“p up on npis, there is going following up on npis, there is going to be a wider cabinet discussion. and then this at three b, prime minister. i propose the following is the next step, a paper that we can share it with the premise that head of the bilateral, an opportunity for the chancellor to set out his views and the economic analysis for the prime minister without it being watered down by the cabinet office process. do you know what that is a reference to, the watered down by the cabinet office process? because plainly, you as the chancellor are absolutely entitled, you suggested yourself, perhaps constitutionally obligated, to bring the economic angle to the prime minister without it being watered down by any other part of government so what is that a reference to, do you think?

obviously i didn't write the e—mail so it's hard for me to comment. and if you flick back to the earlier bit of the e—mail, i think as you can see from that, it clearly mentions a cabinet office process which is right and appropriate, but also, even when it talks about modelling on sectors, to bring that together with cmo thinking on the health impacts. even in that e—mail, you can see, as i said, i didn't write it so i'm not sure entirely what it's referring to, but it's clear that there is a cabinet office process that we are feeding into, cmo is feeding in and that's the right way for the prime minister to receive. , ., , , ., receive. there is no suggestion there should _ receive. there is no suggestion there should not _ receive. there is no suggestion there should not be _ receive. there is no suggestion there should not be a - receive. there is no suggestion there should not be a process, | receive. there is no suggestion - there should not be a process, there has to be a process, the cabinet office will synthesise to some extent what is contributed by other government departments. but these are the most senior officials in your department talking about your

thoughts of what should be done in advance of a by—election and its concern that your voice might be watered down by the cabinet office and therefore there must have been something you were aware of if only in the most general terms. i something you were aware of if only in the most general terms.- in the most general terms. i think as i have said _ in the most general terms. i think as i have said previously, - in the most general terms. i think as i have said previously, i- in the most general terms. i think as i have said previously, i never. as i have said previously, i never felt that i didn't have an opportunity to feed in what i wanted to the prime minister. again, i didn't write an e—mail, i'm not sure how officials may have felt in their conversations with other departments or the cabinet office, i generally thought we had good constructive relations and for my part, i felt i was at the opposition to feed into the prime minister's thinking. mi the prime minister's thinking. all right. a second note where the debate was taking place before we look at the detail of the road map, you expressed concern in may, in fact in eight 915 meeting on the 14th of may that international polling suggested that the british people were more fearful of the virus then other countries and in

the spectator article to which i have already referred you, you state, you say this. it's quoted, in every brief, we try to say, let's stop the theate narrative, it was always wrong from the beginning, i constantly said it was wrong. —— the theate narrative. what was your response concern about the general response concern about the general response of the british people —— a fear narrative. in response of the british people -- a fear narrative.— fear narrative. in general we are a consumption _ fear narrative. in general we are a consumption driven _ fear narrative. in general we are a consumption driven economy - fear narrative. in general we are a consumption driven economy so l consumption driven economy so people's jobs and livelihoods and our ability to pay for public service is a function of consumption being strong. if you have a situation like this where we have actively discouraged or shuts down consumption sectors from operating, once they reopen, it was a point of concern for me and for anyone thinking about the economy and those

jobs as to the pace of return, of people returning to normal activity over time. people returning to normal activity overtime. because people returning to normal activity over time. because if they didn't, that would have significant implications for many people's jobs. and those sectors of the economy, and this is a really important point, that were most impacted by lockdown, consumption sectors, hospitality, retail, disproportionately affected people on the lowest incomes, people coming off welfare, women and ethnic minorities, those working part—time so those jobs as a matter of social justice were particularly important to try and safeguard. and polling was clear, i don't remember the exact firm, but there was polling which demonstrated there seems to be, there was greater reticence for people in the uk to want to return back to all those activities, even once things had been reopen. that

would have genuine impact on people's lives and jobs and anything else that we want to do as a country. so they were concerned. the clock is ticking, i am going to try and ask you to be a little bit more concise if you wouldn't mind, prime minister. on the subject of the obvious understanding of the needs of those in part—time work, the vulnerable, the young, female employees, members of the black and minority ethnic sector, your statement makes it plain that if not at the forefront, certainly a major part of the exchequer�*s thinking throughout the pandemic was the need to ensure that their interests were not forgotten and that as much should be done as possible and ought to be done as possible in terms of trying to get the consumer sector

back to life safeguard their position. and we willjust have a quick look where you have summarised the position, your statement 23069 and the interventions are at page 26. sorry, not 232069, your witness statement, page 26. in briefings and papers that were circulated before meetings, there was often reference to a consideration of the equalities impact. you received equality impact assessments in relation to hmt policies. you are obviously aware from an early stage that less well off households were particularly affected, how could you not be aware, so they were coming into your

economic decision—making. i think thatis economic decision—making. i think that is clear. paragraph 83, you also refer to long covid. do you recall at what time long covid presented itself on the exchequer�*s arising? i presented itself on the exchequer's arisin: ? ., �* presented itself on the exchequer's arisina? ,,. arising? i don't specifically. -- exchequer's — arising? i don't specifically. -- exchequer's horizon? - arising? i don't specifically. -- exchequer's horizon? i- arising? i don't specifically. -- exchequer's horizon? i don't . exchequer's horizon? i don't specifically. i remember in the may plan having a conversation about consideration of other health impacts beyond the immediate covid impacts beyond the immediate covid impacts and i think there is some language in the may plan which talks about various other health impacts at that point. something i was keen to stress that was a consequence of all of this that we should understand. i don't remember specifically. understand. i don't remember specifically-— understand. i don't remember specifically. understand. i don't remember secificall. �* ., specifically. and on account as you riuhtl specifically. and on account as you riahtl sa specifically. and on account as you rightly say of _ specifically. and on account as you rightly say of the _ specifically. and on account as you rightly say of the need _ specifically. and on account as you rightly say of the need to - specifically. and on account as you rightly say of the need to ensure i rightly say of the need to ensure that the retail and hospitality sectors could be brought back to life as soon as reasonably possible, the treasury pushed, indeed, for the sector to be opened head of schools.

that was the original position of hmt, was it? i that was the original position of hmt, was it?— that was the original position of hmt, was it?_ it. hmt, was it? ithink if i... it wasn't ultimately _ hmt, was it? ithink if i... it wasn't ultimately what - hmt, was it? i think if i... it - wasn't ultimately what happened, but i think that was the exchequer's position. iii i think that was the exchequer's osition. . ., i think that was the exchequer's osition. .. _, . , position. if i recall it correctly when i was — position. if i recall it correctly when i was having _ position. if i recall it correctly when i was having these - when i was having these deliberations or participating them in may, there is a letter i sent to the prime minister that contains it, nonessential retail i think you will have the exhibit that might be helpful, i took about nonexistent —— nonessential retail because of the millions ofjobs and the type of people in thosejobs. also millions ofjobs and the type of people in those jobs. also as we later discovered and was my sense during, sage themselves said that nonessential retail had a very limited impact on our model, the evidence concluded there was a minimum impact. in regard to schools, i should say i said in the main thing that they should be

opened, particularly the early years, alongside or immediately after nonessential retail and before hospitality because i care very much about the impact on children and their educational attainment and development and that letter talks about those things. so retail because of the jobs and because it had minimal impact, immediately alongside that, particularly early years education, schools and nurseries, and only after that hospitality. so that was the sequencing. hospitality. so that was the sequencing-— hospitality. so that was the se . uencinu. ., sequencing. indeed, if we have 236585, an — sequencing. indeed, if we have 236585, an e-mail_ sequencing. indeed, if we have 236585, an e-mail from - sequencing. indeed, if we have 236585, an e-mail from your. 236585, an e—mailfrom your principal private secretary to various recipients. and on the first page there is a reference to the chancellor focusing page there is a reference to the chancellorfocusing in, perhaps it's on page two,... yes, the second bullet point. therefore hospitality openin bullet point. therefore hospitality open in the summer, july, and

2—stage things, this means open sectors now, schools and earlyjune and are nonessential between the two in mid—may. so certainly at the beginning of may, and this is dated i think lith of may, the proposal from the treasury is, we have got to get hospitality and particularly nonessential open, and then schools will follow. and there's another letter, an e—mail to 32085, paragraph 17 on page two, this is a letter delivering a road map dated may, paragraph 17, "we must then continue to our plan to return early years reception and years one to stick to school, that is continuing after the opening of nonessential retail can you recall why the final position was reached, the ordering which the school is a

nonessential retail were opened, do you recall how that debate was resolved? ., ., you recall how that debate was resolved?— you recall how that debate was resolved? ., ., . ., , resolved? no, not particularly. i think ou resolved? no, not particularly. i think you said _ resolved? no, not particularly. i think you said previously - think you said previously hospitality was before schools, as you said there, it was not, it was retail and education pretty much together one after another and hospitality later.— hospitality later. that was the osition hospitality later. that was the position that _ hospitality later. that was the position that was _ hospitality later. that was the position that was reached, - hospitality later. that was the l position that was reached, yes. hospitality later. that was the - position that was reached, yes. that was also what _ position that was reached, yes. that was also what that _ position that was reached, yes. “inst was also what that e—mail said. the one you had previously also had hospitality injuly one you had previously also had hospitality in july and schools one you had previously also had hospitality injuly and schools and retail before then. hospitality in july and schools and retail before then.— hospitality in july and schools and retail before then. well, according to the e-mail _ retail before then. well, according to the e-mail from _ retail before then. well, according to the e-mail from the _ retail before then. well, according to the e-mail from the principal. to the e—mail from the principal private secretary dated lith of may, she says, open sectors now, and then schools earlyjune and nonessential between the two. to open sectors now, there nonessential, then schools. ., , schools. then hospitality thereafter. _ schools. then hospitality thereafter. i _ schools. then hospitality thereafter. i don't - schools. then hospitality thereafter. i don't have l schools. then hospitality| thereafter. i don't have it schools. then hospitality i thereafter. i don't have it in schools. then hospitality - thereafter. i don't have it in front of me. 5: ~ j~ thereafter. i don't have it in front of me. [1�*5 thereafter. i don't have it in front of me. j~ thereafter. i don't have it in front of me. ,':�* j~ ., of me. 236585. if you look at the months, of me. 236585. if you look at the months. my _ of me. 236585. if you look at the months, my reading _ of me. 236585. if you look at the months, my reading of _ of me. 236585. if you look at the months, my reading of it, - of me. 236585. if you look at the months, my reading of it, i- of me. 236585. if you look at the months, my reading of it, i don't think_ months, my reading of it, i don't think between the two makes sense.

if you _ think between the two makes sense. if you have _ think between the two makes sense. if you have the second page up. yes, the second — if you have the second page up. yes, the second page- _ if you have the second page up. yes, the second page. i— if you have the second page up. yes, the second page. i think— if you have the second page up. yes, the second page. i think it— if you have the second page up. yes, the second page. i think it said, - the second page. i think it said, hospitality _ the second page. i think it said, hospitality open _ the second page. i think it said, hospitality open in _ the second page. i think it said, hospitality open in summer, - hospitality open in summer, brackets, july.— hospitality open in summer, brackets, july. this means open sectors now. — brackets, july. this means open sectors now, schools _ brackets, july. this means open sectors now, schools and - brackets, july. this means open sectors now, schools and early. brackets, july. this means open - sectors now, schools and early june sectors now, schools and earlyjune and nonessential between the two, mid—may. so nonessential is coming in before schools. just mid-may. so nonessential is coming in before schools.— in before schools. just a couple of weeks. in before schools. just a couple of weeks- you _ in before schools. just a couple of weeks. you said _ in before schools. just a couple of weeks. you said hospitality - in before schools. just a couple of weeks. you said hospitality was . in before schools. just a couple of. weeks. you said hospitality was also coming in, ijust wanted to reiterate that does make sense. between the two, doesn't make sense. it's first _ between the two, doesn't make sense. it's first it— between the two, doesn't make sense. it's first. , , ., between the two, doesn't make sense. it's first. , i. _ between the two, doesn't make sense. it'sfirst. , _ _ it's first. it is your policy, by minister- — it's first. it is your policy, by minister. all _ it's first. it is your policy, by minister. all i _ it's first. it is your policy, by minister. all i will _ it's first. it is your policy, by minister. all i will say - it's first. it is your policy, by minister. all i will say is, . it's first. it is your policy, by| minister. all i will say is, the oint minister. all i will say is, the point was — minister. all i will say is, the point was to _ minister. all i will say is, the point was to do _ minister. all i will say is, the point was to do retail- minister. all i will say is, the point was to do retail and - minister. all i will say is, the - point was to do retail and schools a couple of weeks apart in may and june, hospitality was always summer because it was the last thing. retail because, as you see from the letter that you had up in may, the jobs and the people particularly employed in those jobs, jobs and the people particularly employed in thosejobs, again, people who were more vulnerable work

in retail, on lower incomes. those jobs therefore have a broader social purpose or benefit as well as the job itself. and in schools as far as i remember it, again, not my particular responsibility, there was actually a real concern that it would be very difficult to get schools to come back and i would imagine you have taken evidence on that point. my recollection was there was quite a lot of resistance from the sector about schools coming back, i think parents were also concerned and there was an issue that many schoolteachers were themselves isolated or impacted and impact it would be very difficult to have schools open in full. bii impact it would be very difficult to have schools open in full.- have schools open in full. all that was art have schools open in full. all that was part of _ have schools open in full. all that was part of the — have schools open in full. all that was part of the mix. _ have schools open in full. all that was part of the mix. i'm - have schools open in full. all that l was part of the mix. i'm suggesting to you that this wasn't exactly how it panned out, but it was quite clear that consideration is given to these various competing factors and reasons why schools could only be opened when they wear.- reasons why schools could only be opened when they wear. again, that cuestion is

opened when they wear. again, that question is for— opened when they wear. again, that question is for the _ opened when they wear. again, that question is for the education - question is for the education secretary in the prime minister. from an economic perspective, the only input to the treasury would have to that deliberation or the cabinet office would be the labour market impact. that's why from a purely economic way it would be the education secretary who will talk about children's entertainment —— attainment, although i care very much about that, i had long—standing concerns about that. from an analytical perspective what the treasury can do is explain, unsurprisingly, if you open early years children and primary school it has a disproportionate benefit on the labour market because it means children's parents can return to work, you don't necessarily get that benefit from older students. around the same time. _ benefit from older students. around the same time, on _ benefit from older students. around the same time, on the _ benefit from older students. around the same time, on the 7th - benefit from older students. around the same time, on the 7th of - benefit from older students. around the same time, on the 7th of may i benefit from older students. around the same time, on the 7th of may in fact, you expressed your concern

that unless the economy was reopened at perhaps a somewhat faster speed than some other cabinet ministers were advising, we would be at risk of placing the united kingdom at a competitive disadvantage. and you referred to international comparative data, in essence, however other european countries were shown, how we —— reopening the economy can be doing. can we look briefly at the issue of comparative data? did the treasury throughout the whole crisis refer repeatedly of course to what other countries were doing, what their data was demonstrating, what ultimate decisions they were taking in their particular positions and was that at the forefront of the debate when these arguments were ventilated in front of the prime minister? it’s front of the prime minister? it's too much to _ front of the prime minister? it�*s too much to say it was at the

forefront but it's right to say it was another piece of information that was helpful and were taking into account, yes. bill that was helpful and were taking into account, yes.— that was helpful and were taking into account, yes. all right. in the 28th of april. _ into account, yes. all right. in the 28th of april, you _ into account, yes. all right. in the 28th of april, you had _ into account, yes. all right. in the 28th of april, you had a _ into account, yes. all right. in the 28th of april, you had a bilateral i 28th of april, you had a bilateral with the prime minister, 236581i, this is a note from your principal private secretary referring to the bilateral. it is on tuesday, the subject matter is, pm bilateral on tuesday. on the first page there is a reference to the prime minister's instinct, we can see in the first bullet point, being that we might have overdone lockdown, telling that no other country closed, there are new opportunities growing out of this and online is growing. further down the page it says, the sooner gets this open the better, but then

refers to the risk of another exponential increase. and i think it says, overall, he is agitated that he didn't have a plan. this yes. to what extent in these early days of the road map, mr sunak, was the prime minister concerned as to how he would equate the imperative of making sure that there be no unnecessary risk and growth in prevalence and the need to get the economy back going? it must have been a source of perpetual anxiety. and you had these debates with him as to how he should resolve them. again, probably better addressed to him. but we recapped previously the economic impacts by this point, we had a much better sense of what they

wear because we were, i don't see the date of this e—mail, did you say may? the date of this e-mail, did you say ma ? , �* , ., ~ , the date of this e-mail, did you say ma? , �*, the may? yes, it's the end of april. the government's _ may? yes, it's the end of april. the government's independent - may? yes, it's the end of april. the i government's independent forecaster the obr had published their reference scenario, i think a week or ten days before this, so that would be in the public domain, it was pretty stark, i won't recap it all again but that was out there and we were collecting real—time data on the number of people who were in furlough, the businesses that were shut, etc. it would be unsurprising if that wasn't something he was considering. if that wasn't something he was considering-— if that wasn't something he was considerinu. , ., ., ., considering. there is an e-mail from aaain the considering. there is an e-mail from again the same. _ considering. there is an e-mail from again the same, on _ considering. there is an e-mail from again the same, on the _ considering. there is an e-mail from again the same, on the 26th -- - considering. there is an e-mail from again the same, on the 26th -- 21st| again the same, on the 26th —— 21st of may, 232168. an e—mail which follows yet another meeting with the prime minister in which elizabeth perelman says, i think probably on

page two,... "no one can say that hmt is not giving gold standard economic advice to the prime minister, chancellor. there might be an element of marking your own homework. there can be no question that you have eloquently put these points across but once again he was a lone voice and it was a tricky meeting, where the sense was they were trying to appease him step do you recall what that is a reference to? ., was you recall what that is a reference to? ila. was ita you recall what that is a reference to? ila. was it a reference to the to? no. was it a reference to the fact that you _ to? ila. was it a reference to the fact that you think in this particular meeting you had argued from an obr —— opening up for the economy that the majority of the rim had expressed its combined view that the risk of opening up too fast would have terrible consequences further up the road? was that not the debate going on at the time? i

can't comment on a particular meeting because i don't recall it. in general i was making the points at this time about the economic impact, what was happening internationally, the fact that we were investing in test and trace and the joint bio—security centre as new institutions that would allow us to manage and exit. and i was also concerned at this point in time about the data that we were receiving on transmission, and admissions, and i think it was exactly around this time that it was clear that we had probably been over estimating and that is something that was acknowledged a bit later by sage. and a large amount of the transmission happening was not happening in sectors of the economy which were open or closed but in hospitals or care homes which requires a different response. there

were not issues that were understood late on but they were starting to become issues. there are the types of conversations i was having at this moment in time. ida of conversations i was having at this moment in time.— of conversations i was having at this moment in time. do you recall in june how — this moment in time. do you recall in june how an _ this moment in time. do you recall in june how an hmt _ this moment in time. do you recall in june how an hmt official- this moment in time. do you recall in june how an hmt official who . injune how an hmt official who attended sage provided a readout which referred to the fact that the cmo professor chris whitty and the chief scientific adviser professor sir patrick vallance began to warn that the package of measures for reopening, in particularly the beginning ofjuly, was at the riskier end of the spectrum and therefore had the potential to increase r above one? do you recall that warning being related to you all the treasury at the end ofjune? i don't, what i do recall though, i perhaps should have started with this, this may plan, two things about it. one that it was conditional, there were various tests that were set out to unlock

each stage and indeed it was delayed at one point, which i think shows the fax ability of the decision—making and the responsiveness to the deacon sense. yes stage two was delayed until the 15th from the first.— 15th from the first. yes, and the second most — 15th from the first. yes, and the second most important - 15th from the first. yes, and the second most important thing . 15th from the first. yes, and the second most important thing to | 15th from the first. yes, and the . second most important thing to say is the main plan was developed for scientific and epidemiological input and modelled at sage in early may. i remember the cmo and again, this is recorded in the minutes of the covid strategy meeting at the time, saying that these measures should not push r above one. that these measures should not push r above one-— that these measures should not push r above one-_ i - that these measures should not push r above one._ i think| r above one. when was that? i think that is the covid _ r above one. when was that? i think that is the covid strategy _ r above one. when was that? i think that is the covid strategy meeting i that is the covid strategy meeting in may, it is my witness statement. by in may, it is my witness statement. byjune, wasn't the scientific and

epidemiological evidence from sage and the cmo, the measures were at the riskier end of the spectrum, and i'm specifically asking you about the stage that had been reached by then, latejune, which was step three. were you not aware that the scientists were beginning to question the speed at which the road map was operating? do you recall that been brought to your attention? no, i think they always thought that from the beginning. i think they thought it was consistent with letter are not being above one. i think from the beginning, they thought it was at that end of the spectrum, it was closer to one than it once tuned 0.1 if i can put it that way. they were involved in the package of measures that were announced in may, i think that's important. announced in may, i think that's important-— announced in may, i think that's important. announced in may, i think that's imortant. , �* ., important. they didn't modelled the acka . e, important. they didn't modelled the package. mr — important. they didn't modelled the package, mr sunak. _ important. they didn't modelled the package, mr sunak. they _ important. they didn't modelled the package, mr sunak. they gave - important. they didn't modelled the l package, mr sunak. they gave advice through sage or what the consequences would be the package and it was for the government and

the prime minister in particular to decide what consequences would flow from whatever he decided.— from whatever he decided. again, i don't have a _ from whatever he decided. again, i don't have a perfect _ from whatever he decided. again, i don't have a perfect recollection . don't have a perfect recollection but i thought in the early, in may, either on the second or fifth around that time, that sage had modelled the impact on r of the various measures on consideration and on the meeting on the sixth, the cmo and the minister were broadly content. i think that was in relation to the broad road map which was itself dated the 13th of may, and step one which is the first step. the second step which was the 15th ofjune, the third step came later. and by the end ofjune, the 23rd ofjune, the cmo and the gc essay were warning that the passage of measures is that the riskier end of the spectrum with the riskier end of the spectrum with the potential to increase r above

one. 222181. it is a readout of sage from your critical private secretary. vallance noted the heavy trailing in the press of the government measures which we had out, he has made it clear they are at the riskier end of the spectrum with the impasse —— impact of raising r above one. this reduces the space were doing other things like winning school back in september, if schools are to return, the policymakers may have to re—oppose restrictions in other places like retail. the government had obviously made the various decisions that it made in relation to the three steps in the road map, but by the end ofjune the treasury was of course considering the voucher scheme that became eat out

to help out, was that not considered at the end ofjune without before it came in in august? i at the end ofjune without before it came in in august?— came in in august? i don't recall, the exit plan _ came in in august? i don't recall, the exit plan had _ came in in august? i don't recall, the exit plan had not _ came in in august? i don't recall, the exit plan had not changed, i i came in in august? i don't recall, i the exit plan had not changed, i was strongly recall it being modelled in terms of the impact on r people being comforted ball that it kept things at that level. the other things at that level. the other thing that you are comfortable that it kept things at that level. the other thing was that injune, three days before this e—mail, the sage minutes recall that there had been errors that meant that for some time they had been over estimating the rate of transmission, making it look artificially high. there was an issue about hospital data, was there not? i think in the minutes from the 20th ofjune of sage, it is clear that there were errors in the data collection so all the numbers were artificially high.—

artificially high. give me -- for: ive artificially high. give me -- forgive me _ artificially high. give me -- forgive me so _ artificially high. give me -- forgive me so we _ artificially high. give me -- forgive me so we don't i artificially high. give me --| forgive me so we don't lose artificially high. give me -- - forgive me so we don't lose track... i think that is relevant. just forgive me so we don't lose track... i think that is relevant.— i think that is relevant. just bear with me. i think that is relevant. just bear with me- in _ i think that is relevant. just bear with me. in the _ i think that is relevant. just bear with me. in the same _ i think that is relevant. just bear with me. in the same e-mail. i think that is relevant. just bearl with me. in the same e-mail that with me. in the same e—mail that looks at the same issue, the nhs have looked at the data and claim it is causing no more than 5% error. there was a debate about the significance of the error and what its impact was that the nhs appeared to say that there was no more than a 5% error. be that as it may, whatever the position was on the data, the cmo and the gcsa were raising the general alarm at the end ofjune about the risk that the transmission prevalence would go up and the package which had already been agreed was itself already at the riskier end of the spectrum. the question for you is, to what extent did hmt understand at the end of june that whatever it proposed to do thereafter, that came with significant risk?—

thereafter, that came with significant risk? thereafter, that came with siunificant risk? ., ~ ., ., �*, significant risk? you know, that's “ust not significant risk? you know, that's just not my _ significant risk? you know, that's just not my recollection - significant risk? you know, that's just not my recollection of - significant risk? you know, that's just not my recollection of it. i significant risk? you know, that's just not my recollection of it. my| just not my recollection of it. my recollection was that we went over a set of things that could be done, it was conditional, it was delayed at one stage on the advice from the scientists, so i think that shows that the process is working... that's where we are going to leave the covid inquiry. you can continue to watch on bbc iplayer by scanning the qr code you can see on the right hand of your screen. you can get a summary of all of the morning evidence from rishi sunak on the bbc news website or app. stay with us here on bbc news, the one o'clock news is next with ben brown.

today at one — the prime minister defends the decisions made by the government during the covid pandemic when he was chancellor. at the covid inquiry, rishi sunak issued an apology to all those who suffered and lost loved ones. it's important that we learn the lessons so that we can be better prepared in the future. he's expected to be asked about his controversial eat out to help out scheme during the pandemic. and it's also an important day for the prime minister at westminster... mp5 from rival factions of the conservative party are deciding whether they will

support his rwanda bill this week, aimed at stopping migrants on small boats also this afternoon, was this young man the victim of synthetic opioids flooding into the uk from china? a warning that longer, hotter british summers could mean more disease—spreading mosquitoes. i believe in miracles since you came along, you sexy thing. and why hollywood superstar timothee chalamet thinks people in hull have britain's sexiest accent and coming up on bbc news: england's test squad to tour india has three uncapped players, including somerset�*s shoaib bashir, who only made his first—class debut this year.

good afternoon.