describe. so i was waiting for the advice and waiting for that to change _ advice and waiting for that to change. in advice and waiting for that to chan . e. , .. advice and waiting for that to chance. i. , ., advice and waiting for that to chance. , ., advice and waiting for that to chance. ,., change. in your statement you say, lookin: change. in your statement you say, looking back — change. in your statement you say, looking back it — change. in your statement you say, looking back it was _ change. in your statement you say, looking back it was clear, _ change. in your statement you say, looking back it was clear, this i change. in your statement you say, looking back it was clear, this is i looking back it was clear, this is in the context of january, it is clear that we vastly underestimated the risk is airlie weeks if we properly understood how fast covid was spreading and the fact it was spreading asymptomatically there are many things we would have done differently. it was nevertheless

clear because you knew it had spread outside china to thailand, south korea, japan, and there is material or a growing understanding that it can be transmitted asymptomatically, but what things... can be transmitted asymptomatically, but what things. . ._ can be transmitted asymptomatically, but what things... haifa? no, can be transmitted asymptomatically, but what things... triage? no, there but what things... now? no, there was a dawning _ but what things... now? no, there was a dawning realisation - but what things... now? no, there was a dawning realisation the material shows for example on the 14th of february, scientific reports to sage in the first week of february, diamond princess and so on throughout the middle of february, so it was clear it was asymptomatic. but what of the many things that he would have done differently had you as you say properly understood the true nature of the crisis? goad as you say properly understood the true nature of the crisis?— true nature of the crisis? good i 'ust true nature of the crisis? good i just come _ true nature of the crisis? good i just come back _ true nature of the crisis? good i just come back on _ true nature of the crisis? good i just come back on the _ true nature of the crisis? good i i just come back on the asymptomatic quickly— just come back on the asymptomatic quickly because i do think it's important. the information i was getting _ important. the information i was getting and i think this went up right— getting and i think this went up right to — getting and i think this went up right to the middle of march was that you — right to the middle of march was that you are unlikely to have covid

unless _ that you are unlikely to have covid unless you — that you are unlikely to have covid unless you had the symptoms and i think— unless you had the symptoms and i think i_ unless you had the symptoms and i think i had — unless you had the symptoms and i think i had that from the health secretary. think i had that from the health secreta . .. think i had that from the health secreta . ., ., ., , secretary. you did, at a cabinet meetin: secretary. you did, at a cabinet meeting you — secretary. you did, at a cabinet meeting you were _ secretary. you did, at a cabinet meeting you were told - secretary. you did, at a cabinet meeting you were told that i secretary. you did, at a cabinet meeting you were told that by i secretary. you did, at a cabinet i meeting you were told that by the health secretary. 50 meeting you were told that by the health secretary.— meeting you were told that by the health secretary. so there seemed to be a treat health secretary. so there seemed to be a great deal _ health secretary. so there seemed to be a great deal of _ health secretary. so there seemed to be a great deal of doubt, _ health secretary. so there seemed to be a great deal of doubt, i'm - health secretary. so there seemed to be a great deal of doubt, i'm sure i be a great deal of doubt, i'm sure you write — be a great deal of doubt, i'm sure you write in — be a great deal of doubt, i'm sure you write in what you say about the evidence _ you write in what you say about the evidence that was being, that was knocking — evidence that was being, that was knocking around about asymptomatic transmission, i think if we had known — transmission, i think if we had known and _ transmission, i think if we had known and fully understood to answer your question, the speed of transmission and infection with fatality— transmission and infection with fatality rate, case fatality rate, i think— fatality rate, case fatality rate, i think clearly we would have acted immediately to accelerate test and trace. _ immediately to accelerate test and trace. put— immediately to accelerate test and trace, put huge quantities of time and effort —

trace, put huge quantities of time and effort into money and diagnostics into ppe, into all the things— diagnostics into ppe, into all the things that we were going to need. i'm things that we were going to need. i'm not— things that we were going to need. i'm not saying that work didn't begin. — i'm not saying that work didn't begin, but i think the panic level would _ begin, but i think the panic level would have been much higher. i am trying _ would have been much higher. i am trying to— would have been much higher. i am trying to explain as honestly as i can why— trying to explain as honestly as i can why i — trying to explain as honestly as i can why i think that panic level was not sufficiently lined. the can why i think that panic level was not sufficiently lined.— not sufficiently lined. the reason i -ut not sufficiently lined. the reason i ut the not sufficiently lined. the reason i put the question _ not sufficiently lined. the reason i put the question to _ not sufficiently lined. the reason i put the question to you _ not sufficiently lined. the reason i put the question to you in - not sufficiently lined. the reason i put the question to you in the i not sufficiently lined. the reason i put the question to you in the wayi put the question to you in the way that i did in relation to asymptomatic spread said that it was not known if we had properly understood the fact it was spreading asymptomatically then there are many things we would have done differently. you didn't know, you have explained that you did not note was spreading asymptomatically bit my suggestion to you is, important parts of the government knew by mid—february that it was spreading asymptomatically and that there was therefore a governmental failure to act on that information in the way that you have medical eloquently

described. i that you have medical eloquently described. .. ., that you have medical eloquently described. ., ., ., described. i cannot comment on that because i described. i cannot comment on that because i don't— described. i cannot comment on that because i don't know _ described. i cannot comment on that because i don't know what _ described. i cannot comment on that because i don't know what people i because i don't know what people thought— because i don't know what people thought about the issue of asymptomatic transition in february. i do rememberwhat asymptomatic transition in february. i do remember what we were being told. _ i do remember what we were being told. i_ i do remember what we were being told, i rememberthe viewer i do remember what we were being told, i remember the viewer in the cabinet _ told, i remember the viewer in the cabinet table. the thing that has troubled — cabinet table. the thing that has troubled me a lot, i'm sure we will come _ troubled me a lot, i'm sure we will come onto— troubled me a lot, i'm sure we will come onto it — troubled me a lot, i'm sure we will come onto it as the march discharge policy— come onto it as the march discharge policy were — come onto it as the march discharge policy were clearly the question of asymptomatic transmission... can policy were clearly the question of asymptomatictransmission... can we come back to — asymptomatictransmission... can we come back to that? _ asymptomatic transmission. .. can we come back to that? i _ asymptomatictransmission... can we come back to that? i am _ asymptomatictransmission... can we come back to that? i am sorry - asymptomatictransmission... can we come back to that? i am sorry to i come back to that? i am sorry to interrupt. there is important context that has to set out for the purposes of before the inquiry that the chief medical officer told mr hancock that there was credible information about asymptomatic transmission in germany. was that at fact of which you were aware? riff

transmission in germany. was that at fact of which you were aware?- fact of which you were aware? of the (mo. .. fact of which you were aware? of the cmo- -- mr — fact of which you were aware? of the cmo. .. mr hancock _ fact of which you were aware? of the cmo. .. mr hancock had _ fact of which you were aware? of the cmo. .. mr hancock had been - fact of which you were aware? of the cmo. .. mr hancock had been told i cmo. .. mr hancock had been told there was credible _ cmo. .. mr hancock had been told there was credible evidence i cmo. .. mr hancock had been told there was credible evidence of- there was credible evidence of asymptomatic transmission within germany at a meeting on the 28th of january. if i germany at a meeting on the 28th of janua . . , ., ., january. if i have been told that i have completely _ january. if i have been told that i have completely forgot - january. if i have been told that i have completely forgot that. i january. if i have been told that i have completely forgot that. my | have completely forgot that. my memory— have completely forgot that. my memory of the asymptomatic transmission issue is as i have told you _ transmission issue is as i have told you hir_ transmission issue is as i have told ou. �* ., . " transmission issue is as i have told ou. ~ ., ., transmission issue is as i have told you-_ sorry. i transmission issue is as i have told yom— sorry. i i you. mr hancock was told. sorry, i understand — you. mr hancock was told. sorry, i understand milady, _ you. mr hancock was told. sorry, i understand milady, what - you. mr hancock was told. sorry, i understand milady, what i - you. mr hancock was told. sorry, i understand milady, what i meant. you. mr hancock was told. sorry, i. understand milady, what i meant was if i knew_ understand milady, what i meant was if i knew that chris had told matt that at _ if i knew that chris had told matt that at some stage, it has completely gone from my mind. what i remember_ completely gone from my mind. what i remember about asymptomatic transmission is that insofar as i paid _ transmission is that insofar as i paid attention, to, it was that it was not — paid attention, to, it was that it was not thought to be taking place. borders _ was not thought to be taking place. borders. your statement states that the advice you got consistently from the advice you got consistently from the cmo, the government chief scientific adviser in sage, was that closing the borders would not work.

if you close them dramatically or stringently, then of course there are very real intensely difficult, practical consequences and if you just have screening or light touch restrictions, then they may achieve very little. will you just explain how you received that advice consistently from a cobra or the time of the cobra on the 5th of february through a cabinet meeting on the 14th of february, and through to the end of february? it was consistent advice that you received. yes, thank you and that is one of the most — yes, thank you and that is one of the most fascinating things about the most fascinating things about the scientific advice during this pandemic and the view about behaviours. many, many things changed. — behaviours. many, many things changed, as i have said. masks, other— changed, as i have said. masks, other npis— changed, as i have said. masks, other npis without they moved up and down in _ other npis without they moved up and down in the _ other npis without they moved up and down in the value that people put in them _ down in the value that people put in them but— down in the value that people put in them. but when it came to borders, there _ them. but when it came to borders, there was_ them. but when it came to borders, there was an — them. but when it came to borders, there was an overwhelming scientific consensus _ there was an overwhelming scientific consensus as far as i understood it

that trying — consensus as far as i understood it that trying to interrupt the virus with tougher border controls brought you but— with tougher border controls brought you but you really very little. you might— you but you really very little. you might delay by a matter of days are perhaps— might delay by a matter of days are perhaps weak spots you would not stop the _ perhaps weak spots you would not stop the virus from entering the uk and i_ stop the virus from entering the uk and i think— stop the virus from entering the uk and i think that was, i think a lot of people — and i think that was, i think a lot of people in_ and i think that was, i think a lot of people in the country found that very hard _ of people in the country found that very hard to understand. i think intuitively — very hard to understand. i think intuitively we think, just stop this thing _ intuitively we think, just stop this thing coming in. it was very difficult _ thing coming in. it was very difficult to understand that point and try— difficult to understand that point and try to explain it to the public. the public— and try to explain it to the public. the public really believe instinctive that you can fix this with— instinctive that you can fix this with tougher border control, often do and _ with tougher border control, often do ahd it's— with tougher border control, often do and it's a difficult point sometimes to get over. mr do and it's a difficult point sometimes to net over. ~ , sometimes to get over. mr cummings said in his statement _ sometimes to get over. mr cummings said in his statement you _ sometimes to get over. mr cummings said in his statement you asked - said in his statement you asked rhetorically, aren't people going to think we are if we don't close the

borders? i think we are if we don't close the borders? ., . think we are if we don't close the borders? ._ ., ,., borders? i may have said something like that but — borders? i may have said something like that but i _ borders? i may have said something like that but | think _ borders? i may have said something like that but i think it _ borders? i may have said something like that but i think it was _ borders? i may have said something like that but i think it was a - like that but i think it was a question— like that but i think it was a question that people were asking. he question that people were asking. hrs. also question that people were asking. also says, mr question that people were asking. he: also says, mrjohnson, that because of your general attitude that covid was like swine flu, you were not particularly inclined to challenge the scientific advice at all to the effect that borders, border restrictions would make no difference. is that true? the two statements _ difference. is that true? the two statements to _ difference. is that true? the two statements to me _ difference. is that true? the two statements to me seem - difference. is that true? the two statements to me seem to - difference. is that true? the two statements to me seem to be i statements to me seem to be inconsistent. is statements to me seem to be inconsistent.— statements to me seem to be inconsistent. statements to me seem to be i inconsistent._ i inconsistent. is it true or not? i certainly thought _ inconsistent. is it true or not? i certainly thought it _ inconsistent. is it true or not? i certainly thought it was - inconsistent. is it true or not? i certainly thought it was a - inconsistent. is it true or not? i certainly thought it was a point | certainly thought it was a point worth— certainly thought it was a point worth picking up with the scientists, i wanted to understand the reason — scientists, i wanted to understand the reason why border controls didn't— the reason why border controls didn't work. in retrospect, you can see that _ didn't work. in retrospect, you can see that it— didn't work. in retrospect, you can see that it was right. countries that did — see that it was right. countries that did try to use borders as a way of containing covid, really did not succeed _ of containing covid, really did not succeed in— of containing covid, really did not succeed in that. you say i think it was a _ succeed in that. you say i think it was a point — succeed in that. you say i think it

was a point worth picking up the scientists — was a point worth picking up the scientists. did you push back? can that he _ scientists. did you push back? can that be right, is there not anything that be right, is there not anything that can _ that be right, is there not anything that can he — that be right, is there not anything that can be done to at least restrict— that can be done to at least restrict the spread of the virus? i certainly— restrict the spread of the virus? i certainly remember conversations about— certainly remember conversations about borders, quite how adversarial i was _ about borders, quite how adversarial i was i _ about borders, quite how adversarial i was i couldn't tell you. all riuht. i was i couldn't tell you. all right. there _ i was i couldn't tell you. fill right. there was stock—take meeting on the lith of february when in the context of a general debate about the dhs see, hence the description stock—take meeting, the chief medical officer gave an update following an update from the cmo, the prime minister has stressed the need to continue to expire merit stands to maintain public confidence in the plan. on further travel restrictions, your secretary of state was engaging foreign common and european... you state was engaging foreign common and european...— and european... you are watching former prime _ and european. .. you are watching former prime minister— and european... you are watching former prime minister boris - and european... you are watching i former prime minister boris johnson former prime minister borisjohnson give his evidence to the covid

inquiry in central london. people who are keen to continue to watch that coverage live can do so on the iplayer. and on the bbc live page. and we will be returning to the covid inquiry here on bbc news shortly. there is lots of other news going on this lunchtime here in the uk. this is a live shot of the house of commons, where prime minister is question time is due to start at midday. viewers can watch that coverage on bbc two on the politics live programme. a busy day here so do carry on watching bbc news online and here on bbc news and bbc one. you are watching bbc news. some breaking news this hour, the government has just published its response to the 2017 report about

the hillsborough families experiences which was written by the former bishop of liverpooljames jones. the government said it is deeply sorry for taking six years to respond to a report about the hillsborough disaster, saying that delay had taken too long, compounding the agony of the hillsborough families and survivors. the government has stopped short of introducing a hillsborough law, it is believed to consider such a law would risk causing conflict and confusion. let's go live to liverpool and speak to our reporter nick garnett. let's start with that apology. the government says it is sorry for taking six years, why has it taken so long? is sorry for taking six years, why has it taken so long?— sorry for taking six years, why has it taken so long? 34 years since the disaster, it taken so long? 34 years since the disaster. in — it taken so long? 34 years since the disaster, in 2016 _ it taken so long? 34 years since the disaster, in 2016 after _ it taken so long? 34 years since the disaster, in 2016 after the - it taken so long? 34 years since the disaster, in 2016 after the end - it taken so long? 34 years since the disaster, in 2016 after the end of. disaster, in 2016 after the end of the inquest, the bishop of liverpool james shows, who has had a long history of being involved in what happened after hillsborough, was commissioned by the government to write a report. he came up with a

report with 25 recommendations for ways in which what happened at hillsborough could not happen again. in terms of what happened afterwards for the families. those 25 recommendations went to the government, since then nothing has happened, six years, seven home secretaries. countless prime ministerial changes. that delay, each new home secretary had to look at the document again and come up with their own proposals and recommendations and that has been why it has been delayed. long. today nrc minutes it had just been published. i can tell you some of the things in it. it says the government will create a new law forcing the police to be open and honest about what it knows when tragedy strikes or a disaster strikes. even if that implicates them. chief constables will be held to account. it does not go any further than just the police. to account. it does not go any

further thanjust the police. this will anger some of the families of those who were unlawfully killed at hillsborough. they had been campaigning for all public bodies, the health bodies, health and safety officials, the national government and local government, to explain everything openly and honestly as soon as a happened. that is not being put into law, the gap and said it would be confusing and could cause conflict. so they have stopped and just getting the police as part of that. it will also create a public advocate, an independent body, and offers that will look after the right and needs of families in instances such as hillsborough. let's not forget, since this report was commissioned and written in 2016, there have been and written in 2016, there have been a number of other disasters, we have been hearing all morning about the covid crisis, we have heard about the grenfell inquiry still continuing, and as well as that the manchester bombing, and in each of these cases the similar lessons that

should have been learned after hillsborough were not put in place. said the families of those who are bereaved have been left trying to fight what they see as injustice at every single turn. this isn'tjust about hillsborough, the government is damning in the way that it looks at what happened in the past. the home secretary says one of its own police forces was dishonest, that nobody was willing to admit liability for what happened and that the families were obstructed at every turn. rishi sunak has given a statement, he says there can never be too many apologies for the families have been put through. i want to thank the hillsborough family, he goes on, for their patience and courage. it is that tenacity and patience and carriage which has brought this to boot. that has. government into the position where they had to answer these 25 recommendations. from now on the government says it will be looking at ways to provide more legal aid and legal aid support for people who

have to go to court or inquests and try and look after the needs of their own bereaved relatives. they often found, one of the comments that was made at the hillsborough disaster, was that in many cases families would turn up at court to find themselves facing huge ranks are very highly paid and expert lawyers. they had none of that expertise available to them. the government says it will balance things up and make legal aid and support available to everybody that is going through this. the report itself is 75 pages long, the first inquest that took place shortly after the disaster took 90 days, but it took a further 21 years before they were overturned. new inquests were carried out in about 2014, in 2016 they came back to say the 97 people who died at hillsborough had

been unlawfully killed. the government has said, taking six years to respond to the report commissioned after that, seven home secretaries have been in place, that delay might delay 2226 days since the report was commissioned, the garment was asked to get in touch and give its recommendations and 12,653 days since 97 football fans went to a football game and never came home. went to a football game and never came home-— went to a football game and never came home. . ~' ,. �* . ~' came home. nick, thank you. breaking news that the — came home. nick, thank you. breaking news that the government _ came home. nick, thank you. breaking news that the government has - news that the government has responded to 2017 report into the hillsborough disaster. let's return to central london and in the covid inquiry were former prime minister borisjohnson has been giving his evidence all morning. we are now soon expecting him to return. he is giving evidence for two days at a

covid inquiry. facing two days of questioning, he had been criticised by some previous witnesses, but this is his opportunity to make his point and get his views across at what happened during his tenure as prime minister throughout the pandemic. as he started giving his evidence, he immediately apologised to the families of those who had died, many of whom are at the inquiry, either inside or outside. during the evidence, earlierthis inside or outside. during the evidence, earlier this morning, some people may protests, silent protest queue and asked to the room. now i think we can return live to boris johnson at the covid inquiry. did ou ask johnson at the covid inquiry. did you ask in _ johnson at the covid inquiry. d c you ask in the course of that cabinet meeting, what, bluntly, is the plan? i cabinet meeting, what, bluntly, is the lan? , , ., ,

the plan? i understood the plan be, from what matt _ the plan? i understood the plan be, from what matt had _ the plan? i understood the plan be, from what matt had said _ the plan? i understood the plan be, from what matt had said and - the plan? i understood the plan be, from what matt had said and from l the plan? i understood the plan be, l from what matt had said and from the discussions i had had, that we would try to isolate test and treat people as they arrived, that is what i thought the plan was. my impression was that we had a good testing system. i don't, to answer your question, i cannot be confident i said in that meeting, what is the plan? that is my understanding of what it was. plan? that is my understanding of what it was-— what it was. albert later on the 14th of february _ what it was. albert later on the 14th of february cabinet - what it was. albert later on the i 14th of february cabinet meeting, another update, 56138, page one, we see the attendees, page 60 update on coronavirus. —— page six the update. the prime minister said the garment and country needed to be ready for the coronavirus situation to get worse, the public messaging server had struck the right balance between preparing the public for what might

happen and not causing unnecessary alarm. yourfocus happen and not causing unnecessary alarm. your focus appears to be messaging, communications, ensuring that the public are aware but they are not caused undue alarm by an overreaction. where was the debate and you're urging about infection control measures, the practicalities, the nuts and built of stopping the virus from spreading irrevocably throughout the uk? now it had left china? i am irrevocably throughout the uk? now it had left china?— it had left china? i am not certain, first of all. — it had left china? i am not certain, first of all. on _ it had left china? i am not certain, first of all, on messaging, - it had left china? i am not certain, first of all, on messaging, the - first of all, on messaging, the messaging was incredibly important. messaging in the end was the most important tool we had to deal with the virus. i don't think we should deprecate the importance of messaging. as for measures to tackle the infection, this bread within the country, we talked about borders and

we have talked about test and trade, borders didn't really offer a panacea, test entries, we were sadly not as well—placed as we should have been —— test and trace. that been -- test and trace. that couldn't _ been -- test and trace. that couldn't work _ been -- test and trace. that couldn't work because - been -- test and trace. that couldn't work because it - been -- test and trace. thatj couldn't work because it was been —— test and trace. trust couldn't work because it was silly for a handful of cases, you have identified no other practical means to prevent the spread, why doesn't somebody say, we have a major problem here, not only is it coming but the two measures you have just identified are not going to work! for the reason i have given wages that although we can see the rw cs and we are seeing these numbers, we are not yet believing, perhaps irrationally, that the rw clr anything like it is going to happen.

that is fundamentally the problem. page seven, there is another reference to the government's plans, plans in place, top of the page, concluding the chief medical officer said that if the virus became widespread in the uk, widespread in the uk, there are plans in place. when the chief medical officer told you that, what did you make of it? bearing in mind that if the virus was widespread, it would necessarily have extended beyond the limited test and trace system about which you were beginning to understand something and the borders have obviously failed. what were the plans? i obviously failed. what were the lans? .. . , plans? i think that he is referring thereto testing _ plans? i think that he is referring thereto testing and _ plans? i think that he is referring thereto testing and tracing - plans? i think that he is referring thereto testing and tracing but i thereto testing and tracing but plainly that was inadequate. at a certain stage later in the month, as i think i say in my statement, chris briefed me about mpis, lockdowns and other measures.—

other measures. indeed. on page eiuht, other measures. indeed. on page eight. you — other measures. indeed. on page eight. you sum — other measures. indeed. on page eight. you sum up _ other measures. indeed. on page eight, you sum up the _ other measures. indeed. on page eight, you sum up the meeting. l eight, you sum up the meeting. you're grateful to the secretary of state for health, it was challenging to convince people migrate foot to the safety of state for his work on getting the balance of the medications right, there was potential for the virus to have a large impact on the uk 's economy. was it because of the mindset to which you have referred to the inquiry that you didn't say there is potential for the virus indeed a probability now that it will kill rather than focusing on the economy? i didn't say that because you use the web probability, in the sense of high suppose overwhelming likelihood, that was not what we thought. bi]! likelihood, that was not what we thou . ht. �* likelihood, that was not what we thought- but— likelihood, that was not what we thought.- but i - likelihood, that was not what we thought.- but i did - likelihood, that was not what we | thought.- but i did think thought. all right. but i did think that we were _ thought. all right. but i did think that we were now _ thought. all right. but i did think that we were now in _ thought. all right. but i did think that we were now in a _ thought. all right. but i did think that we were now in a situation l that we were now in a situation almost certainly were we were going to have to take a lot of measures to contain it, that would be costly and

difficult. so that is a point... if you think about it, that was... it wasn't nearly as fatal as people had originally said, it caused another lot of money. originally said, it caused another lot of money-— originally said, it caused another lot of money. cobra on the 18th of february was _ lot of money. cobra on the 18th of february was and _ lot of money. cobra on the 18th of february was and beating - lot of money. cobra on the 18th of february was and beating it - lot of money. cobra on the 18th of february was and beating it you i lot of money. cobra on the 18th of i february was and beating it you were present at but if we could just have up present at but if we could just have up by present at but if we could just have up by 60 to seven. in broad outline, -- 56627. the up by 60 to seven. in broad outline, —— 56627. the director of the secretariat says to mr hancock who had chaired the meeting, paragraph seven, there was work to be done to great a clear plan of activity and it is not appropriate for me to ask you what was meant by that phrase. sorry, this is matt speaking? ida,

sorry, this is matt speaking? no, that is sorry, this is matt speaking? iifr, that is paragraph 17, page seven, the chair invited the director secretary, this is her responding. catherine herman. indeed. were you aware —— catherine hammond. when your glare by this date, the 18th of berry that it was no rule book, the system had to build many parts of the response from scratch and that there was no central government plan other than the old 2011 pan flu strategy, were you told that? i wasn't told that, but that became apparent as the days went on. and clearly one of the things i hope in this inquiry is that we will have a

much better system of planning for these types of events.— these types of events. 146563 is an e-mail chain _ these types of events. 146563 is an e-mail chain between _ these types of events. 146563 is an e-mail chain between your- these types of events. 146563 is an e-mail chain between your private | e—mail chain between your private secretary, the government chief scientific adviser chris whitty and kathrin hammes, concerning the coronavirus in italy, and get your chronological period, three days before 11 municipalities in italy you will recall had locked down the population, and also i should say the diamond princess affair, the explosive outbreak on the virus on the cruise ship had become apparent, as had the figures of the number of people who showed no symptoms on that boat. but to turn to the document itself, your private secretary says it would be good to see where we get to post sage

tomorrow, at some point soon i would like to expose the prime minister to the potential decisions he might have to take in short order on this. at that moment it has been fairly abstract with him and i think. plainly you cannot go digging around in other people's e—mails on government assistance to find out for yourself, you have to be reliant on what you are told. what was your general state of information, the general state of information, the general level of knowledge at this date, now in the dog days of february? br; date, now in the dog days of february?— date, now in the dog days of februa ? j . , ., , date, now in the dog days of februa ? j . , .,y , ., february? by pleat my memory is that the scenes from _ february? by pleat my memory is that the scenes from italy _ february? by pleat my memory is that the scenes from italy really _ february? by pleat my memory is that the scenes from italy really rattled - the scenes from italy really rattled me. and i rememberseeing the scenes from italy really rattled me. and i remember seeing a note somewhere saying that the fatality rate in italy was 8% because they had an elderly population, i thought, my god, we have an elderly

population, this is appalling, and i thought my instinct was that it cannot be right. this number. and so you know, i look at all this stuff in which we seem so oblivious, with horror, we should have winker—mac connectivity have twigged. but sooner. we should have twigged. what imran is trying to do here is get the site iss to get me through the idea of the mpis the site iss to get me through the idea of the mp1s and what that would involve. , , ., involve. this is the 24th. there had been a cobra _ involve. this is the 24th. there had been a cobra on _ involve. this is the 24th. there had been a cobra on the _ involve. this is the 24th. there had been a cobra on the tuesday - involve. this is the 24th. there had l been a cobra on the tuesday before, the 18th of february, there wasn't one again until the 26th of february, this wasjust one again until the 26th of february, this was just on the cusp of half—time. there was no cabinet between friday the 14th of february and tuesday the 25th of february,

but sage continued to convene. despite being, as you have said yourself, seriously rattled by the news of italy, did the tempo of work on coronavirus nevertheless dip doing the half term break that followed? i doing the half term break that followed? ., . ., , ., doing the half term break that followed? ., . ., ., followed? i notice that you have been over— followed? i notice that you have been over that _ followed? i notice that you have been over that period _ followed? i notice that you have been over that period in - followed? i notice that you have been over that period in your i been over that period in your previous interrogations in this inquiry, and i hope the inquiry is satisfied that wasn't a long holiday that i took... satisfied that wasn't a long holiday that i took. . ._ that i took... you personally, but let me that i took. .. you personally, but let me ask— that i took... you personally, but let me ask you... _ that i took... you personally, but let me ask you... i— that i took. .. you personally, but let me ask you... i think- that i took... you personally, but let me ask you... i think there i that i took... you personally, but i let me ask you... i think there were some misapprehension. _ let me ask you... i think there were some misapprehension. you i let me ask you... i think there were some misapprehension. you carried let me ask you... i think there were i some misapprehension. you carried on workin: . .. some misapprehension. you carried on working--- if— some misapprehension. you carried on working--- if you _ some misapprehension. you carried on working... if you will _ some misapprehension. you carried on working... if you will allow _ some misapprehension. you carried on working... if you will allow me i some misapprehension. you carried on working... if you will allow me to i working... if you will allow me to set out the picture. it may make things easier. you returned to downing street three times during the half term break, you receive the

number of notes in your red box, you didn't receive a daily update dealing with coronavirus expressly or exclusively until your return from the half term break on monday the 24th of february, and the question to you is, in the box returns, the box notice you receive, or proportion focused on coronavirus? i or proportion focused on coronavirus?— or proportion focused on coronavirus? .. ., , ., or proportion focused on coronavirus? ., ., coronavirus? i cannot tell you that, i cannot remember. _ coronavirus? i cannot tell you that, i cannot remember. i _ coronavirus? i cannot tell you that, i cannot remember. i remembered| i cannot remember. i remembered there was conversations going on about covid with my officials, and in that very period i rang president xijinping of china to offer the uk's condolences for what was happening in china, to discuss the origins of covid, and to compare notes on what was happening. i also

i couple of days later rang president trump in america to discuss exactly the same thing. so despite or has been said, by some evidence, there was a lot going on and it really starts to melt in tempo round about the time we get backin tempo round about the time we get back in one's note... fin tempo round about the time we get back in one's note. . ._ tempo round about the time we get back in one's note... on the 28. the auestion back in one's note... on the 28. the question to — back in one's note... on the 28. the question to you _ back in one's note... on the 28. the question to you is, _ back in one's note... on the 28. the question to you is, nobody - back in one's note... on the 28. the question to you is, nobody is i question to you is, nobody is suggesting you put your feet up doing that week.— suggesting you put your feet up doing that week. i doing that week. apart from you! i am suggesting _ doing that week. apart from you! i am suggesting to _ doing that week. apart from you! i am suggesting to you _ doing that week. apart from you! i am suggesting to you by _ doing that week. apart from you! i am suggesting to you by your i am suggesting to you by your reference it that the tempo increased after the half term break between the 14th appropriate when cabinet discussed the plans that we need to be drawn up to the 25th of february, after half term, relatively little overall was done in terms of responding to this

immediate crisis. i in terms of responding to this immediate crisis.— in terms of responding to this immediate crisis. i think, forgive me, i immediate crisis. i think, forgive me. i was _ immediate crisis. i think, forgive me, i was referring _ immediate crisis. i think, forgive me, i was referring to _ immediate crisis. i think, forgive me, i was referring to a i me, i was referring to a conversation that happened to be caught with a previous witness, the impression was being given by someone that i was relaxing during that period. i someone that i was relaxing during that eriod. .. someone that i was relaxing during that period-— that period. i think it was mr cummings- _ that period. i think it was mr cummings. not _ that period. i think it was mr cummings. not given i that period. i think it was mr cummings. not given by i that period. i think it was mr cummings. not given by me| that period. i think it was mr i cummings. not given by me but the witness. i take _ cummings. not given by me but the witness. i take it _ cummings. not given by me but the witness. i take it back _ witness. i take it back unreservedly. i- witness. i take it back unreservedly. i was i witness. i take it back i unreservedly. i was working throughout the period and the tempo did increase, particularly during... when we got, when i saw the message from catherine hammond, a think it was the 2nd of march, and told it was the 2nd of march, and told it was earlier... was the 2nd of march, and told it was earlier. . ._ was the 2nd of march, and told it was earlier... there was a meeting on friday the _ was earlier... there was a meeting on friday the 20th _ was earlier... there was a meeting on friday the 20th of _ was earlier... there was a meeting on friday the 20th of february i was earlier... there was a meeting on friday the 20th of february thatj on friday the 20th of february that you attended with the ccf.- you attended with the ccf. that's riaht, and you attended with the ccf. that's right, and what _ you attended with the ccf. that's right, and what troubles i you attended with the ccf. that's right, and what troubles me i you attended with the ccf. that's right, and what troubles me was| you attended with the ccf. that's right, and what troubles me was that

she and number —— the sheer number of potentialfertility she and number —— the sheer number of potential fertility is. this was just a horrifying figure —— the sheer number of potential fatalities. i thought, sheer number of potential fatalities. ithought, because sheer number of potential fatalities. i thought, because what the paper also said was it may be a bad flu pandemic or it may be milder than that. but i thought we had plenty of bad flu pandemic in the uk, and we also have, if it is mounted on that, it would be an exceptional thing. why am i also been told that it is 520,000? that was a meeting _ been told that it is 520,000? that was a meeting on _ been told that it is 520,000? that was a meeting on the _ been told that it is 520,000? that was a meeting on the 28th of february but i want you please to answer the question about the tempo of work on coronavirus between the 14th of february and the 28th of february when that paper was

produced to you? would you accept that there was a lost opportunity on the part of government to react with sufficient speed and attention to the nature of this crisis in that two—week period, for whatever reason, because of the mindset, because parts of government were away, it matters not, overall the government took it off the ball in that two—week period by failing to act sufficiently speedily. i that two-week period by failing to act sufficiently speedily.— act sufficiently speedily. i think that there were _ act sufficiently speedily. i think that there were clearly i act sufficiently speedily. i think that there were clearly things l act sufficiently speedily. i think i that there were clearly things that we could have done if we had, and should have done if we had known and understood quite how fast it was spreading, but we didn't. that was a reality. spreading, but we didn't. that was a reali . ., , ., ., , ., spreading, but we didn't. that was a reali . ., ., ., reality. there was a cobra on wednesday _ reality. there was a cobra on wednesday the _ reality. there was a cobra on wednesday the 26 _ reality. there was a cobra on wednesday the 26 appear i reality. there was a cobra on i wednesday the 26 appear very, reality. there was a cobra on - wednesday the 26 appear very, 56216, page six. —— 26 of february. not again a cobra you were present at, but it is a cobra of the utmost

seriousness because, on page 11, the chair mr hancock said the reasonable worst—case planning assumptions looked close to becoming the reasonable planning assumptions as cases in italy demonstrated the need for heightened alertness. turning that into plain english, what mr hancock was saying was that the government which had hitherto been working on the basis of planning for a reasonable worst—case scenario, planning for the worst but hoping for a better outcome, planning for the worst but hoping fora better outcome, had planning for the worst but hoping for a better outcome, had realised that the reality of the scenario, identified by sir chris whitty in january, the second scenario, was looking close to becoming the reality, that is to say the reasonable worst—case scenario was indeed coming to pass. not there

quite yet but was looking close. would you agree that that understanding was a crucial moment? sorry, what date is this? this understanding was a crucial moment? sorry, what date is this?— sorry, what date is this? this is a 26 of february. — sorry, what date is this? this is a 26 of february, meeting - sorry, what date is this? this is a 26 of february, meeting of- sorry, what date is this? this is a 26 of february, meeting of not i sorry, what date is this? this is a | 26 of february, meeting of not at, and advance in receipt of you by the civil contingencies paper. it and advance in receipt of you by the civil contingencies paper.— civil contingencies paper. it does look as though _ civil contingencies paper. it does look as though that _ civil contingencies paper. it does look as though that meeting i civil contingencies paper. it does i look as though that meeting informed catherine hammond's paper and perhaps was the reason why i got a meeting i did, but i couldn't swear to that. i meeting i did, but i couldn't swear to that. ., �* meeting i did, but i couldn't swear to that. . �* meeting i did, but i couldn't swear tothat. . �* meeting i did, but i couldn't swear tothat. . ., to that. i haven't asked you that, but it may _ to that. i haven't asked you that, but it may well _ to that. i haven't asked you that, but it may well be _ to that. i haven't asked you that, but it may well be that _ to that. i haven't asked you that, but it may well be that the i to that. i haven't asked you that, i but it may well be that the material shows the ccf sped past to provide a paper for you shows the ccf sped past to provide a paperfor you before shows the ccf sped past to provide a paper for you before this shows the ccf sped past to provide a paperfor you before this meeting. the question from this paragraph for you is, as the prime minister, were

you is, as the prime minister, were you told that the cobra which you had not shared had been told that the reasonable worst—case scenario was looking close to becoming the reality? i was looking close to becoming the reali ? ., �* , ., the reality? i don't remember that. the ccf --aer reality? i don't remember that. the ccf paper is — reality? i don't remember that. the ccr paper is 182311. _ reality? i don't remember that. the ccr paper is 182311. the _ reality? i don't remember that. the ccr paper is 182311. the first - ccf paper is 182311. the first paragraph, covid looks likely to become a global pandemic, although this is not yet certain. the first sentence of this report. did you ask catherine hammond, how can it not yet be certain when the virus has escaped china, it has sustained, there is sustained human—to—human transmission outside china, there are cases now in the uk, and we have no means of preventing its spread? why is she saying it had not yet certain? i why is she saying it had not yet certain? .. why is she saying it had not yet certain? ~' ., �* ~ ., certain? i think, i don't know the answer, certain? i think, i don't know the answer. why _ certain? i think, i don't know the

answer, why she _ certain? i think, i don't know the answer, why she is _ certain? i think, i don't know the answer, why she is saying i certain? i think, i don't know the answer, why she is saying that, l certain? i think, i don't know the answer, why she is saying that, i think formally speaking it had not yet been declared a global pandemic and i think it was up to the who to do so, maybe she is referring to that. i read and has meaning it is not yet certain to be a major problem. not yet certain to be a ma'or portend not yet certain to be a ma'or roblem. . . ., , ., , ., problem. paragraph two, basing on existin: problem. paragraph two, basing on existing assumptions, _ problem. paragraph two, basing on existing assumptions, about i problem. paragraph two, basing on existing assumptions, about half. problem. paragraph two, basing on existing assumptions, about half of the uk population would become ill and up to 520,000 people could die as a direct result of covid. just posing there, note the reference to could die as opposed to would die, once the virus has a self—sustaining community transmission. the scientific advice is to use these numbers for planning, they are not a prediction. did anybody at that meeting, the meeting in which you had, we will come to the actual

meeting itself in a moment, did anybody at the meeting at which this paper was discussed ask catherine hammond, why is the sole paper from the civil content is secretary and, the civil content is secretary and, the crisis management body in the heart of government, suggesting that these figures are not a prediction when, as you havejust these figures are not a prediction when, as you have just described, the information to cobra on the 26th of february was saying the reasonable worst—case planning assumptions close to becoming reality? i assumptions close to becoming reali ? ., ., , ., reality? i cannot answer that question- — reality? i cannot answer that question- it _ reality? i cannot answer that question. it is _ reality? i cannot answer that question. it is a _ reality? i cannot answer that question. it is a very i reality? i cannot answer that question. it is a very good i question. it is a very good question. it is a very good question-— question. it is a very good cuestion. . ., ., ., , question. page two, paragraph nine. the reort question. page two, paragraph nine. the report says. _ question. page two, paragraph nine. the report says, we _ question. page two, paragraph nine. the report says, we need _ question. page two, paragraph nine. the report says, we need to i question. page two, paragraph nine. the report says, we need to strike i question. page two, paragraph nine. the report says, we need to strike a | the report says, we need to strike a balance between taking precautionary steps and overreacting. as cases

spread, the risk of overreacting is reducing. we are now planning for a potential global pandemic that would inevitably spread to the uk, so it would end this paragraph inevitably spread. did you assess reading this report that the reference to overreaction was long past and that in fact in the striking of that balance there was now a real emergency and i need to take the toshney steps straightaway? i think that -- precautionary _ toshney steps straightaway? i think that -- precautionary steps. i i toshney steps straightaway? i think that -- precautionary steps. i found that —— precautionary steps. i found the paper very alarming and arresting, i remember going to talk to my officials about it. saying, which is it? a severe to mild flu pandemic, orsomething which is it? a severe to mild flu pandemic, or something more serious? i couldn't understand what i was

being asked to anticipate. i have referred to _ being asked to anticipate. i have referred to the _ being asked to anticipate. i have referred to the meeting, i being asked to anticipate. i have referred to the meeting, your i referred to the meeting, your private secretary refers that one for 666 meeting —— private secretary refers that one for 666 meeting "14666, it private secretary refers that one for 666 meeting —— m666, it is difficult to read his writing, but there is a reference to the prime minister asking about the strategy. what is the strategy? when are we going to take big decisions? of what evidence? and then you say, biggest damage done by overreaction. it looks from the face of this note that your sense that there was a real crisis, that you were extremely rattled, is prevalent in the first sentence, but in the second sentence perhaps a reflection of the cc5 report you say the biggest damage is done by overreaction. l report you say the biggest damage is done by overreaction.—

done by overreaction. i thinki am leavin: done by overreaction. i thinki am leaving both _ done by overreaction. i thinki am leaving both possibilities - done by overreaction. i thinki am leaving both possibilities open - leaving both possibilities open because that is how it still struck me. i think that... in disasters such as this, the actions that government take inevitably also have costs. i'm sure will come under those but that is ability you have to strike. —— that is a balance you have to strike. as prime minister, instead of warning over existential crisis you won against overreacting. m0. warning over existential crisis you won against overreacting.- warning over existential crisis you won against overreacting. no, i said forgiveness. — won against overreacting. no, i said forgiveness. i _ won against overreacting. no, i said forgiveness, i said _ won against overreacting. no, i said forgiveness, i said when _ won against overreacting. no, i said forgiveness, i said when we - won against overreacting. no, i said forgiveness, i said when we going . won against overreacting. no, i said| forgiveness, i said when we going to take decisions based on evidence? because _ take decisions based on evidence? because i'm looking at a problem with being presented to me. i need to know_ with being presented to me. i need to know what the plan is going to be.

to know what the plan is going to be i_ to know what the plan is going to be i have — to know what the plan is going to be. i have told you that i don't like the — be. i have told you that i don't like the look of the way it is going in italy— like the look of the way it is going in italy at— like the look of the way it is going in italy at all. and all we need to do something. and that is the day, i think_ do something. and that is the day, i think the _ do something. and that is the day, i think the 28th, when i remember, i'm not sure— think the 28th, when i remember, i'm not sure if— think the 28th, when i remember, i'm not sure if chris would confirm, i remember— not sure if chris would confirm, i remember having a long conversation with him _ remember having a long conversation with him at— remember having a long conversation with him at some stage around that date when — with him at some stage around that date when he takes me through npis what week— date when he takes me through npis what week later referred to as lockdown is and he tells me about the pros— lockdown is and he tells me about the pros and cons, behavioural fatigue. — the pros and cons, behavioural fatigue, and takes me through the issues _ fatigue, and takes me through the issues i_ fatigue, and takes me through the issues. i think what i'm saying is if this— issues. i think what i'm saying is if this is— issues. i think what i'm saying is if this is the _ issues. i think what i'm saying is if this is the problem, then when i my going — if this is the problem, then when i my going to— if this is the problem, then when i my going to be given a menu of options — my going to be given a menu of options about what we're going to do about— options about what we're going to do about this? _ options about what we're going to do about this? the options about what we're going to do about this? ., ., ., about this? the readout from the meetin: about this? the readout from the meeting 136750 _ about this? the readout from the meeting 136750 shows _ about this? the readout from the meeting 136750 shows that - about this? the readout from the meeting 136750 shows that you i about this? the readout from the - meeting 136750 shows that you called for a major ramp up of all gd, other

government department activity. on domestic preparedness. if you just go over to i think the second page, there we are, top of the page, i missed it, thank you. we need a major ramp up of all gd activity on domestic preparedness. we should use the cobra meeting to land this point with the secretary of state. the prime minister agreed with the action plan that was published, which was published on the 3rd of march, contain delay, you left the draft plan over that weekend, did you not? draft plan over that weekend, did ou not? , , , draft plan over that weekend, did| you not?_ 28th you not? the first time, yes. 28th february one _ you not? the first time, yes. 28th february one of— you not? the first time, yes. 28th february one of march. _ you not? the first time, yes. 28th february one of march. the - you not? the first time, yes. 28th| february one of march. the agreed you not? the first time, yes. 28th - february one of march. the agreed to the need for earlier legislation and there is a debate about

repatriation. do you, with hindsight and i emphasise hindsight, except that the level of seriousness may not have been sufficiently communicated from you? do you see that you did enough? i communicated from you? do you see that you did enough?— that you did enough? i think that i did what i could. _ that you did enough? i think that i did what i could. i— that you did enough? i think that i did what i could. i think _ that you did enough? i think that i did what i could. i think the - did what i could. i think the problem _ did what i could. i think the problem is that actually, if you exclude — problem is that actually, if you exclude borders and test and trace is not _ exclude borders and test and trace is not as— exclude borders and test and trace is not as good as it's cracked up to be, and _ is not as good as it's cracked up to be, and if— is not as good as it's cracked up to be, and if you are told that we have -ot be, and if you are told that we have got ample _ be, and if you are told that we have got ample supplies of ppe, i was finding _ got ample supplies of ppe, i was finding it — got ample supplies of ppe, i was finding it hard to conceptualise exactly — finding it hard to conceptualise exactly what we should be doing except _ exactly what we should be doing except for the npis. and the only thing _ except for the npis. and the only thing that— except for the npis. and the only thing that i'd been given. and we had no _ thing that i'd been given. and we had no plan for that and i don't

think— had no plan for that and i don't think the — had no plan for that and i don't think the concept of lockdown, even the word _ think the concept of lockdown, even the word lockdown had yet emerged. indeed _ the word lockdown had yet emerged. indeed not~ _ the word lockdown had yet emerged. indeed not. there is a 25th of february sage meeting where non—pharmaceutical interventions were debated, there was a debate about extreme social—distance at the beginning of march, lockdown does not appear to have... but your answer is that i think the problem is that if you exclude borders and test and trace, is not as good as it's cracked up to be and if you are told we have got ample supplies of ppe i find it hard to conceptualise exactly what we should be doing. that debate, that realisation on your part that there is no effective border control, that ppe may be deficient, that there is no effective test and trace scaled up test and trace, is absent. that level of debate does not take, there is no general realisation the virus

is no general realisation the virus is coming. it is to present the tally to rate 1%, and we have not got the measures to deal with it, that debate does not take place. find that debate does not take place. and i think that's — that debate does not take place. and i think that's right. i think for the same _ i think that's right. i think for the same reason which is the reason i have _ the same reason which is the reason i have given, — the same reason which is the reason i have given, which is that people can see _ i have given, which is that people can see that it could happen as catherine — can see that it could happen as catherine hammond puts it, they still don't — catherine hammond puts it, they still don't think that it's very likely— still don't think that it's very likely to _ still don't think that it's very likely to happen. and that the realitv — likely to happen. and that the reality. in likely to happen. and that the reali . ~., . ., likely to happen. and that the reali . . ., , likely to happen. and that the reali . ., , reality. in march on the second you cheered your _ reality. in march on the second you cheered your first _ reality. in march on the second you cheered your first cobra. _ reality. in march on the second you cheered your first cobra. 56217. - reality. in march on the second you cheered your first cobra. 56217. if l cheered your first cobra. 56217. if we look at page five, paragraph two, we look at page five, paragraph two, we can see that you are told... that contact tracing for the source of

infection for the last two cases had not been successful. pausing there, even the limited test and trace system the natick kingdom had failed to pick up what was still then only relatively relatively few number of cases, not the last two and that in both france and germany there was a sustained community transmission. so in terms of infection spread, it may be thought, well, game over, in terms of infection spread. the aim for the delay phase was to delay the peak of infection to reduce loss of life. then in paragraph three, the cmo said interventions to delay the spread of the virus must not be implemented to early to ensure maximum effectiveness. there is

material from maximum effectiveness. there is materialfrom spidey, one of the sage subcommittees also cobra on the 4th sage subcommittees also cobra on the lith of march and the 9th of march, which demonstrates the chief medical officer in particular said timing of implementation is crucial, compliance or despondency is heavily dependent on timing. i'm going to use the well—known phrase behavioural fatigue goat has no scientific genesis, you understand the phrase and its meaning. to what extent where your decisions and we are now getting into the phase of which social—distancing measures were starting to be complicated, to what extent was your decision—making process influenced by this notion

that intervention should not be imposed to early? it that intervention should not be imposed to early?— imposed to early? it was the prevailing — imposed to early? it was the prevailing view _ imposed to early? it was the prevailing view for _ imposed to early? it was the prevailing view for a - imposed to early? it was the prevailing view for a long - imposed to early? it was the i prevailing view for a long time, imposed to early? it was the - prevailing view for a long time, and it was— prevailing view for a long time, and it was not— prevailing view for a long time, and it was notjust prevailing view for a long time, and it was not just the cmo who articulated the concept of behavioural fatigue. articulated the concept of behaviouralfatigue. if articulated the concept of behavioural fatigue. if you look at the many— behavioural fatigue. if you look at the many other meetings, the press conference — the many other meetings, the press conference of the 12th of march, you can see _ conference of the 12th of march, you can see that — conference of the 12th of march, you can see that the csa gives a very full description of what happens. if you go— full description of what happens. if you go in— full description of what happens. if you go in hard and early with a population that has no immunity. and then you _ population that has no immunity. and then you release the measures, it bounces _ then you release the measures, it bounces back. i think you described the springm — bounces back. i think you described the spring... will bounces back. i think you described the spring- - -— bounces back. i think you described the spring- - -_ the spring... will you forgive me if i ause the spring... will you forgive me if i pause you? _

the spring. .. will you forgive me if i pause you? i— the spring... will you forgive me if i pause you? i was _ the spring... will you forgive me if i pause you? i was asking - the spring... will you forgive me if| i pause you? i was asking questions about this idea that the population must not have measures imposed too early because they will become tired of it. there is an issue about maximum effectiveness. i was not in fact asking about the recoil or... forgive me, you are quite right but the two _ forgive me, you are quite right but the two things are connected. what they went _ the two things are connected. what they went on to say on the 12th of march _ they went on to say on the 12th of march is — they went on to say on the 12th of march is that people get fed up and you lose _ march is that people get fed up and you lose the, and we will come to this in— you lose the, and we will come to this in the — you lose the, and we will come to this in the latter of the october november lockdown is, you have to keep doing — november lockdown is, you have to keep doing it. so my anxiety was in the absence — keep doing it. so my anxiety was in the absence of therapeutics and without — the absence of therapeutics and without a — the absence of therapeutics and without a vaccination programme, if recently— without a vaccination programme, if recently went into a hard lockdown early. _ recently went into a hard lockdown early, and — recently went into a hard lockdown early, and then had no alternative but to _

early, and then had no alternative but to come out, but to answer your main _ but to come out, but to answer your main question, it was an anxiety, a problem _ main question, it was an anxiety, a problem that was very prevalent during _ problem that was very prevalent during those early days. this issue a- ears during those early days. this issue a - ears to during those early days. this issue appears to have — during those early days. this issue appears to have been _ during those early days. this issue appears to have been raised - during those early days. this issue appears to have been raised with l during those early days. this issue i appears to have been raised with you at a relatively early stage on the 2nd of march. we must not implement too early in order to ensure maximum effectiveness. to what extent do you think it likely you would have proceeded to implement measures earlier than you did had you not been told you must not go too early to ensure maximum effectiveness. what is the impact of this? what should the inquiry make of this debate? is it important... it is fundamental. _ debate? is it important... it is fundamental. it— debate? is it important... it is fundamental. it goes, - debate? is it important... it is fundamental. it goes, because i'm afraid— fundamental. it goes, because i'm afraid it— fundamental. it goes, because i'm afraid it is— fundamental. it goes, because i'm afraid it is what happened. we have to be _ afraid it is what happened. we have to be realistic about 2020, the whole — to be realistic about 2020, the whole year, that whole tragic, tragic— whole year, that whole tragic, tragic year. we did lockdown. but

then it _ tragic year. we did lockdown. but then it bounced back. after we had unlocked — then it bounced back. after we had unlocked. so then it bounced back. after we had unlocked. , ~ unlocked. so sorry, mrjohnson, may i brina ou unlocked. so sorry, mrjohnson, may i bring you back. _ unlocked. so sorry, mrjohnson, may i bring you back, it _ unlocked. so sorry, mrjohnson, may i bring you back, it is _ unlocked. so sorry, mrjohnson, may i bring you back, it is the _ unlocked. so sorry, mrjohnson, may i bring you back, it is the first - i bring you back, it is the first week in march. had you not been told, don't go too early because there is a limit to which the population will be able to bear the implementation of these measures, would you have gone earlier than you did, and by what time where you effectively forced to delay? i don't think i can say _ effectively forced to delay? i don't think i can say that _ effectively forced to delay? i don't think i can say that i _ effectively forced to delay? i don't think i can say that i would - effectively forced to delay? i don't think i can say that i would have . think i can say that i would have gone _ think i can say that i would have gone earlier because i think i would have been— gone earlier because i think i would have been guided by what advice i was getting about put mpis in. don't forget, _ was getting about put mpis in. don't forget, this is a once in a century event _ forget, this is a once in a century event when— forget, this is a once in a century event. when doing things, enacting policies _ event. when doing things, enacting policies that has never been enacted in our— policies that has never been enacted in our lifetime in this country and to do— in our lifetime in this country and to do at— in our lifetime in this country and to do at the — in our lifetime in this country and to do at the drop of a hat is very

logistically— to do at the drop of a hat is very logistically difficult but it was, you know, not something you jumped into. you know, not something you 'umped into. ., , you know, not something you 'umped into. . , ., _ ~ into. having been told by the cmo, be careful. — into. having been told by the cmo, be careful, don't _ into. having been told by the cmo, be careful, don't go _ into. having been told by the cmo, be careful, don't go too _ into. having been told by the cmo, be careful, don't go too early, - be careful, don't go too early, because the population might not be it, did you consider saying to him, in this general debate about non—pharmaceutical interventions and social—distancing, the public health demands, the likelihood of death and hospitalisation demand that we take those measures, regardless of whether the population are prepared to put up with it over time. did you push back against this notion of don't go too early?— push back against this notion of don't go too early? short answer is no. so i don't go too early? short answer is no- so i don't— don't go too early? short answer is no. so i don't remember— don't go too early? short answer is no. so i don't remember saying - don't go too early? short answer is no. so i don't remember saying to | no. so i don't remember saying to myself— no. so i don't remember saying to myself absolutely candidly, i don't remember saying to myself this is so

bad, they— remember saying to myself this is so bad, they must be wrong, i must overrule — bad, they must be wrong, i must overrule the scientists or i must ignore _ overrule the scientists or i must ignore the — overrule the scientists or i must ignore the scientists, i must go... no question— ignore the scientists, i must go... no question of overruling the scientist, your following the scientists.— scientist, your following the scientists. .. . ., scientists. correct, forgive me. that's a very — scientists. correct, forgive me. that's a very important - scientists. correct, forgive me. - that's a very important distinction. i must _ that's a very important distinction. i must ignore the scientific advice and the _ i must ignore the scientific advice and the threats to public health and if worse _ and the threats to public health and if worse outcomes if we go too early and i_ if worse outcomes if we go too early and i must _ if worse outcomes if we go too early and i must simply maximise, i got to do with— and i must simply maximise, i got to do with the _ and i must simply maximise, i got to do with the problem in front of the windscreen, dealwith do with the problem in front of the windscreen, deal with it now, i didn't— windscreen, deal with it now, i didn't do— windscreen, deal with it now, i didn't do that and i learned perhaps with hindsight i should have done but as— with hindsight i should have done but as i_ with hindsight i should have done but as i said to you right at the outset — but as i said to you right at the outset of— but as i said to you right at the outset of this, ijust don't know the answer. outset of this, i 'ust don't know the m._ outset of this, i 'ust don't know the swr— outset of this, i 'ust don't know the answr— outset of this, i 'ust don't know the answer._ mr. outset of this, i 'ust don't know- the answer._ mr keith, the answer. that is clear. mr keith, is that a convenient... _ the answer. that is clear. mr keith, is that a convenient... it _ the answer. that is clear. mr keith, is that a convenient... it is - the answer. that is clear. mr keith, is that a convenient... it isjust - is that a convenient... it isjust that— is that a convenient... it isjust that we — is that a convenient... it isjust that we normally _ is that a convenient... it isjust that we normally break - is that a convenient... it isjust that we normally break every l

is that a convenient... it is just i that we normally break every hour and a _ that we normally break every hour and a quarter— that we normally break every hour and a quarter and _ that we normally break every hour and a quarter and that's _ that we normally break every hour and a quarter and that's probablyl and a quarter and that's probably enough _ and a quarter and that's probably enough this— and a quarter and that's probably enough this morning. _ you have been listening to the former prime minister borisjohnson give evidence there at the covid inquiry in central london. they have just now broken for lunch. let's speak now to our correspondent who has been outside of the covid inquiry this morning. what have we been heaving? ll} inquiry this morning. what have we been heaving?— inquiry this morning. what have we been heaving? 20 to choose from. i was 'ust been heaving? 20 to choose from. i was just making _ been heaving? 20 to choose from. i wasjust making a _ been heaving? 20 to choose from. i wasjust making a note _ been heaving? 20 to choose from. i wasjust making a note of— been heaving? 20 to choose from. i wasjust making a note of the - was just making a note of the highlights and there were so much to write down i had given up really. i think in the last hour or so, what has been really interesting is a look into this idea of timing. how borisjohnson should have twigged earlier, he said the scenes coming out of italy had rattled him, but

his decisions or lack thereof early enough he said basically a virus had not broken on the political leaders of the time ofjust how important it was. he talks about for example bse, virus back in the early 905 where, which the british government had worried about mad cow disease and how that might be transmitted to humans. and how he said in effect that was an example of the government overreacting and he did not want this to be the same thing if you like. we also had about the toxic culture we have been hearing so much about over the last couple of weeks in downing street, he talked about an atmosphere of challenge which he applauded and that simply things were always this way but it's just that we have heard more about it from whatsapp. that has made it all a bit more obvious

to the public. on track thank you very much, we will have more courage later on in the day. let's go now to the house of commons, with the government has been responding to the hillsborough report of, let's see what they have to say. . the response that flows from it. i had the privilege of meeting many of the family's liverpool ofjune this year alongside the former home secretary. i was deeply moved to hear of their experiences and by the dignity with which they shared them. perhaps even more affecting their own flinching determination to make sense of the census and bring about change for others. that is the true mark of compassion, campaigning for change knowing nothing any government can do will bring back their own loved ones. the hillsborough families through determined efforts over decades created a lasting legacy, a national figure that is a tribute to their loved ones. at the start of his

report bishopjames expressed his hope that we might be a better nation for having listened to them. we are and they deserve the thanks of our nation. second, i pay tribute to those in this house who continue to those in this house who continue to campaign on behalf of the hillsborough families, to campaign on behalf of the hillsboroughfamilies, including to campaign on behalf of the hillsborough families, including a memberfor hillsborough families, including a member for gaston hillsborough families, including a memberfor gaston and hillsborough families, including a member for gaston and hillwood, holton, were all south and liverpool west derby. i thank former members of the house who have given important support of the families, and i thank the former prime minister the right honourable member for maidenhead. and i thank glenn taylorfor his vital work for maidenhead. and i thank glenn taylor for his vital work on the ongoing independent forensic pathology review. quite apart from its important recommendations, bishopjames's reportedly bedded this dating experiences of those bereaved by the hillsborough disaster, an unimaginable tragedy unfolded. 97 innocent men, women and children ultimately lost their

lives, hundreds more were injured and traumatised by what they saw but for hillsborough cosmic bereaved and survivors that terrible day was only day one of an enduring ordeal and in the days and decades after it became clear they suffered a double injustice. first, there was abject failure of the police and others at the ground to protect their loved ones, failures described in lord justice taylor's 1990 ones, failures described in lord justice taylor'51990 report as blunders of the first magnitude. then they faced years of unforgivable defensiveness. the survivors and families discovered cruelty as innocent fans were lame for their own deaths but that was a web of lies spun by those seeking to protect their own reputation. i emphasise a point because although the disaster may have been over 3a years ago, these baseless narratives still inexplicably persist in some quarters today so let me take this

important opportunity to restate what is not a matter of opinion but unassailable fact. fans attending the hillsborough stadium on the 15th of april 1989 bear absolutely responsibility for the deaths that occurred. in making that statement i echo what was said seven years ago by my right honourable friend the memberfor by my right honourable friend the member for maidenhead by my right honourable friend the memberfor maidenhead at by my right honourable friend the member for maidenhead at this dispatch box when she read out the full findings of the second inquest. namely, 96 men, women and children were unlawfully killed. since then, andrew devine who suffered life changing injuries that hillsborough passed away in 2021, becoming the 97th vitality of the disaster. i would like to place on record my deepest sympathies to his family and friends and all those who lost loved ones. the government's response to bishopjames's report has been a long time coming, too long. for some of that time, some, it was held back

to... there has been delay and that is only compounded the pain of the hillsborough families and survivors in the government apologises for that. as the house will be aware, the government's response follows out of the place which was published in january out of the place which was published injanuary this out of the place which was published in january this year. today the chief coroner is also publishing his response which relate his leadership role regarding the coronial service and these address the points raised by bishopjames, but this doesn't stop here. we will of course continue to listen to families of those involved in all major incidents and their concerns. turning to the report. it contains 25 points of learning. whilst bishop james said he considered each to be vitally important, he was clear that three in particular were in his words crucial. so let me turn to those. first, he proposed the creation of a charter for families bereaved through public tragedy. bishop james bereaved through public tragedy. bishopjames made clear that he

wanted to help bring about cultural change through commitments to change it project related to transparency and acting in the public interest. it is worth reflecting that in setting out point of learning 13 regarding the hillsborough thor which i will come onto, we should james said he had drawn heavily on that law's principles in the drafting of this charter. so it is worth taking a moment to consider the language of the charter. it commits signatories, the leaders of public bodies to strive to one, place a public interest above the reputation of their own organisations, two, to approach all forms of public scrutiny, including public inquiries and inquest, with candour in an open, honest and transparent way and three, to avoid seeking to defend the indefensible. i can tell the house that the deputy prime minister has today signed what will be known as the hillsborough charter on behalf of the government.

other signatories of the charter include the national police chief counsel on behalf of all 43 police forces, the college of policing, the crown prosecution service, the national pages council and others. we want this charter to become part of the culture of what it means to be a public servant in britain. the deputy prime minister will be writing to all departments to ensure that everyone who works in government is aware of the hillsborough charter and what it means for the way they work. a reference to the charter will also be added to the central induction to the civil service for all new joiners. the civil service for all new 'oiners. , .. the civil service for all new 'oiners. , ., ., ., joiners. hillsborough charter and indeed bishop _ joiners. hillsborough charter and indeed bishop james's _ joiners. hillsborough charter and indeed bishop james's reported l joiners. hillsborough charter and . indeed bishop james's reported also indeed bishopjames's reported also been added to the curriculum for every— been added to the curriculum for every recruit whojoins been added to the curriculum for every recruit who joins the police. this will be embedded the second point of learning is what he described as the pressing need for proper participation of bereaved families at inquest. inquests are

first and foremost about answering questions, who, where, when and how an individual has died but as bishop james highlighted, the hillsborough families were let down by the very process that should have given them answers during the first inquest and then they had to endure the second which was ordered by my right honourable friend. at the first inquest families were positive under legal representation, a single barrister between them. we recognise that proper involvement in an inquest will cases brief family should get representation, especially when the state is representing that is why changes have been made such that had the hillsborough tragedy happened today the families would have been eligible for free legal aid to the exceptional case funding scheme. the government is determined to make this process as straightforward as possible and that is why injanuary 2022 the ministry ofjustice removed the means test representation of relation to cases end in september 2023 the means test was also removed

from legal advice at inquest. we want to build on this progress. sol can announce today that we will consult on an expansion of legal aid forfamilies bereaved consult on an expansion of legal aid for families bereaved through consult on an expansion of legal aid forfamilies bereaved through public disaster where an independent public advocate is engaged or in the aftermath of a terrorist incident. i acknowledge that bishopjames talks broadly about the proper participation of bereaved families in inquests where the state is represented. we will seek to further understand the experiences of these individuals and i would welcome a conversation with bishopjames on this earlier in the new year. we also support the principle raised by bishop james also support the principle raised by bishopjames is's report that public body shouldn't spend limitless funds from legal representation that is very hard set out a requirement for departments to consider the number of lawyers instructed and we build now going to set out their central government public bodies should publish their spend on legal representation at inquest and inquiries, reaffirming this should be proportionate and never

excessive. we have also published a set of principles that guide how public body should instruct lawyers at inquest. these include a requirement to approach the inquest with openness and honesty and to keepin with openness and honesty and to keep in mind the breach should be at the heart of the inquest process. we will also publish guidance said the clear expectation that central government public bodies must instruct lawyers in accordance with the principle of the hillsborough charter. because how lawyers engage with the inquest process and indeed brief family matters. i will turn to the third of bishopjames's three crucial points of learning. a duty of candourfor crucial points of learning. a duty of candour for police officers. as he described it, there is a gap in police accountability arrangements for officers who failed to co—operate fully with investigations into alleged criminal offences. that is why a new offence of police corruption applicable to police and nta offices with introduced in 2017, punishable by up to m years imprisonment. in 2020 we updated the

police conduct regulations to introduce a new duty to cooperate for individual offices during investigations and inquiries, and failure to do so could result in sanctions and dismissal. last month we introduce for an organisational duty of candour on policing. we will place a duty on the college of policing to issue a code of practice with ethical policing and for that code to include the duty of candour. this duty is designed to promote a culture of openness, honesty and transparency and chief constables will be held to account for the fourth's performance against the cold. the new code of practice has been made in parliament today. and we will want to go beyond the police to consider health care. i can tell the house it in response to recent concerns about openness in the settings we will also be conducting a review into the effectiveness of the existing duty of candour for health and social care providers, the terms of reference for that have been published today. i am aware

that the hillsborough law calls for a duty of candour on all public authorities. since the hillsborough disaster, a comprehensive framework of duties and obligations has developed which, public officials and the different official proceedings such as inquest and inquiries. in central government civil service code requires seven servants to act with honesty and integrity and a breach of these codes could result in a range of potential sanctions including dismissal and this is along the principles providing holders of public office should act in the public office should act in the public interest. the legal fragment the mac framework regarding inquest requires all individuals, regardless of whether or not they are public or official, cooperate with them, for example a duty of candour in judicial review which amount to a duty to lay cards face up on the table. when it comes to inquiries

importantly these carry the potential for a custodial sanction. prison sentences. third, where a public official demonstrates a lack of candour when it forms part of the duty as a public office holder, they can potentially be guilty of misconduct in public office, a criminal offence. we will keep these changes under review to ensure we achieve the culture of openness, honesty and candour and we will not rule out taking further action if it is needed. today the government response to all 25 points of learning, but i forgot to statement on those which bishopjames describe is crucial, very meaningful progress has been made and we will not hesitate to go further if required. the discussions will continue and indeed the government is committed to another debate in the new year to ensure that dialogue progresses and i also am happy to meet hillsborough families to discuss any aspect of the government response but let me turn finally to a really important

point, the improvements in the justice system. bishopjames made searingly clear that the justice system which should have supported victims and the bereaved after the tragedy was not set up to do so. victims and the bereaved after the tragedy was not set up to do 50. our response sets up the steps this government has taken to make sure the families and survivors in the aftermath of a tragedy are guided through what can be a difficult, complicated and for bidding process. through the victims and prisoners bill we have introduced legislation to enable an independent public advocate. once established, the ipa will be a strong voice for victims, the bereaved and whole communities affected by major incidents. the ipa has promised and make sure that those affected by major incidents know their rights, can access and support services and have their voices heard at inquest and inquiries. it's design has been upon by the very difficulty of the hillsborough families faced and our commitment to making sure that with the families do not suffer the same

injustices. that can include holding public bodies to account. we have been told what would have helped them most in the aftermath of those terrible events. after listening to concerns of the hillsborough families set out so powerfully when i met them this year, as well as confusions from colleagues across the house, i'm looking at the honourable lady for garston, i decided we must go further by setting us why no—one beats the bard. and coming up on bbc news... the moment the olympics slipped from their grasp. a dramatic night sees england fall just one goal short of qualifying for paris on behalf of team gb.