her to resign? in point of fact, i said that the _ her to resign? in point of fact, i said that the chief _ her to resign? in point of fact, i said that the chief medical - her to resign? in point of fact, i l said that the chief medical officer is not a first ministerial appointment, i technically could not have made her resign. but it was not necessary. by the time i spoke to her on the phone on sunday evening, i was clear it was an inevitable outcome and she was clear it was an inevitable outcome. the conversation really became that is what was going to happen. we really became that is what was going to ha en. ~ ., really became that is what was going to ha -en. ~ . ., really became that is what was going to ha en. ~ . ., , really became that is what was going to ha..en_ . ., ., , to happen. we have also seen some internal correspondence _ to happen. we have also seen some internal correspondence involving i internal correspondence involving professor — internal correspondence involving professor smith and others, that tended _ professor smith and others, that tended to — professor smith and others, that tended to suggest that the way in which _ tended to suggest that the way in which the — tended to suggest that the way in which the resignation had been handled — which the resignation had been handled had undermined their positioh _ handled had undermined their position. they felt that it undermined the confidence that they felt was _ undermined the confidence that they felt was in _ undermined the confidence that they felt was in them, to be able to continue — felt was in them, to be able to continue in _ felt was in them, to be able to continue in that role. was that something of what you are aware? i something of what you are aware? wasn't something of what you are aware? i wasn't aware of it at the time. looking back on it and having seen the correspondence, i suppose it is not surprising. as i say, it was in

the midst of a really tough, difficult time for everybody. this was an episode that, you know, i hadn't known dr calderwood or worked with her as long as others had. it was upsetting, the whole circumstance. i can see that perhaps the process that unfolded over that sunday are trying to achieve both of those things might have given an impression to other advisers that i thought the loss of her would be so catastrophic that they felt i did not value their advice or their input. that was not the case. i could perhaps see why they might have thought that, but it wasn't the case. i highly value the contribution of all of the individuals advising me. did that exnerience _ individuals advising me. did that exnerience to — individuals advising me. did that experience to any _ individuals advising me. did that experience to any extent - individuals advising me. did that - experience to any extent undermine the confidence of the team that remained — the confidence of the team that remained in place?— the confidence of the team that remained in place? certainly not in my exnerience- — remained in place? certainly not in my experience. i— remained in place? certainly not in my experience. i genuinely - remained in place? certainly not in my experience. i genuinely don't i my experience. i genuinely don't think that was the case. we very quickly moved to, and adapted to the

way of working. she became chief medical officer, and later became a chief medical officer in his own right. yes, there were difficulties over the next few days. we have to adapt to the loss of somebody who had been very central to our response going forward. but i don't think it damaged relationships at all. something else i read into that correspondence was there had been a sense, because dr calderwood, with me, had been the key clinical communicator. how do dr calderwood not resigned that weekend, we had already decided to establish a firm point of contact between the public and the government. that position of her doing the daily presence with me every day would not have been sustainable, because it would have taken up too much of the time sheet. we were already planning to move to

a situation which we did anyway, where the clinicians would share that responsibility. in a where the clinicians would share that responsibility. in a particular asect of that responsibility. in a particular asnect of the _ that responsibility. in a particular aspect of the correspondence, i that responsibility. in a particular aspect of the correspondence, it | aspect of the correspondence, it might— aspect of the correspondence, it might be — aspect of the correspondence, it might be read slightly differently, to suggest that the remaining nredicat— to suggest that the remaining medical and clinical advisory team believe _ medical and clinical advisory team believe too much reliance had been placed _ believe too much reliance had been placed on— believe too much reliance had been placed on dr calderwood as expert advice _ placed on dr calderwood as expert advice if— placed on dr calderwood as expert advice. if that is the correct interpretation of that documentation, is that a fair representation of the way in which advice _ representation of the way in which advice was — representation of the way in which advice was taken from medical sources— advice was taken from medical sources by the government? | advice was taken from medical sources by the government? i don't think so. i sources by the government? i don't thinks0- i can— sources by the government? i don't think so. i can absolutely _ sources by the government? i don't think so. i can absolutely see - sources by the government? i don't think so. i can absolutely see why l think so. i can absolutely see why that would be an interpretation that could be put on that, and it may be what the author of the correspondence meant by it. dr calderwood was the principal conduit of advice to me. she was not the sole author of that advice. i said

earlier on that i interacted regularly with dr smith in the period before dr calderwood resigned. it was not as if he was not a key part of the response. he was a very valued part of the response. you know, you asked me earlier on about my experience as health secretary, when we were confronted by swine flu. albeit as health secretary at the time, no doubt the first minister would have adopted this role if it had developed differently, but i developed differently, but i developed a that point a very key working relationship with the chief medical officer, who at that time was so harry burns. again, that was part of the lesson i had taken from that, the importance of the relationship of having a clear conduit for advice. that was important. of course, she was not giving me advice she was the sole author of. she was drawing on

multiple other sources and giving it to me. in multiple other sources and giving it to me. ., , ., multiple other sources and giving it to me. . , ., , ., multiple other sources and giving it to me. . , . 4' to me. in translating, if you like, the source _ to me. in translating, if you like, the source of _ to me. in translating, if you like, the source of information - to me. in translating, if you like, the source of information to - to me. in translating, if you like, the source of information to you, and her— the source of information to you, and her being the person you are speaking — and her being the person you are speaking to, there was a risk, was there _ speaking to, there was a risk, was there not. — speaking to, there was a risk, was there not, that in the translation there not, that in the translation the right— there not, that in the translation the right information might not be getting _ the right information might not be getting to you? ifi the right information might not be getting to you?— getting to you? if i have given... you know. _ getting to you? if i have given... you know. dr — getting to you? if i have given... you know, dr smith _ getting to you? if i have given... you know, dr smith would - getting to you? if i have given... you know, dr smith would not i you know, dr smith would not always be... but not infrequently would be in the room of the time, it was not that it was the only person i was speaking too frequently, the very early days. she would take part, as dr smith did later, for the cause between the four uk cmls, and come straight off the call, and give the information she had got from the other cmos. it was a situation where she may have been the principal conduit of information to me, but she was not the only person in the

room during the discussions. i was absolutely aware that she was bringing to me information that came from different sources. her resignation _ from different sources. her resignation was _ from different sources. her resignation was a _ from different sources. her resignation was a cataclysmic event for the _ resignation was a cataclysmic event for the ability of the scottish goverment to react appropriately to the threat, — goverment to react appropriately to the threat, and also had an enormous effect _ the threat, and also had an enormous effect on _ the threat, and also had an enormous effect on public confidence in the government strategy? on effect on public confidence in the government strategy?— effect on public confidence in the government strategy? on both of those, it had _ government strategy? on both of those, it had the _ government strategy? on both of those, it had the potential - government strategy? on both of those, it had the potential to - government strategy? on both of those, it had the potential to do i those, it had the potential to do both of those things. i don't believe it did either. had dr calderwood not resigned on that sunday evening, i believe, in terms of confidence in the public messaging, it may well have had that impact. i would suggest that the evidence, through public attitudes and public polling, after that, suggests that it did not have that effect. i think her resignation stemmed the potential for that. effect. i think her resignation stemmed the potentialfor that. and on the first, it did have a

disruptive effect, but it was one that we were able to overcome reasonably quickly. and establish ways of working. i know that dr smith stepped up and did a very good job in those circumstances. so, i absolutely accept the potential for both of those things to happen. i wouldn't necessarily agree that either of them were the outcome. thank you. sorry to jump around a little _ thank you. sorry to jump around a little in _ thank you. sorry to jump around a little in the — thank you. sorry to jump around a little in the timeline, i am going to go— little in the timeline, i am going to go a — little in the timeline, i am going to go a little bit earlier than the beginning of april. on the 12th of february— beginning of april. on the 12th of february 2020 there was a ministerial table talk exercise catted — ministerial table talk exercise called exercise nimbus, which took place _ called exercise nimbus, which took place involving representatives of the english and scottish and northern irish governments. is this something — northern irish governments. is this something you are aware of at the time? _ something you are aware of at the time? i _ something you are aware of at the time? ., ., , ., ., ., time? i would have been aware of it at a certain — time? i would have been aware of it at a certain level, _ time? i would have been aware of it at a certain level, but _ time? i would have been aware of it at a certain level, but i _ time? i would have been aware of it at a certain level, but i don't - at a certain level, but i don't think it was something that was

particularly high up my awareness scale, if i can put it that way. you didn't attend _ scale, if i can put it that way. you didn't attend it? _ scale, if i can put it that way. you didn't attend it? |_ scale, if i can put it that way. you didn't attend it? | didn't, - scale, if i can put it that way. you didn't attend it? i didn't, unless. didn't attend it? i didn't, unless ou are didn't attend it? i didn't, unless you are about — didn't attend it? i didn't, unless you are about to _ didn't attend it? i didn't, unless you are about to tell— didn't attend it? i didn't, unless you are about to tell me - didn't attend it? i didn't, unless you are about to tell me that. didn't attend it? i didn't, unless you are about to tell me that i l didn't attend it? i didn't, unless. you are about to tell me that i did. i didn't attend it. mr you are about to tell me that i did. i didn't attend it.— i didn't attend it. mr freeman also did not attend _ i didn't attend it. mr freeman also did not attend it, _ i didn't attend it. mr freeman also did not attend it, was _ i didn't attend it. mr freeman also did not attend it, was that - i didn't attend it. mr freeman also did not attend it, was that your - did not attend it, was that your understanding?— did not attend it, was that your understanding? yes. it was attended b mr understanding? jazz it was attended by mr fitzpatrick, a understanding? 19:3 it was attended by mr fitzpatrick, a minister understanding? 193 it was attended by mr fitzpatrick, a minister in the health— by mr fitzpatrick, a minister in the health area — by mr fitzpatrick, a minister in the health area as well. should either you health area as well. should either vou or— health area as well. should either you or miss freeman tended have such an event, _ you or miss freeman tended have such an event, which we heard from miss freeman— an event, which we heard from miss freeman an — an event, which we heard from miss freeman an event that sought to update _ freeman an event that sought to update pandemic planning, in order to apply— update pandemic planning, in order to apply more specifically to the circumstances of the emerging threat? — circumstances of the emerging threat? :, ., ., . :, threat? forgive me, in advance of toda , i threat? forgive me, in advance of today. i have _ threat? forgive me, in advance of today, i have not _ threat? forgive me, in advance of today, i have not reviewed - threat? forgive me, in advance of i today, i have not reviewed operation nimbus. i wasn't aware you wanted to

question me on this. i am happy to do so, if you wish me to do so, to give an answer in hindsight. if i think i should have been at it personally, i think the answer is probably no. having missed fitzpatrick involved and that would not be, in any sense, abnormal in the circumstances. he would have fed back through the normal processes in government what the findings and conclusions, and any recommendations would have been. i am certain there would have been. i am certain there would have been senior officials in attendance as well. dr calderwood was at it. attendance as well. dr calderwood was at it- dr _ attendance as well. dr calderwood was at it. dr calderwood _ attendance as well. dr calderwood was at it. dr calderwood was - attendance as well. dr calderwood was at it. dr calderwood was at. attendance as well. dr calderwood was at it. dr calderwood was at it, j was at it. dr calderwood was at it, then that makes _ was at it. dr calderwood was at it, then that makes part _ was at it. dr calderwood was at it, then that makes part of— was at it. dr calderwood was at it, then that makes part of my - was at it. dr calderwood was at it, then that makes part of my point. | was at it. dr calderwood was at it, i then that makes part of my point. we may come onto other aspects of this, in government, in normal times, particularly in the times we were in, not everybody can be at

everything. just because a particular minister or particular civil servant is not present at a particular meeting, it doesn't mean that minister is not engaged in the outcome or the deliberation around that meeting. it is outcome or the deliberation around that meeting-— that meeting. it is a matter of riori that meeting. it is a matter of priority between _ that meeting. it is a matter of priority between conflicting i priority between conflicting commitments?— priority between conflicting commitments? most days in government. _ commitments? most days in government, that _ commitments? most days in government, that is - commitments? most days in i government, that is absolutely commitments? most days in - government, that is absolutely the case. there will always be element of prioritisation. igraffith case. there will always be element of prioritisation.— of prioritisation. with this event not have been, _ of prioritisation. with this event not have been, the _ of prioritisation. with this event i not have been, the circumstances, given— not have been, the circumstances, given the _ not have been, the circumstances, given the evidence we have heard about _ given the evidence we have heard about the — given the evidence we have heard about the extent of the threat, something which should have been prioritised — something which should have been prioritised more than it appears to have _ prioritised more than it appears to have been? — prioritised more than it appears to have been?— prioritised more than it appears to have been? , , , �* , have been? possibly. i'm genuinely nott inc have been? possibly. i'm genuinely rrot trying to _ have been? possibly. i'm genuinely not trying to avoid _ have been? possibly. i'm genuinely not trying to avoid answering - have been? possibly. i'm genuinely not trying to avoid answering the i not trying to avoid answering the question. i have not reviewed operation nimbus in advance of this. so i don't want to, without having done so, be more definitive than i am being. it may well be that what you are putting to me i would answer yes to, and i'm happy to give some written evidence to the inquiry on

this point if it would be helpful. thank you. we have seen in a notebook— thank you. we have seen in a notebook from an individual named mr derek— notebook from an individual named mr derek grieve, the deputy minister for the _ derek grieve, the deputy minister for the health protection division within— for the health protection division within the — for the health protection division within the directorate of population health. _ within the directorate of population health. a _ within the directorate of population health, a number of entries ranging from the _ health, a number of entries ranging from the 26th of february, to the 5th of— from the 26th of february, to the 5th of march, which reads as follows _ 5th of march, which reads as follows. on the 26th of february it says he _ follows. on the 26th of february it says he attended the cobra meeting with the _ says he attended the cobra meeting with the cabinet secretary, mr freeman _ with the cabinet secretary, mr freeman. he noted that it is clear that all— freeman. he noted that it is clear that all departments in the uk government are fully engaged and mobilised in the way that the sg simply— mobilised in the way that the sg simply isn't. the next day, he indicates _ simply isn't. the next day, he indicates that despite attempts to encourage them, still no real engagement. they then spent 20 minutes— engagement. they then spent 20 minutes talking about internal sg columns, — minutes talking about internal sg columns, completely amazed, and even by the _ columns, completely amazed, and even by the 5th _ columns, completely amazed, and even by the 5th of— columns, completely amazed, and even by the 5th of march he notes i attended _ by the 5th of march he notes i attended a directors meeting, laid it out— attended a directors meeting, laid it out thickly, but few believe this is going _ it out thickly, but few believe this is going to — it out thickly, but few believe this is going to be serious. is that, as far as _ is going to be serious. is that, as far as you — is going to be serious. is that, as far as you are concerned, far as you

were _ far as you are concerned, far as you were aware — far as you are concerned, far as you were aware of— far as you are concerned, far as you were aware of the time from your position. — were aware of the time from your position. an — were aware of the time from your position, an accurate understanding of the _ position, an accurate understanding of the state of preparedness and emergency amongst directors in the scottish— emergency amongst directors in the scottish government, in particular the observation that it appeared that the — the observation that it appeared that the uk government's operation was sufficiently further advanced? | was sufficiently further advanced ? couldn't was sufficiently further advanced? i couldn't comment in any detail on the uk government operation at that point. perhaps i should limit myself to commenting on the government i was responsible for. it would not be my understanding or experience. that said, i did not know about these views at the time. derek grieve is a civil servant i have worked with in various capacities over my time in government. he is of the utmost professionalism and expertise, so i would take seriously what he says. i suppose i would acknowledge that i cannot directly comment on a meeting

i was not at, they note i did not write. but that was not my experience at the time. in preparing for today, experience at the time. in preparing fortoday, it experience at the time. in preparing for today, it struck me that a cabinet on the 10th of march 2020, i make some quite extensive comments about the fact that this is going to be a whole government, whole society challenge, and notjust health. at that point, it was something i was stressing, that it had to be something everybody saw as their business and their priority. the other comment, and it is possibly not fair to ascribe to derek grieve, but at the start of swine flu, the sense that when you are in a crisis thatis sense that when you are in a crisis that is very much initially focused on health, it is absolutely all you're thinking about. even people

thinking about it a lot, there is the indication they are not as seized by it as they might be. swine flu did not progress beyond being a health challenge, in the way that 19 recoded. —— that 19 recoded. my understanding is that there was an increasing over that period realisation of how serious it was. there was a realisation that it was serious and was going to affect everybody. can we move onto the next section, the minutes of the cabinet meeting held the day before the entries that i've started to read out from mr grieve's notes. you are noted as being in attendance. can we go to paragraph four? it says under

any other business, they should be chairing a further ministerial meeting to discuss cochrane's response to the global outbreak of the novel coronavirus, covid—i9, about which there will be a full discussion about the cabinet. it will be particularly important to ensure that messages to the general public were as informative as possible and couched in the correct language. was it appropriate, given the information we have looked at emerging from professor will houston, particularly, that as of the 25th of february, novel coronavirus was being dealt with the any other business, with no substantive discussion of what might be done to prevent the thread? —— spread? be done to prevent the thread? -- sread? :. :. . be done to prevent the thread? -- sread? . . , ., ., :, spread? that had been all that note was communicating, _ spread? that had been all that note was communicating, i— spread? that had been all that note was communicating, i would - spread? that had been all that note was communicating, i would agree | was communicating, i would agree with you. but i was communicating the fact that later that day i was

chairing a meeting of the scottish government resilience room. i started sharing those on the 29th of january. with one exception, when i had been sitting flooded areas. this was a period where there was significant work ongoing. either the following week, or the week after that, there was a substantive paper submitted and i would suggest that if that had said there was a global outbreak of the novel coronavirus, we will keep cabinet informed and there was no action behind it, i would accept that. but as far as government terms, it is very clear action as a result of that information. there would be a more

full discussion of that. the first discussion was in february. there would have been extensive cabinet discussions along the way. it is an indication forfuller discussions along the way. it is an indication for fuller descriptions ongoing across government. there is no note of a — ongoing across government. there is no note of a discussion _ ongoing across government. there is no note of a discussion relating - ongoing across government. there is no note of a discussion relating to i no note of a discussion relating to procuring — no note of a discussion relating to procuring or— no note of a discussion relating to procuring or building a testing capacity. _ procuring or building a testing capacity, is there?— procuring or building a testing capacity, is there? procuring or building a testing caaci , isthere? �* , ., ., capacity, is there? because that one note does rrot _ capacity, is there? because that one note does not describe _ capacity, is there? because that one note does not describe it, _ capacity, is there? because that one note does not describe it, this - capacity, is there? because that one note does not describe it, this is - note does not describe it, this is the 25th of february, by the time this note is written, we have already taken the first steps to build testing capacity. testing capacity at the end of january, zero. by the 10th of february, two weeks before this note, we had established testing facilities in glasgow and edinburgh. i think we

very quickly, after that, established a facility in tayside, in dundee, as well. i don't know if that would have been before or slightly after this note. clearly, evidently, from the reality of what was happening, there was work to build up testing under way by the time this note was written. there is no note of any _ time this note was written. there is no note of any discussion _ time this note was written. there is no note of any discussion of - time this note was written. there is no note of any discussion of the - no note of any discussion of the current— no note of any discussion of the current state of building testing capacity? current state of building testing ca aci ? :. current state of building testing ca aci ? ., :, current state of building testing caaci ? ., :, , , capacity? that note suggest there wasn't, capacity? that note suggest there wasn't. but _ capacity? that note suggest there wasn't, but that _ capacity? that note suggest there wasn't, but that doesn't _ capacity? that note suggest there wasn't, but that doesn't mean - capacity? that note suggest there | wasn't, but that doesn't mean that the work was not under way. the health secretary would have been leading at work. the scottish government resilience meeting that i was chairing later that day undoubtedly would have touched on that work. and we know from what was happening, and had already happened, that the work was under way and was progressing. as i said earlier on, the question of whether it was

progressing quickly enough is another discussion. but it was undoubtedly progressing. there is no note of any discussion _ undoubtedly progressing. there is no note of any discussion or— note of any discussion or information being shared about personal— information being shared about personal protective equipment? again, _ personal protective equipment? again, that does not mean the work was not under way. again, i can't bring it up, perhaps you can bring it up, but i think one of the first cabinet meeting is... sorry, one of the first briefings i received in january 2020 told me about the first release of facemasks from the national stockpile. clearly, again, just because this note doesn't say theseissues just because this note doesn't say these issues were discussed at this particular cabinet meeting, the evidence both in documentation, but in reality, what was happening was that this work was under way. the

earliest productions injanuary from professor— earliest productions injanuary from professor wollhausen was talking about _ professor wollhausen was talking about the vulnerable populations, scotland — about the vulnerable populations, scotland had a population where there _ scotland had a population where there were recognised health inequalities in lower socioeconomic groups~ _ inequalities in lower socioeconomic groups. isn't that why we put in pubiic— groups. isn't that why we put in public health scotland to address those _ public health scotland to address those issues? i public health scotland to address those issues? lam pointing out public health scotland to address those issues? i am pointing out that the earliest — those issues? i am pointing out that the earliest productions involved a production— the earliest productions involved a production of a pandemic fuelled by mild cases, and scotland had an elderly— mild cases, and scotland had an elderly population with health inequalities, amongst those with protected characteristics, and in

lower— protected characteristics, and in lower socioeconomic groups. this is why pubtic— lower socioeconomic groups. this is why public health scotland was being set up _ why public health scotland was being set up to _ why public health scotland was being set up to deal with those problems? it set up to deal with those problems? it was _ set up to deal with those problems? it was the _ set up to deal with those problems? it was the final part of the question i hadn't caught. one of many reasons why public health scotland was being set up. it was due before covid arrived, it was due to be established on the 1st of april 2020, that was a long—standing programme of work. it's important to say that it is not the case that the scottish cup and only started dealing with these issues when public health scotland was established. the scottish government, through many of its pre—existing bodies and processes, were acutely and intensely focused on health inequalities and the needs of older people. public health scotland was established because it was thought that having a body of that nature, particularly one that

brought health and government together would be better able to do that. . together would be better able to do that. , :, :, ., :, ., that. there is no information about an ste -s that. there is no information about any steps to _ that. there is no information about any steps to try — that. there is no information about any steps to try to _ that. there is no information about any steps to try to protect - that. there is no information about any steps to try to protect the - any steps to try to protect the vulnerable part of scotland's population? i vulnerable part of scotland's population?— vulnerable part of scotland's --oulation? ,, :, :, :, ~' population? i know from the work under way that — population? i know from the work under way that all _ population? i know from the work under way that all of _ population? i know from the work under way that all of the - population? i know from the work under way that all of the issues i under way that all of the issues were being progressed. all of the issues were being worked on. i suspect, or i know that because it was not all encapsulated there, it doesn't mean it wasn't happening. what steps were being taken to protect — what steps were being taken to protect the vulnerable population? all protect the vulnerable population? att of— protect the vulnerable population? all of the _ protect the vulnerable population? all of the work we were doing to understand covid, to make sure we were preparing and scaling up facilities like testing, making sure that we were in a position to supply ppe. i know there were many concerns

raised about all of these things. i'm not suggesting all of that worked perfectly. all of that was designed to protect, as far as it was possible to do, in the face of oprah pandemic, the entire population. and we were beginning to understand who was going to be more vulnerable to a virus of this nature. : :, , ., :, , nature. are to stage, the scottish goverment _ nature. are to stage, the scottish goverment was _ nature. are to stage, the scottish goverment was asleep _ nature. are to stage, the scottish goverment was asleep at - nature. are to stage, the scottish goverment was asleep at the - nature. are to stage, the scottish i goverment was asleep at the wheel, wasn't _ goverment was asleep at the wheel, wasn't it? _ goverment was asleep at the wheel, wasn't it? :, goverment was asleep at the wheel, wasn't it? no. could i ask you some auestions wasn't it? fin. could i ask you some questions about the cobra meeting that a _ questions about the cobra meeting that a place on the 12th of march 2020 _ that a place on the 12th of march 2020 we — that a place on the 12th of march 2020. we went through some evidence in this— 2020. we went through some evidence in this regard with michael gove. it is a meeting that was chaired by mr johnson _ is a meeting that was chaired by mr johnson if— is a meeting that was chaired by mr johnson. if we could go to inqoo5621, johnson. if we could go to in0005621, please. could we go to

pa-e in0005621, please. could we go to page eight, thank you. you may recall— page eight, thank you. you may recall that — page eight, thank you. you may recall that there was some discussion around this stage as regards — discussion around this stage as regards scotland's emerging position that it _ regards scotland's emerging position that it was _ regards scotland's emerging position that it was interested in seeking to cancel— that it was interested in seeking to cancel mass gatherings, which did subsequently happen. paragraph 15, it says. _ subsequently happen. paragraph 15, it says. the — subsequently happen. paragraph 15, it says, the chair said that the gc essay— it says, the chair said that the gc essay should use the announcement to set out _ essay should use the announcement to set out what _ essay should use the announcement to set out what stage two should be and be-in set out what stage two should be and begin socialising options to protect the general public. the general public— the general public. the general public will not be asked to do options — public will not be asked to do options two, three or four immediately, but these options would come in _ immediately, but these options would come in the _ immediately, but these options would come in the next few weeks. he respected — come in the next few weeks. he respected the scottish government decision— respected the scottish government decision to cancel mass gatherings to ease _ decision to cancel mass gatherings to ease pressure on emergency responders, and as the pandemic progresses, this might need to be taken _ progresses, this might need to be taken on — progresses, this might need to be taken on by the whole of uk. it is crucial— taken on by the whole of uk. it is crucial to— taken on by the whole of uk. it is crucial to stick to the sage advice as much— crucial to stick to the sage advice as much as — crucial to stick to the sage advice as much as possible, and the four nation _ as much as possible, and the four nation should stick together as is

possible. — nation should stick together as is possible, as one united kingdom. on pa-e possible, as one united kingdom. on page ten, _ possible, as one united kingdom. on page ten, there is a list of actions where _ page ten, there is a list of actions where it— page ten, there is a list of actions where it states the chief medical officers — where it states the chief medical officers from all four nations are to prepare — officers from all four nations are to prepare advice for consideration by cobra, — to prepare advice for consideration by cobra, for the approach for mass gatherings — by cobra, for the approach for mass gatherings. the decision underneath, at number— gatherings. the decision underneath, at number five, cobra will keep under— at number five, cobra will keep under review the policy mass gatherings, with particular reference — mass gatherings, with particular reference to the impact on public and emergency services. we can see from the _ and emergency services. we can see from the first page of the document that this _ from the first page of the document that this meeting, chaired by mr johnson, — that this meeting, chaired by mr johnson, took place at 1.15 pm. do you read _ johnson, took place at 1.15 pm. do you read that as there is an agreement that cobra would keep the issue of— agreement that cobra would keep the issue of counselling mass gatherings under— issue of counselling mass gatherings under review and a father advice in that regard — under review and a father advice in that regard would be provided by,

amongst — that regard would be provided by, amongst others, chief medical officers — amongst others, chief medical officers for all four nations? | officers for all four nations? accept officers for all four nations? i accept the reading you have put on the minute. i was at the meeting. there is no doubt in that meeting that the scottish goverment was going to confirm a decision to advise, it was before we had legal powers to enforce it, but we would advise the cancellation of gatherings over 500 people. you rightly point to the time of that meeting, 1.15. just before that meeting, 1.15. just before that meeting, i had taken part in a weekly session of first minister's questions, and i advised parliament thatis questions, and i advised parliament that is what the scottish cup and was minded to do. this was a scottish goodman decision to take. i was in no doubt, in that meeting, that that was the decision the scottish government was going to take. i was increasingly concerned we were not moving fast enough to

deal with the rate of transmission of 19 retro. —— covid. i heard it said ijumped the gun on mass gatherings. by this point, we were notjumping the gun, arguably we were going more slowly than we should have been. i think the public was ahead of government and the action they thought was appropriate. my action they thought was appropriate. my view on mass gatherings, which i set out to cobra, was that for three reasons i thought it important to take this action of this time. firstly, that while the medical advice was that open—air events were relatively less risky than others. it was not a case there was no risk of transmission. at this stage of the pandemic, i thought we had to do

whatever we could to reduce the risk of transmission. secondly, i was increasingly concerned about the pressure on emergency services, having to police large events when they were dealing with other pressures associated with 19 makro. thirdly, i thought there was a serious disjoint in governments. we were seeking to say this was a serious threat, but saying it was ok for them to gather together in the crowded events. if people thought it was ok to do that, would they be less likely to follow advice we were giving in the day—to—day business of their lives, before lunch you asked me about the rugby match at murrayfield. as you put to me, there was an argument that should not have gone ahead. that was my position. i indicated that the government would confirm the position. i announced

the decision of the scottish goodman had taken, and i would assert very strongly then command i would now, that having taken the decision, we were perfectly within our rights to take the decision. i was notjust in my rights to announce it, it was important that i announced it. and i will come onto the other important decisions that were taken at cobra, it was essential the public were given quick and effective information about it. are the minutes wrong, then? if you what ou are the minutes wrong, then? if you what you are — are the minutes wrong, then? if you what you are saying, _ are the minutes wrong, then? if you what you are saying, if— are the minutes wrong, then? if you what you are saying, if your - are the minutes wrong, then? if m. what you are saying, if your reading of that minute is putting a question to me that says i somehow breached good faith in that i did something that was against the agreement in cobra, there was no doubt in that cobra meeting, not on the pages in

front of mejust cobra meeting, not on the pages in front of me just now, where it says the prime minister of the scottish government's decision or word i think it was the passage are referred to earlier, on page eight. yes, he respected the scottish government's decision. it is clear that he understood we had taken a decision. to that he understood we had taken a decision. :, , ., ~ , ,, :, decision. to be fair, ms sturgeon, if one reads _ decision. to be fair, ms sturgeon, if one reads that _ decision. to be fair, ms sturgeon, if one reads that passage - decision. to be fair, ms sturgeon, if one reads that passage in - if one reads that passage in isolation _ if one reads that passage in isolation without looking at the subsequent actions, one might conclude — subsequent actions, one might conclude that, but one obviously needs— conclude that, but one obviously needs to — conclude that, but one obviously needs to see what is reached by the end of— needs to see what is reached by the end of the _ needs to see what is reached by the end of the meeting in the actions, which _ end of the meeting in the actions, which involved further advice being taken _ which involved further advice being taken on _ which involved further advice being taken on the issue. all which involved further advice being taken on the issue. filll which involved further advice being taken on the issue.— taken on the issue. all i can say is i was in that _ taken on the issue. all i can say is i was in that meeting, _ taken on the issue. all i can say is i was in that meeting, i _ taken on the issue. all i can say is i was in that meeting, i recall- taken on the issue. all i can say is i was in that meeting, i recall it i i was in that meeting, i recall it very clearly and there was no doubt that was the decision i communicated. i tried to persuade the other governments to follow suit. as it happens, i think they all did follow suit within two or three days because the situation was developing at pace and in a not good direction. i believe the scottish government was right to take that decision then and if i have a regret

about that