of different players involved range of different players involved in our _ range of different players involved in our resilience activity. we tended — in our resilience activity. we tended to _ in our resilience activity. we tended to develop our strategic thinking — tended to develop our strategic thinking around the scottish resilience partnership which i put on the _ resilience partnership which i put on the record to the module one hearings — on the record to the module one hearings through together figures from local government, police scotland. _ from local government, police scotland, the scottish fire and rescue — scotland, the scottish fire and rescue service, the scottish environmental protection agency and other organisations who were criticat— other organisations who were critical to— other organisations who were critical to enable us to have effective _ critical to enable us to have effective resilience arrangements. and from — effective resilience arrangements. and from that initiatives such as the scottish risk assessment emerged, which was a strategic overview— emerged, which was a strategic overview of what were the likely potential — overview of what were the likely potential threats or resilience issues — potential threats or resilience issues that scotland may have to face _ issues that scotland may have to face that — issues that scotland may have to face. that became a focal point for our planning for future events. was

it the case that _ our planning for future events. —" it the case that the fact the scottish government resilience cabinet subcommittee had not met since 2010, was it the case that that created something of a deficit in the organisational aspects of the way in which any resilience response would be conducted? i way in which any resilience response would be conducted?— would be conducted? i don't think that's the case _ would be conducted? i don't think that's the case because _ would be conducted? i don't think that's the case because there - would be conducted? i don't think that's the case because there wasl that's the case because there was engagement at the most senior level in the _ engagement at the most senior level in the scottish resilience partnership and within school about all of— partnership and within school about all of these issues on an ongoing basis _ all of these issues on an ongoing basis and — all of these issues on an ongoing basis and from time to time these issues _ basis and from time to time these issues would come the cabinet as well _ issues would come the cabinet as well so— issues would come the cabinet as well. so the scottish risk assessment, if my memory serves me right. _ assessment, if my memory serves me right, in _ assessment, if my memory serves me right, i'm pretty certain went to cabinet — right, i'm pretty certain went to cabinet over resilience thinking around — cabinet over resilience thinking around about that would have gone to cabinet _ around about that would have gone to cabinet as— around about that would have gone to cabinet as well. is around about that would have gone to cabinet as well. is it around about that would have gone to cabinet as well.— cabinet as well. is it the case that resilience was _ cabinet as well. is it the case that resilience was effectively - cabinet as well. is it the case that resilience was effectively a - resilience was effectively a reserved matter? l

resilience was effectively a reserved matter? i suppose in a legislative _ reserved matter? i suppose in a legislative sense _ reserved matter? i suppose in a legislative sense they _ reserved matter? i suppose in a legislative sense they would - reserved matter? i suppose in a legislative sense they would be | legislative sense they would be certain — legislative sense they would be certain legislative instruments which — certain legislative instruments which will be wholly reserved and the civil— which will be wholly reserved and the civil contingency legislation for example would be wholly reserved. but when it comes to responding to the practicalities of resilience — responding to the practicalities of resilience arrangements, many of the issues _ resilience arrangements, many of the issues that— resilience arrangements, many of the issues that evolved. this resilience arrangements, many of the issues that evolved.— issues that evolved. this is exactly what i wanted _ issues that evolved. this is exactly what i wanted to _ issues that evolved. this is exactly what i wanted to try _ issues that evolved. this is exactly what i wanted to try and _ issues that evolved. this is exactly what i wanted to try and clarify - what i wanted to try and clarify because if they were prior to the pandemic hypothetically speaking to be a response to a national emergency, would it be the case that the resilience operations would be delivered on an operational level through the various partnerships in scotland you have described but that if the emergency had been instigated through the civil contingencies act that the policies connected with how

something would be managed at a higher policy level will generally be a matter for the higher policy level will generally be a matterfor the uk government higher policy level will generally be a matter for the uk government to decide? i be a matter for the uk government to decide? ~' ., , ., decide? i think it would depend on the nature of— decide? i think it would depend on the nature of the _ decide? i think it would depend on the nature of the circumstances. l decide? i think it would depend on the nature of the circumstances. if for example there was any requirement for there to be a response _ requirement for there to be a response in the resilience arrangement from public services that were — arrangement from public services that were devolved to the scottish parliament, health, education, police, — parliament, health, education, police, fire, transport, local government, the involvement and the engagement of the scottish government would be critical because the constitutional arrangements that we have _ the constitutional arrangements that we have today make it clear that there _ we have today make it clear that there was — we have today make it clear that there was all devolved functions and in my— there was all devolved functions and in my view— there was all devolved functions and in my view it would be anti—democratic for that not to be the case — anti—democratic for that not to be the case i— anti—democratic for that not to be the case. i do accept however they may be _ the case. i do accept however they may be certain steps taken by the uk

government properly under the existing — government properly under the existing legislative reader with —— framework— existing legislative reader with —— framework approved by the house of commons _ framework approved by the house of commons and house of lords for provision — commons and house of lords for provision through the civil contingencies act. but if there were practical— contingencies act. but if there were practical issues that had to be addressed by the devolved public services — addressed by the devolved public services in scotland, that would have _ services in scotland, that would have to — services in scotland, that would have to take into account the constitutional arrangements that we have _ constitutional arrangements that we have in— constitutional arrangements that we have. in short, the scottish government runs those things. so you would organise _ government runs those things. so you would organise the _ government runs those things. so you would organise the practical _ would organise the practical arrangements and whatever would be needed to respond? if it arrangements and whatever would be needed to respond?— needed to respond? if it was taken forward under _ needed to respond? if it was taken forward under the _ needed to respond? if it was taken forward under the umbrella - needed to respond? if it was taken forward under the umbrella of- needed to respond? if it was taken forward under the umbrella of the | forward under the umbrella of the civil contingencies act, but my contention is it wouldn't be a particularly effective way to do that because of the fact there is policy— that because of the fact there is policy responsibility as well as operational responsibility vested in the scottish parliament and the

scottish— the scottish parliament and the scottish government for the exercise of those _ scottish government for the exercise of those functions consistent with the scottish act of 1998. as of those functions consistent with the scottish act of 1998.— the scottish act of 1998. as we discussed _ the scottish act of 1998. as we discussed with _ the scottish act of 1998. as we discussed with other _ the scottish act of 1998. as we | discussed with other witnesses, the scottish act of 1998. as we i discussed with other witnesses, it was a possibility that the pandemic might have been dealt with as a civil contingencies act situation. it might. but mr gove said he didn't think— it might. but mr gove said he didn't think that _ it might. but mr gove said he didn't think that would be appropriate. he think that would be appropriate. ho. and his think that would be appropriate. he: and his government did think that would be appropriate. he and his government did not think it was appropriate and neither did the scottish government. we did not. one other aspect of your m1 evidence, you are asked about the state of relationships between the two governments at the beginning of the pandemic and he said generally the relationship was pretty poor by that point, pull in the aftermath of brexit because constituent parts of the uk, in scotland we were not happy with brexit at all and you

obviously had to spend a lot of time on the no—deal brexit as the inquiry heard this morning from nicola sturgeon per generally relations were pretty poor. ijust wanted to clarify with you that that remains your understanding of the situation and in particular i want to clarify with you the generality of the evidence you have already given to the extent you don't limit that for example to personal relationships between any individual but generally between any individual but generally between the governments. i between any individual but generally between the governments.— between the governments. i think it's fair to say _ between the governments. i think it's fair to say that _ between the governments. i think it's fair to say that things - between the governments. i think it's fair to say that things were - it's fair to say that things were pretty— it's fair to say that things were pretty strained after the no—deal brexit— pretty strained after the no—deal brexit experience and strain is the best way— brexit experience and strain is the best way to put it. however, one of the other— best way to put it. however, one of the other points i put on the record in my— the other points i put on the record in my module when evidence was that generally— in my module when evidence was that generally on resilience issues we all tended to work collaboratively with each — all tended to work collaboratively with each other and my experience of

interacting _ with each other and my experience of interacting with uk ministers on resilience — interacting with uk ministers on resilience issues, and they were a number— resilience issues, and they were a number of— resilience issues, and they were a number of occasions, we generally managed _ number of occasions, we generally managed to work on a collaborative basis~ _ managed to work on a collaborative basis. ~ :. . :. managed to work on a collaborative basis. . :, , :, , ., basis. was that next -- you exoerience _ basis. was that next -- you experience with _ basis. was that next -- you experience with regard - basis. was that next -- you experience with regard to i basis. was that next -- you i experience with regard to the basis. was that next -- you - experience with regard to the extent you had to work with any government official during the pandemic? we've heard conflicting evidence about that. it heard conflicting evidence about that. :. heard conflicting evidence about that. :, :, :, , that. it varied. for example as education _ that. it varied. for example as education secretary _ that. it varied. for example as education secretary i - that. it varied. for example as education secretary i had - that. it varied. for example as education secretary i had a - that. it varied. for example as education secretary i had a lot| that. it varied. for example as i education secretary i had a lot of interaction — education secretary i had a lot of interaction with the uk secretary of state _ interaction with the uk secretary of state for— interaction with the uk secretary of state for education and my counterparts in northern ireland and wales— counterparts in northern ireland and wales and _ counterparts in northern ireland and wales and these were always helpful and collaborative conversations. i set out _ and collaborative conversations. i set out in — and collaborative conversations. i set out in the areas where we were able to— set out in the areas where we were able to make some headway and in other— able to make some headway and in other areas— able to make some headway and in other areas it was more difficult. what _ other areas it was more difficult. what with— other areas it was more difficult. what with the areas in which they were difficulties? if what with the areas in which they were difficulties? iii what with the areas in which they were difficulties?— were difficulties? if i look at the andemic were difficulties? if i look at the

pandemic l _ were difficulties? if i look at the pandemic i think _ were difficulties? if i look at the pandemic i think there - were difficulties? if i look at the pandemic i think there was - were difficulties? if i look at the pandemic i think there was a - were difficulties? if i look at the i pandemic i think there was a sense in march _ pandemic i think there was a sense in march 2020 that we would have liked things to be moving faster, to move _ liked things to be moving faster, to move to _ liked things to be moving faster, to move to a _ liked things to be moving faster, to move to a response to covid. and then— move to a response to covid. and then when— move to a response to covid. and then when we got to the moment of lockdown— then when we got to the moment of lockdown that was agreed on a collaborative basis. ithink lockdown that was agreed on a collaborative basis. i think the relaxation of lockdown was difficult because _ relaxation of lockdown was difficult because they were different circumstances in different parts of the uk _ circumstances in different parts of the uk which made it difficult for there _ the uk which made it difficult for there to — the uk which made it difficult for there to be a one size fits all. it didn't— there to be a one size fits all. it didn't suit — there to be a one size fits all. it didn't suit everybody to be moving at the _ didn't suit everybody to be moving at the same pace because the condition— at the same pace because the condition of the pandemic and that added _ condition of the pandemic and that added to— condition of the pandemic and that added to the tension.— added to the tension. without its evidence about _ added to the tension. without its evidence about tensions - added to the tension. without its evidence about tensions which i added to the tension. without its - evidence about tensions which seems to be apparent from materials we looked at in and around the may period of 2020, would that fit in with your second point when the

restrictions were being eased on a different period? it restrictions were being eased on a different period?— restrictions were being eased on a different period? it probably would have started _ different period? it probably would have started around _ different period? it probably would have started around that _ different period? it probably would have started around that time - different period? it probably would| have started around that time when they would be a sense that we were taking _ they would be a sense that we were taking account of the different circumstances in different parts of the uk _ circumstances in different parts of the uk. :, :, :, :, circumstances in different parts of theuk. :, :, :, , the uk. that had always of course been a possibility _ the uk. that had always of course been a possibility because - the uk. that had always of course been a possibility because the - been a possibility because the legislation enabled scotland to take a different path if it was appropriate. a different path if it was appropriate-— a different path if it was auroriate. :. , : a different path if it was auroriate. :, . m appropriate. that is correct. can i ask some — appropriate. that is correct. can i ask some questions _ appropriate. that is correct. can i ask some questions about - appropriate. that is correct. can i ask some questions about the - ask some questions about the decision making during the course of the pandemic itself. i have already referred to the cabinet, new evidence you suggest members of the cabinet were invited to express their views before cabinet in the first minister would sum up the views and different views would often be considered but cabinet never held a vote on any issue in connection with covid or any other issue. can you please explain to us why it was that cabinet never voted

on any matter related to covid, given your position that cabinet was the main decision—making body? the the main decision-making body? the cabinet the main decision—making body? the cabinet areas views. we had the evidence — cabinet areas views. we had the evidence in— cabinet areas views. we had the evidence in front of us and the first _ evidence in front of us and the first minister would get to a summary position and that would be a summary— summary position and that would be a summary position and that would be a summary position that would be informed — summary position that would be informed by the evidence and from what had _ informed by the evidence and from what had been expressed that cabinet~ — what had been expressed that cabinet. my comment was she read out is absolutely _ cabinet. my comment was she read out is absolutely correct. in my 16 years— is absolutely correct. in my 16 vears in— is absolutely correct. in my 16 years in the cabinet there wasn't a single _ years in the cabinet there wasn't a single vote — years in the cabinet there wasn't a single vote on any single issue because — single vote on any single issue because that is not how cabinet did its business. it tried to come to a point _ its business. it tried to come to a point of— its business. it tried to come to a point of agreement and i suppose if a member— point of agreement and i suppose if a member of cabinet felt theyjust could _ a member of cabinet felt theyjust could not— a member of cabinet felt theyjust could not go along with what had been _ could not go along with what had been agreed then we all know how the system _ been agreed then we all know how the system works, once cabinet decides

collective _ system works, once cabinet decides collective responsibility kicks in and if _ collective responsibility kicks in and if you — collective responsibility kicks in and if you can't live with it than you have — and if you can't live with it than you have to— and if you can't live with it than you have to resign from the cabinet. no member— you have to resign from the cabinet. no member chose to do so. i think we all in _ no member chose to do so. i think we all in the _ no member chose to do so. i think we all in the cabinet would be entirely knowing _ all in the cabinet would be entirely knowing of the working approaches of the cabinet and we know the course of action— the cabinet and we know the course of action to — the cabinet and we know the course of action to take if we didn't agree — of action to take if we didn't auree. ~ :, , of action to take if we didn't auree. . ., agree. was it the case that when cabinet meetings _ agree. was it the case that when cabinet meetings other- agree. was it the case that when cabinet meetings other than - cabinet meetings other than extraordinary meetings generally took place on a tuesday? tuesday mornin: took place on a tuesday? tuesday morning at — took place on a tuesday? tuesday morning at 9:30am. _ took place on a tuesday? tuesday morning at 9:30am. as _ took place on a tuesday? tuesday morning at 9:30am. as we - took place on a tuesday? tuesday - morning at 9:30am. as we understand it from the paperwork _ morning at 9:30am. as we understand it from the paperwork there _ morning at 9:30am. as we understand it from the paperwork there was - morning at 9:30am. as we understand it from the paperwork there was a - it from the paperwork there was a certain process by which materials would be put togetherfor the purpose of cabinet and it would possibly involve meetings of smaller group of cabinet involving the first minister and usually yourself and certain others. to discuss matters that might be put before cabinet. is that might be put before cabinet. is that broadly correct?—

that broadly correct? broadly i would say _ that broadly correct? broadly i would say that's _ that broadly correct? broadly i would say that's a _ that broadly correct? broadly i would say that's a fair- that broadly correct? broadly i l would say that's a fair summary. that broadly correct? broadly i - would say that's a fair summary. not in all— would say that's a fair summary. not in all cases— would say that's a fair summary. not in all cases but certainly at some of the _ in all cases but certainly at some of the key— in all cases but certainly at some of the key moments of the handling of the key moments of the handling of the _ of the key moments of the handling of the pandemic in relation to the relaxation — of the pandemic in relation to the relaxation of restrictions. there might— relaxation of restrictions. there might be — relaxation of restrictions. there might be a _ relaxation of restrictions. there might be a discussion, it would be convened — might be a discussion, it would be convened involving the first minister— convened involving the first minister and myself, the health secretary, at different stages they would _ secretary, at different stages they would be — secretary, at different stages they would be either the finance minister or the _ would be either the finance minister or the economy minister and latterly those _ or the economy minister and latterly those two _ or the economy minister and latterly those twojobs were or the economy minister and latterly those two jobs were combined, or the economy minister and latterly those twojobs were combined, along with some _ those twojobs were combined, along with some senior officials and senior— with some senior officials and senior advisers and we would tend to look at _ senior advisers and we would tend to look at evidence presented by the state _ look at evidence presented by the state of _ look at evidence presented by the state of the pandemic and what with the possible choices we might have in front— the possible choices we might have in front of— the possible choices we might have in front of us. that would be

invariably _ in front of us. that would be invariably informed by a slide presentation of information that would _ presentation of information that would be — presentation of information that would be led by senior officials about— would be led by senior officials about what was the current state of the pandemic and particularly when it came _ the pandemic and particularly when it came to— the pandemic and particularly when it came to questions about relaxing restrictions, whether there was any scope _ restrictions, whether there was any scope available to us to relax restrictions, given the prevalence of the _ restrictions, given the prevalence of the pandemic. and given the strategic— of the pandemic. and given the strategic direction set by cabinet that we — strategic direction set by cabinet that we were trying to suppress covid _ that we were trying to suppress covid to— that we were trying to suppress covid to an extent that would allow us to _ covid to an extent that would allow us to have — covid to an extent that would allow us to have a — covid to an extent that would allow us to have a bit more normality. our us to have a bit more normality. interpretation us to have a bit more normality. oi" interpretation of the paperwork as we understand it is that these prior meetings resulted in material then being put to cabinet based on effectively what that group had thought would be the right thing to do. cabinet looking at those and

then often delegating responsibility back to the first minister or yourself, is it a fair summary of the process and to what extent would it be a legitimate conclusion from that that decisions were made in this other body beforehand and then ratified by cabinet and ultimately the detail of the decision being made by the same individual members of that body admit before? i of that body admit before? i wouldn't accept that characterisation. what would happen is that— characterisation. what would happen is that they would be an early discussion about some of the evidence—based and some of the options — evidence—based and some of the options that were available and on many— options that were available and on many occasions they would be lots of uncertainty _ many occasions they would be lots of uncertainty about what might be provided — uncertainty about what might be provided for. that would result will take place — provided for. that would result will take place towards the end of the week— take place towards the end of the week or— take place towards the end of the week or in — take place towards the end of the week or in the early part of a weekend _ week or in the early part of a weekend and then over the weekend a

cabinet _ weekend and then over the weekend a cabinet paper would be prepared which _ cabinet paper would be prepared which would give all members of the cabinet _ which would give all members of the cabinet the evidence base and then throw— cabinet the evidence base and then throw out— cabinet the evidence base and then throw out of that evidence—based what _ throw out of that evidence—based what were — throw out of that evidence—based what were the possible actions that could _ what were the possible actions that could be _ what were the possible actions that could be taken on those issues would be put _ could be taken on those issues would be put to— could be taken on those issues would be put to cabinet, which would then have a _ be put to cabinet, which would then have a very— be put to cabinet, which would then have a very extensive discussion. in that cabinet — have a very extensive discussion. in that cabinet meeting i think it would — that cabinet meeting i think it would be fair to say we were wrestling with the dilemmas about to what extent could restrictions be relaxed. — what extent could restrictions be relaxed, given the state of the pandemic. orthe relaxed, given the state of the pandemic. or the other side of the coin, _ pandemic. or the other side of the coin. given — pandemic. or the other side of the coin, given the state of the pandemic what did we need to do to apply— pandemic what did we need to do to apply greater restrictions? and cabinet —

apply greater restrictions? and cabinet would come to a position on that and _ cabinet would come to a position on that and if— cabinet would come to a position on that and if there was any marginal detail— that and if there was any marginal detail and — that and if there was any marginal detail and i stress the word marginal detail, that needed to be clarified _ marginal detail, that needed to be clarified in— marginal detail, that needed to be clarified in the aftermath of a cabinet — clarified in the aftermath of a cabinet discussion and that might be in particular when it came to the settling — in particular when it came to the settling of— in particular when it came to the settling of what local authority areas — settling of what local authority areas would report particular levels that might — areas would report particular levels that might require further interrogation of data. it might have to wait _ interrogation of data. it might have to wait for— interrogation of data. it might have to wait for the date of the day to emerge — to wait for the date of the day to emerge which might come at about 12pm _ emerge which might come at about 12pm on _ emerge which might come at about 12pm on a — emerge which might come at about 12pm on a tuesday. and it would be limited _ 12pm on a tuesday. and it would be limited scope delegated to the first minister— limited scope delegated to the first minister or myself to take that final— minister or myself to take that final decision.— final decision. there are good reasons- - - — final decision. there are good reasons... might _ final decision. there are good reasons... might i _ final decision. there are good reasons... might i also - final decision. there are good reasons... might i also add i final decision. there are good l reasons... might i also add that that position — reasons... might i also add that that position would _ reasons... might i also add that that position would then - reasons... might i also add that i that position would then invariably

lead to— that position would then invariably lead to open public communication about— lead to open public communication about the — lead to open public communication about the issues involved.- lead to open public communication about the issues involved. there are aood about the issues involved. there are good reasons _ about the issues involved. there are good reasons are _ about the issues involved. there are good reasons are there _ about the issues involved. there are good reasons are there not - about the issues involved. there are good reasons are there not why - good reasons are there not why decision—making and cabinet as part of our system? amongst possibly others, those reasons include the importance of all cabinet ministers being able to bring the perspective of the particular portfolio to the discussion. and if it were to be the case hypothetically that discussions took place and decisions were reached in smaller groups, that that would be a matter which wouldn't derive the benefit of being able to draw on the experience and viewpoint of all of the cabinet members which represent the main cross sections of parts of society? i represent the main cross sections of parts of society?— parts of society? i think that would be a problem _ parts of society? i think that would be a problem but _ parts of society? i think that would be a problem but that _ parts of society? i think that would be a problem but that wasn't - parts of society? i think that would be a problem but that wasn't what| be a problem but that wasn't what happened — be a problem but that wasn't what happened in the scottish government. did the _ happened in the scottish government. did the system, that i think broadly

we agree on, the system of a discussion taking place beforehand, a cabinet meeting taking place and some element of decision—making being delegated, give rise to a system whereby you, the first minister and a small group of selected others effectively made the decisions about how the pandemic should be managed in scotland? i should be managed in scotland? i wouldn't accept that characterisation. i think decisions were _ characterisation. i think decisions were taken— characterisation. i think decisions were taken by the cabinet and if there _ were taken by the cabinet and if there was— were taken by the cabinet and if there was anything not undertaken by there was anything not undertaken by the cabinet it was of a marginal detail— the cabinet it was of a marginal detail in— the cabinet it was of a marginal detail in relation to any decision—making, with the exception of a couple _ decision—making, with the exception of a couple of instances at the start _ of a couple of instances at the start of— of a couple of instances at the start of the pandemic which i narrated _ start of the pandemic which i narrated my witness statement for completeness, where decisions were taken _ completeness, where decisions were taken with— completeness, where decisions were taken with such urgency that they

were _ taken with such urgency that they were taken amongst smaller groups and i were taken amongst smaller groups and l have _ were taken amongst smaller groups and i have been open with the inquiry— and i have been open with the inquiry about that. was and i have been open with the inquiry about that.— and i have been open with the inquiry about that. was it the case that way ministers _ inquiry about that. was it the case that way ministers brought - inquiry about that. was it the case | that way ministers brought matters up that way ministers brought matters up in cabinet, the first minister if she disagreed with that point of view, she often sought to trump the view, she often sought to trump the view with her own view? idol view, she often sought to trump the view with her own view?— view with her own view? not in my experience- _ view with her own view? not in my experience. the _ view with her own view? not in my experience. the first _ view with her own view? not in my experience. the first minister - experience. the first minister encouraged an open discussion of cabinet _ encouraged an open discussion of cabinet and different points of views — cabinet and different points of views were expressed. these were not perfect _ views were expressed. these were not perfect or— views were expressed. these were not perfect or ideal choices. we talked earlier— perfect or ideal choices. we talked earlier today about the four hams framework and i think that was a helpful— framework and i think that was a helpful frame across to structure our decision—making. all that did

was assemble the dilemma. it assembled the dilemmas in front of us, it— assembled the dilemmas in front of us, it didn't— assembled the dilemmas in front of us, it didn't give us a perfect pathway _ us, it didn't give us a perfect pathway. we had to try to take the decisions _ pathway. we had to try to take the decisions that would allow us to navigate — decisions that would allow us to navigate through those challenges. might _ navigate through those challenges. might one say that the four hams framework pointed out the problem that didn't help with the solution. it pointed out the problem and help with the _ it pointed out the problem and help with the solution. can it pointed out the problem and help with the solution.— with the solution. can i look at i and q with the solution. can i look at i and 0 00034792. _ with the solution. can i look at i and 0 00034792. this - with the solution. can i look at i and 0 00034792. this is - with the solution. can i look at i and 0 00034792. this is an - with the solution. can i look at i - and 0 00034792. this is an exchange which took place in messages between the now first minister and professor leach who you will know. this is on the 14th of december 2021 at 11i07. the 14th of december 2021 at mm. in amongst a discussion about what had happened at that time in a cabinet meeting. the context of this

is the emerging threat of omicron. you will remember in december 2020 that although scotland had already lived with a period of high cases as a result of the delta variant, that the omicron threat was creating even more pressing situation in the context is discussions amongst the then cabinet secretary for health and social care and the national clinical director about what should be done. mr yusuf said i took a hell of a bullet at cabinet but might be able to strengthen the measures even if it's just slightly. we think we can find £100 million within the portfolio, not sure if it's enough but i've pushed to ask if it's enough to move things or limits on gatherings in household and hospitality into regs for at least the next four weeks. he then says don't know if it will happen, this last minute and fm not multi—happy it's at this last stage would lead

see if it strengthens a package of measures that are far too weak as things stand. to which professional each response, iwas things stand. to which professional each response, i was listening and they almost intervened to deflect for you, she was ridiculous, absolutely ridiculous. and he replies and yes to the principal. her ranting at me isn't the problem. i can take it, it's whether the quantum of the stage help strengthen the package. feel free to defend me at a later stage. today's number is lower than expected. suspect some people are not testing given christmas is around the corner. to these messages not show the culture of the scottish cabinet was driven by nicola sturgeon's strong mindedness and when challenging hurt was seen as taking a bullet? filo was seen as taking a bullet? no because i think that particular morning — because i think that particular morning if i remember correctly, i

think— morning if i remember correctly, i think the — morning if i remember correctly, i think the first minister was a bit surprised — think the first minister was a bit surprised that the health portfolio had been — surprised that the health portfolio had been able to find £100 million to transfer to business support and in all— to transfer to business support and in all my— to transfer to business support and in all my ten years of handling the public— in all my ten years of handling the public finances in scotland the health — public finances in scotland the health secretary never offered me £100 million in return for anything. ithink— £100 million in return for anything. i think it _ £100 million in return for anything. i think it probably surprised at the first minister. cabinet had open and full discussions and again i suspect might— full discussions and again i suspect might exhaust your patience on the four hams— might exhaust your patience on the four hams framework but we would constantly— four hams framework but we would constantly be wrestling with the dilemmas that would be involved in establishing a path out of the situation because there was no even

answer~ _ situation because there was no even answer. ~ , :, , situation because there was no even answer. ~ , . , , . . , answer. whilst cabinet secretaries mi . ht answer. whilst cabinet secretaries might complain — answer. whilst cabinet secretaries might complain private _ answer. whilst cabinet secretaries might complain private is - answer. whilst cabinet secretaries might complain private is in - answer. whilst cabinet secretaries might complain private is in the i might complain private is in the exchange we looked at they were also fall back in line behind the first minister was really calling the shots? if minister was really calling the shots? . minister was really calling the shots? , . , shots? if i remember the cabinet can't live with — shots? if i remember the cabinet can't live with a _ shots? if i remember the cabinet can't live with a cabinet - shots? if i remember the cabinet can't live with a cabinet decision | can't live with a cabinet decision we know— can't live with a cabinet decision we know what the rules are. he resigned — we know what the rules are. he resigned from the cabinet. would it be accurate — resigned from the cabinet. would it be accurate to _ resigned from the cabinet. would it be accurate to say _ resigned from the cabinet. would it be accurate to say that _ resigned from the cabinet. would it be accurate to say that given - resigned from the cabinet. would it be accurate to say that given the i be accurate to say that given the volume and complexity of information that was available to take into account decision—making that sharing the burden of responsibility amongst cabinet members rather than expecting it to be assimilated and borne by one or two people would be a sensible way to given?— a sensible way to given? that's why we had extensive _ a sensible way to given? that's why we had extensive cabinet _ a sensible way to given? that's why we had extensive cabinet papers. i a sensible way to given? that's why| we had extensive cabinet papers. in total 71 _ we had extensive cabinet papers. in total 71 papers were put to cabinet with comprehensive evidence, background and recommendations. 61 offered _ background and recommendations. 61 offered by— background and recommendations. 61 offered by me. to enable cabinet to have those —

offered by me. to enable cabinet to have those discussions about the dilemmas — have those discussions about the dilemmas because it was accepted that these were difficult dilemmas and they— that these were difficult dilemmas and they had to be —— we had to establish a _ and they had to be —— we had to establish a way through them. and and they had to be -- we had to establish a way through them. and we can see that — establish a way through them. and we can see that in — establish a way through them. and we can see that in the _ establish a way through them. and we can see that in the cabinet _ establish a way through them. and we can see that in the cabinet minutes? i can see that in the cabinet minutes? i would say so. but we cannot see the extent of the discussions that took place on other important bodies such as the group referred to as the gold group vocal commands and the score group for which there are no minutes. fin score group for which there are no minutes. :, , , minutes. on the gold meetings, my view would be _ minutes. on the gold meetings, my view would be that _ minutes. on the gold meetings, my view would be that in _ minutes. on the gold meetings, my view would be that in the _ minutes. on the gold meetings, my view would be that in the large i view would be that in the large amount— view would be that in the large amount of my experience the format of the _ amount of my experience the format of the goal— amount of my experience the format of the goal discussion was a slide deck— of the goal discussion was a slide deck would be gone through in these meetings _ deck would be gone through in these meetings all took place on teams so a slide _ meetings all took place on teams so a slide deck would be presented to a sole remotely and we would interact

with that _ sole remotely and we would interact with that and discuss and debate the different— with that and discuss and debate the different issues that were in front of us _ different issues that were in front of us in — different issues that were in front of us. in the aftermath of that they would _ of us. in the aftermath of that they would be _ of us. in the aftermath of that they would be a — of us. in the aftermath of that they would be a summary note which would invariably _ would be a summary note which would invariably be minute from ken thompson the director—general of the inquiry— thompson the director—general of the inquiry heard from a couple of weeks a-o inquiry heard from a couple of weeks ago which _ inquiry heard from a couple of weeks ago which would then be issued to those _ ago which would then be issued to those who— ago which would then be issued to those who participated. we would have had — those who participated. we would have had wider circulation than that because _ have had wider circulation than that because more people needed to adhere the contents of those discussions. that would — the contents of those discussions. that would be the process of recording the goal discussions. i would _ recording the goal discussions. i would accept i certainly felt i saw that traffic for a substantial period _ that traffic for a substantial period of the pandemics, i'm not sure _ period of the pandemics, i'm not sure i_ period of the pandemics, i'm not sure i saw— period of the pandemics, i'm not sure i saw it _ period of the pandemics, i'm not sure i saw it for the whole of the pandemic— sure i saw it for the whole of the pandemic so i would accept there are

times— pandemic so i would accept there are times when— pandemic so i would accept there are times when all that information is not there — times when all that information is not there. when it comes to school, school _ not there. when it comes to school, school tends — not there. when it comes to school, school tends to be a place where operational decisions are taken and then a _ operational decisions are taken and then a list— operational decisions are taken and then a list of actions identified as to what— then a list of actions identified as to what is— then a list of actions identified as to what is to be taken forward and that would — to what is to be taken forward and that would be the approach that would _ that would be the approach that would be — that would be the approach that would be taken. but that would be the approach that would be taken.— that would be the approach that would be taken. �* . . ., would be taken. but again there are no minutes— would be taken. but again there are no minutes of— would be taken. but again there are no minutes of the _ would be taken. but again there are no minutes of the discussion i would be taken. but again there are no minutes of the discussion that i no minutes of the discussion that took place so everyone can see the outcomes from the documents that may or may not be available, one doesn't know what the nature of the discussion was on the basis upon which any operational decisions whatever decisions presented to cabinet were made. if whatever decisions presented to cabinet were made.— whatever decisions presented to cabinet were made. if you take the old cabinet were made. if you take the gold discussions, _ cabinet were made. if you take the gold discussions, the _ cabinet were made. if you take the gold discussions, the process i cabinet were made. if you take the gold discussions, the process of i gold discussions, the process of what _ gold discussions, the process of what the — gold discussions, the process of what the presentation of evidence which _ what the presentation of evidence which l'm — what the presentation of evidence which i'm certain will be available, there _ which i'm certain will be available, there will— which i'm certain will be available, there will be a summary note of the points— there will be a summary note of the points that — there will be a summary note of the points that arose and were concluded as a consequence and that would

essentially be the drafting blocks of the _ essentially be the drafting blocks of the cabinet paper that would then io of the cabinet paper that would then -o to of the cabinet paper that would then go to cabinet. so the inquiry would be able _ go to cabinet. so the inquiry would be able to— go to cabinet. so the inquiry would be able to see through all of that. a clear— be able to see through all of that. a clear line — be able to see through all of that. a clear line of sight of the thinking _ a clear line of sight of the thinking that was going in to the conclusions that were being arrived at. ultimately in the cabinet paper relationship between the evidence that was— relationship between the evidence that was being gathered, the conclusions drawn and the actions that were — conclusions drawn and the actions that were being proposed as a consequence.— that were being proposed as a consequence. that were being proposed as a conseuuence. ~ , , , consequence. why were these meetings not consequence. why were these meetings rrot minuted? — consequence. why were these meetings not minuted? they _ consequence. why were these meetings not minuted? they were _ consequence. why were these meetings not minuted? they were being - not minuted? they were being recorded so — not minuted? they were being recorded so essentially - not minuted? they were being recorded so essentially the i not minuted? they were being l recorded so essentially the gold meetings were preparing material that would go to cabinet and the inquiry— that would go to cabinet and the inquiry will see those cabinet papers — inquiry will see those cabinet papers and the cabinet minutes that arise out— papers and the cabinet minutes that arise out of— papers and the cabinet minutes that arise out of them. i can recall various— arise out of them. i can recall various notes which summarised the discussions — various notes which summarised the discussions that took place within the gold — discussions that took place within the gold meetings which again flowed

into the _ the gold meetings which again flowed into the drafting of the cabinet papers — into the drafting of the cabinet papers as a consequence. in into the drafting of the cabinet papers as a consequence. in the same wa as in papers as a consequence. in the same way as in the _ papers as a consequence. in the same way as in the e-mails _ papers as a consequence. in the same way as in the e-mails to _ papers as a consequence. in the same way as in the e-mails to your- way as in the e—mails to your private office you summarised matters that you wish to put on the corporate record?— matters that you wish to put on the corporate record? yes. can i ask you some questions _ corporate record? yes. can i ask you some questions about some of the early decision—making in march 2020 and the delegation of decision—making in that regard. there was a decision taken to recommend a ban on mass gatherings on the 12th of march 2020, is that right? that is correct. that decision was made without cabinet. that is correct. i understand the decision to cancel mass gatherings of more than 500 people was taken by the first minister with input from the first minister with input from the chief medical officer under morning of march 2020. a cabinet meeting took place on the 10th of march 2020 which is in 0 000238706

looking at page three paragraph ten. it says paragraph seven of the paper made clear that, while current scientific evidence did not suggest that closing schools are cancelling large—scale events would have a significant effect they should be kept under review. so the cabinet, on the 10th of march, discusses the cancellation of hamas gatherings and i think decides to keep it under review as there is not the scientific evidence to

support the ban, is that the position at that stage?