�*of years, any �*ef years, any mps, number of years, any mps, constituents have been —— but many mps mconstituents have been prosecuted for committing fraud with many protesting innocence. meeting convened in february at the house of commons, attended by mps and their constituents which this matter was discussed, that is a cross—reference to the 27th of february meeting at portcullis house. following this meeting, you had several private meetings with ms perkins and her colleagues to discuss how the issue might best be introduced her colleagues. the post office limited is now a completely separate entity from the royal mail and she wrote in the organisation in 2011 and became of where the issue soon after starting. the business rest on its reputation and been

trustworthy. she said the post office also recognised full well that the matter was also very serious for the supposed masters and mistresses and it was invariably life changing. over the page, please. she said that now was a time of enormous change in the post office and that it was important to give mps confidence in the business and reputation. again, so far so good. she stated that the matter involves treading a tightrope regarding questions of money. the post office and its staff stewards of large quantities of cash and the cash does not belong to the post office and it is in transit as a comes through the post office. there is the issue of trying not to put temptation in people's way, but in any retail business, that is not possible. what did you or do you

understand to be the point being made there about temptation being put in people? why? fist made there about temptation being put in peeple? why?— made there about temptation being put in people? why? at the meeting ofthe put in people? why? at the meeting of the 17th of— put in people? why? at the meeting of the 17th of may, _ put in people? why? at the meeting of the 17th of may, with _ put in people? why? at the meeting of the 17th of may, with all _ put in people? why? at the meeting of the 17th of may, with all of - put in people? why? at the meeting of the 17th of may, with all of the - of the 17th of may, with all of the n and me, paula venables and others had raised the problem of there being lots of cash lying around in unexpected places and whether this meant that they thought that that led some postmasters into temptation and being inherently dishonest wasn't entirely clear that that was theissue wasn't entirely clear that that was the issue that they were raising, i think. and we never really got to the bottom of that but that's what the bottom of that but that's what theissue the bottom of that but that's what the issue she was talking about. we then the issue she was talking about. - then see that miss vennells picked up then see that miss vennells picked

up the temptation batten and she said that temptation is an issue, but that trust in the post office as a brand is paramount. post office needs trustworthy people on staff and its processes and systems must be transparent and must work well. so the moment the focus i think is all on the honesty and trustworthiness of the postmasters. yes. {iii trustworthiness of the postmasters. yes. " j~:: :: trustworthiness of the postmasters. yes. " j~::::. yes. of the 11,800 current postmasters _ yes. of the 11,800 current postmasters employed - yes. of the 11,800 current l postmasters employed only yes. of the 11,800 current i postmasters employed only a yes. of the 11,800 current - postmasters employed only a tiny number are being slide as an issue with the horizon system and so it's relatively small. and then i want to go through what is later said here. there is a series of assertions made. she said, according to the

minutes, that the horizon system is very secure and the first assertion, assertion one, did you at this stage now whether that was true or false? at this stage, no, i didn't. we were going to have an independent investigation to see whether that was true or not. did investigation to see whether that was true or not.— investigation to see whether that was true or not. did you accept what ou are was true or not. did you accept what you are being _ was true or not. did you accept what you are being told _ was true or not. did you accept what you are being told by _ was true or not. did you accept what you are being told by the chief- you are being told by the chief executive of the post office? i did not accept _ executive of the post office? i did not accept that _ executive of the post office? i did not accept that the _ executive of the post office? i did not accept that the horizon system was very secure, no. that was a matter still to be investigated. can i turn to the _ matter still to be investigated. (1531 i turn to the second assertion, assertion two? every keystroke used by anyone using the system is recorded and auditable. did you know whether that was true or false? i didn't know whether that was true or

false. that was a matter still to be investigated. did false. that was a matter still to be investigated-— investigated. did you accept what ou are investigated. did you accept what you are being _ investigated. did you accept what you are being told? _ investigated. did you accept what you are being told? no. - investigated. did you accept what you are being told? no. she - investigated. did you accept what you are being told? no. she is. you are being told? no. she is recorded as — you are being told? no. she is recorded as continuing to say, when things go wrong in a sub—post office, there is a helpline which staff can call seven days a week during office hours and back—up staff who will help further if things go wrong. it's here that issues are normally resolved. did you know whether that was correct, true or false? that at the helpline stage, issues are normally resolved? i believed it was probably untrue at that stage. mostly because of the experience thatjoe hamilton had had of seeing come of telephoning the helpline and asking what to do, doing what they have said and seen the balance that she was alleged to

be owing to have doubled in front of her eyes. so that assertion struck me as being untrue. can her eyes. so that assertion struck me as being untrue.— her eyes. so that assertion struck me as being untrue. can we turn to the fourth assertion? _ me as being untrue. can we turn to the fourth assertion? it _ me as being untrue. can we turn to the fourth assertion? it appears - the fourth assertion? it appears that some sub sub postmasters have been borrowing money from the post office account or till in the same way that they might do in a retail business. but this is not how the post office casas public money on the post office must recover it if it goes missing. did you or would you take from what is recorded as being said there that the issue, according to miss vennells, with postmasters putting their hands on the till, rather than with rising? it's clearly possible that might have happened... horizon... but if

you don't have a robust, to use the word horizon accounting system, you cannot be sure whether it hasn't. i thought it might have happened in some cases but to say that it happened in a lot of cases struck me as being needing to be examined and tested. find as being needing to be examined and tested. �* . ., , , ., tested. and then a fifth assertion, every case — tested. and then a fifth assertion, every case taken _ tested. and then a fifth assertion, every case taken to _ tested. and then a fifth assertion, every case taken to prosecution i tested. and then a fifth assertion, l every case taken to prosecution that involved the horizon system thus far has found in favour of the post office. we will come in a moment to look at that statement, which as i have said is not a true statement. or did you know whether it was true or false at this time? what or did you know whether it was true or false at this time?— or false at this time? what i knew about 10 hamilton _ or false at this time? what i knew about 10 hamilton was _ or false at this time? what i knew about 10 hamilton was that - or false at this time? what i knew about 10 hamilton was that her i or false at this time? what i knew l about 10 hamilton was that her case aboutjo hamilton was that her case had been found in favour of the post office and yet it was her case that i was particularly questioning so it may have been true as far as i was

aware but i didn't place much credence in what she had said there. can we go to the foot of the page please? you will see in between that the minute follows largely the structure of the speaking notes that we have looked at with angela bogarde speaking to the two case studies. it notes that they are attached. do you think you might have got something from that pack that we saw?— have got something from that pack that we saw? they were attached. i did see some _ that we saw? they were attached. i did see some case _ that we saw? they were attached. i did see some case notes, _ that we saw? they were attached. i did see some case notes, yes. - that we saw? they were attached. i | did see some case notes, yes. they are somewhere around in a large amount of papers. ii are somewhere around in a large amount of papers.— amount of papers. if we go to the foot of the _ amount of papers. if we go to the foot of the page, _ amount of papers. if we go to the foot of the page, mike _ amount of papers. if we go to the foot of the page, mike would - amount of papers. if we go to the foot of the page, mike would mp| foot of the page, mike would mp asked the question that, to which an

answer was given later on we should look at the question as a whole now. mike would mp asks "whether anyone in the post office had entertained the thought that there might well be problems with the horizon system, rather than believing that there was not. he asked one of the post office will sign the system was 100% secure and 100% full proof, making the point that would be the first software system implemented by government to be so were this the case. and then if we go over to the top of the next page. andrew briggs and mp asked whether there had been any case where the discrepancy was the fault of the system. andrew briggs in... there is then a discussion where it seems there was a side tracking about the identity

of the forensic accountant. and then if you see three boxes from the bottom paula vennells said that going back to the mp�*s question, there had not been a case investigated where the horizon system had been found to be at fault. so there is what i am calling assertion six. did you know again, it's expressed in a different way, whether that was true or false? that there had not been a case investigated were the horizon system have been found to be false? ida. i have been found to be false? no, i didn't. so. — have been found to be false? no, i didn't- so. we _ have been found to be false? no, i didn't. so, we have _ have been found to be false? no, i didn't. so, we have seen _ didn't. so, we have seen the assertions — didn't. so, we have seen the assertions made _ didn't. so, we have seen the assertions made and - didn't. so, we have seen the assertions made and i - didn't. so, we have seen the assertions made and i can i didn't. so, we have seen the . assertions made and i can come didn't. so, we have seen the _ assertions made and i can come down, thank you. and of the assurances given to nine mps and all their

representatives. would you agree overall this is a fair summary. the problem is that a small number of postmasters borrow money from the till. the problem is not horizon, every prosecution involving horizon has found in favour of the post office and not a single case existed where on investigation the horizon system was found to be at fault." yes. i system was found to be at fault." yes. ~' ., ., , ., ~ . yes. i think it follows that alice perkins, paula _ yes. i think it follows that alice perkins, paula vennells - yes. i think it follows that alice perkins, paula vennells and - yes. i think it follows that alice - perkins, paula vennells and angela vanden bogarde and others did not disclose to you on the other eight mps representatives the following. "anything about the julie wolstenholme case." in which expert evidence have been served by a man called... concerning bugs in the horizon system and in which case was settled by the post office. thea;r

settled by the post office. they didn't disclose _ settled by the post office. they didn't disclose that, _ settled by the post office. they didn't disclose that, no. - settled by the post office. they didn't disclose that, no. they l didn't disclose that, no. they didn't disclose that, no. they didn't mention _ didn't disclose that, no. they didn't mention the _ didn't disclose that, no. they didn't mention the case - didn't disclose that, no. they didn't mention the case of i didn't disclose that, no. they | didn't mention the case of lee castleton and the obtaining of a report from bdo hayward which had found errors in the horizon system. no. , �* ., no. they didn't mention the ac uittal no. they didn't mention the acquittal of— no. they didn't mention the acquittal of another- no. they didn't mention the acquittal of another person l no. they didn't mention the i acquittal of another person by a jury acquittal of another person by a jury in 2004 and mrs mckelvey having blamed horizon for the causing of losses of money that she was accused of stealing? no, they didn't. they did not mention the speedy acquittal of suzanne palmer by a jury in 2007. mrs palmer also having blamed horizon a trial for the losses attributable or said to be attributable or said to be attributable to her? there was a question directed to the jury about what mrs palmer is to do if she didn't agree the figure that horizon had produced which the post office had produced which the post office had been unable or unwilling to

answer and an order of the post office to pay £70,000 in costs. ida. office to pay £70,000 in costs. no. they didn't — office to pay £70,000 in costs. no. they didn't mention any of the following bugs, all of which have been discovered and noted by the post office by this time. the calendar square bug, sometimes known as the falkirk bug, operative by the post office in's admission between 2000 and 2006 and on the findings later of mrjustice fraser until 2010? ., , later of mrjustice fraser until 2010? ., y ., 2010? no, they did mention it. they did mention — 2010? no, they did mention it. they did mention the _ 2010? no, they did mention it. they did mention the missed _ 2010? no, they did mention it. they did mention the missed payments i 2010? no, they did mention it. they i did mention the missed payments bugs of 2010? no. oranother did mention the missed payments bugs of 2010? no. or another bug operative between 2010 and 2013? they didn't mention the dalmellington bug from 2010 and the fact it was still operative at the time of this meeting? ida. they did time of this meeting? no. they did mention another bug operative in 2010 and another one in 2005 and

again in 2007? ida. they did mention again in 2007? no. they did mention the local suspense account bug operative in 2010? the reversals bug in 2003? the gyro bank discrepancy bugs operative in 2001 and 2002? ida. bugs operative in 2001 and 2002? no. or the independent expert review and report on horizon in 2005 and again in march 2010 but on each occasion the post office had decided against it in the latter occasion seemingly on the grounds that it might be disclosable in criminal proceedings? they didn't. fir disclosable in criminal proceedings? the didn't. , , they didn't. or problems with the so-called iro _ they didn't. or problems with the so-called irq data _ they didn't. or problems with the so-called irq data on _ they didn't. or problems with the so-called irq data on whether. they didn't. or problems with the i so-called irq data on whether those so—called irq data on whether those issues should be revealed in criminal courts who are hearing criminal courts who are hearing criminal charges against sub—postmaster is based on irq data and which the post office been notified? .,

and which the post office been notified? ida. does it follow that notified? no. does it follow that our notified? no. does it follow that your state of _ notified? no. does it follow that your state of knowledge at this time, based on what the post office board member and executive members were telling you was that you were unaware of any bugs, errors or defects which had been detected in legacy horizon or which were then evident in emerging in horizon online? . . . evident in emerging in horizon online? , ., ., . online? yes, i was unaware. we were all unaware — online? yes, i was unaware. we were all unaware but _ online? yes, i was unaware. we were all unaware but michael _ online? yes, i was unaware. we were all unaware but michael wood - online? yes, i was unaware. we were all unaware but michael wood was i all unaware but michael wood was raising the question, the only absolutely perfect computer programme in existence? tau absolutely perfect computer programme in existence? you were unaware of — programme in existence? you were unaware of the _ programme in existence? you were unaware of the problems _ programme in existence? you were unaware of the problems with i programme in existence? you were unaware of the problems with the l unaware of the problems with the so—called irq data and its presentation to criminal courts. completely unaware of that. == presentation to criminal courts. completely unaware of that. -- ar q data... is completely unaware of that. -- ar q data--- isan— completely unaware of that. -- ar q data... is an appropriate _ completely unaware of that. -- ar q data... is an appropriate moment i completely unaware of that. -- ar q data... is an appropriate moment if. data... is an appropriate moment if it is convenient to do to break in this line of questioning. certainly,

i would this line of questioning. certainly, i would just _ this line of questioning. certainly, i would just ask _ this line of questioning. certainly, i would just ask you, _ this line of questioning. certainly, i would just ask you, if _ this line of questioning. certainly, i would just ask you, if i _ this line of questioning. certainly, i would just ask you, if i may, i this line of questioning. certainly, i would just ask you, if i may, we | i would just ask you, if i may, we reached — i would just ask you, if i may, we reached the — i would just ask you, if i may, we reached the summer of 2012 and it may be _ reached the summer of 2012 and it may be that this will be pursued further— may be that this will be pursued further withjust so that may be that this will be pursued further with just so that it stuck in my— further with just so that it stuck in my mind _ further with just so that it stuck in my mind can i ask you this? in any of— in my mind can i ask you this? in any ofthese— in my mind can i ask you this? in any of these discussions, was the role of— any of these discussions, was the role of fujitsu mentioned at all? it's role of fujitsu mentioned at all? it's hard — role of fujitsu mentioned at all? it's hard to— role of fujitsu mentioned at all? it's hard to remember precisely when fujitsu's role came up. certainly it was raised at some stage and i believe it had been raised before now, yes. buti believe it had been raised before now, yes. but i can't remember exactly when it was first raised. were you given a kind of summary, for want _ were you given a kind of summary, for want of— were you given a kind of summary, forwant ofa— were you given a kind of summary, for want of a better description, of

the role _ for want of a better description, of the role that fujitsu might be playing — the role that fujitsu might be playing in providing information, which _ playing in providing information, which permitted the post office, either _ which permitted the post office, either to — which permitted the post office, either to prosecute or take disciplinary action against sub—postmasters? disciplinary action against sub-postmasters?- disciplinary action against sub-postmasters? disciplinary action against sub-ostmasters? ., ., �* ~ sub-postmasters? no, i don't thinki was. none sub-postmasters? no, i don't thinki was- none at— sub-postmasters? no, i don't thinki was. none at this _ sub-postmasters? no, i don't thinki was. none at this stage. _ sub-postmasters? no, i don't thinki was. none at this stage. i _ sub-postmasters? no, i don't thinki was. none at this stage. i won't i sub-postmasters? no, i don't thinki was. none at this stage. i won't ask| was. none at this stage. i won't ask ou an was. none at this stage. i won't ask you any more _ was. none at this stage. i won't ask you any more and — was. none at this stage. i won't ask you any more and if— was. none at this stage. i won't ask you any more and if my _ was. none at this stage. i won't ask you any more and if my colleague . you any more and if my colleague wanted _ you any more and if my colleague wanted to— you any more and if my colleague wanted to get up he may. i was conscious— wanted to get up he may. i was conscious that in the documents we looked _ conscious that in the documents we looked at. — conscious that in the documents we looked at, which may only be a small representative sample, there was no reference _ representative sample, there was no reference to fujitsu so ijust wanted _ reference to fujitsu so ijust wanted what your memory was about it. wanted what your memory was about it thank— wanted what your memory was about it. thank you. when can we start again? _ it. thank you. when can we start auain? . it. thank you. when can we start aain? ., it. thank you. when can we start auain? . , ., again? have passed please. -- have assed again? have passed please. -- have passed the — again? have passed please. -- have passed the hour _ again? have passed please. -- have passed the hour please _ again? have passed please. -- have passed the hour please you - again? have passed please. -- have passed the hour please you have i again? have passed please. -- have i passed the hour please you have been listening to the post office horizon

it public inquiry and this is bbc news coverage. taste it public inquiry and this is bbc news coverage.— news coverage. we have been listenin: news coverage. we have been listening to — news coverage. we have been listening to a _ news coverage. we have been listening to a tory _ news coverage. we have been listening to a tory mp - news coverage. we have been listening to a tory mp and i news coverage. we have been i listening to a tory mp and former conservative mp who has been fighting alongside so many of the victims who have been affected by the scandal and has been campaigning on this issue for 14 years and when he was an mp he was the sole voice of the victims in parliament. i want to pick out a few moments from what we have heard there. he has been sharing his correspondence with the government, the post office and as well as the royal mail and that's important because the inquiry is trying to establish who knew what and when and how they dealt with theseissues and when and how they dealt with these issues once they were flagged up. he flagged up the issues of the horizon it system and his concern that victims were wrongly closed of theft to the government at the time because he wanted an injustice sorted out and given the government as a shareholder, and on the post office, he assumed they would but he summed up their response to him as

no, not me, golf because he wrote to peter mandelson who in 2009 was a secretary of state for business skills and innovation. he didn't get response from him but he did get response from him but he did get response from him but he did get response from the who explained the government has an arm's—length relationship in their words with the post office and that they have been assured there were no problems with the horizon it system. lord james has said he was frustrated by this and made the comparison that has been made before of the risk of owning a dangerous dog. you can't have an arm's—length relationship if the dog behaves badly and that he was frustrated because he felt so many of these victims were constantly told they were the only ones having these problems when in fact they didn't and that this was, there was an element of intimidation to this. the inquiry has taken a short break and we will return to that special coverage of the inquiry shortly but for now let's go to nikki in the studio.

children have been let down by a lack of research and remarkably weak evidence on medical interventions in gender care. that's according to a landmark review published today. a paediatrician who carried out the review for nhs england is calling for gender services for children and young people to match the standards of other nhs care saying the toxicity of the debate meant professionals were afraid to openly discuss their views. our health editor has more. sonia wanted to transition from the age of 15, but she found she couldn't get access to care and was put on a waiting list. by the age of 18, she hadn't had a first appointment and was transferred to adult services. after hearing there'd be another long wait, she opted to go private until she could be seen by the nhs. sonia says the long delays were hard to cope with. all in all, i spent four years on waiting lists to be seen

by an nhs specialist. it was incredibly frustrating and the period between being told that, "oh, we're not going to see before your 18th," and being referred on, and then me gaining private health care was an incredibly dark period in terms of my mental health. it was the the lowest i've been during the course of my transition. expanding gender services is a key focus of the latest independent review. recommendations include a separate pathway for young children and their families, allowing early discussions to take place, a follow—through service for 17— to 25—year—olds, and assurances that the same standards of care as other parts of the nhs will be provided. gender services provided by the controversial tavistock clinic in london ended last month. two new centres in london and liverpool have been set up. the use of drugs to stop the onset

of puberty has now stopped until further research is done. the author of the report says hormone treatment should in future be used with extreme caution for 16— to 18—year—olds and argues that children were let down by the quality of services. well, i think it's very important to be concerned about a group of children and young people, who are not getting the services that they need and they deserve in order to thrive and be well as they grow into adults. so i, of course, would hope that considerable note is taken of this report. keira bell started taking puberty blockers aged 16, after being referred to the tavistock. she then took legal action, arguing she wasn't challenged enough at the clinic and regretted her decision. her lawyer responded to the review findings. whilst it is very reassuring for young people who are going through gender—questioning at the moment and their parents,

that hopefully there will be a new service developed that will meet their needs appropriately, it is, unfortunately, for many young people, too late. they live with the ongoing consequences of poor clinical treatment and their lives forever changed. for sonia, the priority now is for the report's findings to be implemented, for more resources to be provided, and for calmer and fairer discussions around gender and identity. hugh pym, bbc news, birmingham. to discuss this more i'm joined by our health editor and also by the chief leader writer at the observer who has written on this subject. whew, we saw from europe report that is a major review and critical in places. what's your assessment of the points? it’s places. what's your assessment of the points?— the points? it's a very comprehensive - the points? it's a very| comprehensive report, the points? it's a very i comprehensive report, more the points? it's a very _ comprehensive report, more than 300 pages and this review goes back to

2020 and an interim report in 2022 questioned the use of puberty blockers at the tavistock and portman trust, which provided gender services and that led to a series of events, including an inspection by the regulator which found the service to be inadequate and then last month, nhs england said puberty blockers would no longer be routinely prescribed and the service of the tavistock and portman was brought to an end with two new clinics being set up. this is a long—running and much debated issue. i think that thing is a standout for me is the fact that in her forward to her report the doctor is seen directly that she wants to speak directly that she wants to speak directly to children and young people how they have been let down that there wasn't adequate research or evidence to support the long—term use of puberty blockers and hormone

treatment and that was partly, lucy morris implied because of the toxic debate because of the issue —— she more or less employed... and clinicians were shying away from it and didn't want to get involved and reluctant to engage and you have this large rise in referrals to the trust for the gender service. i think there is that but then there's the more forward—looking aspect to it which is how do you improve services now? and she is clear the services now? and she is clear the services need to be extended and made more available, notjust one centre in london, but a new centre in london and one in liverpool and then other regional hubs because of then other regional hubs because of the very long waiting lists for children and young people with gender issues and long with for others as well and she is saying we need to move on from this toxic debate to provide the best possible care for children and young people

on the similar standards to the levels of care that are expected and assumed in other parts of the nhs. if i can come to you, sonia, hughes said the children have been let down. . �* . said the children have been let down. . �* , ., ~ , down. that's right and i think he is entirely right _ down. that's right and i think he is entirely right that _ down. that's right and i think he is entirely right that the _ down. that's right and i think he is entirely right that the most - entirely right that the most important thing looking forward is the reforms that is being recommended to gender services for children— recommended to gender services for children and that's really about having — children and that's really about having more holistic services that treat _ having more holistic services that treat children and young people as human— treat children and young people as human beings but takes into account the fact— human beings but takes into account the fact that when children are questioning their gender, sometimes that might _ questioning their gender, sometimes that might be an issue of trans— identity— that might be an issue of trans— identity in — that might be an issue of trans— identity in adulthood but quite often — identity in adulthood but quite often it— identity in adulthood but quite often it will resolve itself and it can be — often it will resolve itself and it can be associated with many other things. _ can be associated with many other things, including mental health issues. — things, including mental health issues, including autism, children processing — issues, including autism, children processing there of developing same—sex attraction to huge recommendations and the challenge comes— recommendations and the challenge comes back to this toxicity point and i_ comes back to this toxicity point and i think— comes back to this toxicity point and i think it's important to

explain _ and i think it's important to explain why the toxicity has hampered the use of evidence in children's— hampered the use of evidence in children's health care. because when whistle—blowers were raising whistle— blowers were raising concerns _ whistle—blowers were raising concerns over the lack of help, as long _ concerns over the lack of help, as long as _ concerns over the lack of help, as long as 15— concerns over the lack of help, as long as 15 or— concerns over the lack of help, as long as 15 or 16 years ago, they were _ long as 15 or 16 years ago, they were tired _ long as 15 or 16 years ago, they were tired and called trans— phobic, bigoted. _ were tired and called trans— phobic, bigoted, hatefuland were tired and called trans— phobic, bigoted, hateful and that has led to an issue _ bigoted, hateful and that has led to an issue were essentially an arrant ideology— an issue were essentially an arrant ideology about gender identity has been allowed to drive the health care of— been allowed to drive the health care of children and that has failed children— care of children and that has failed children i— care of children and that has failed children i think going forward there is big _ children i think going forward there is big question marks to the nhs and how is— is big question marks to the nhs and how is going to realise the vision and how— how is going to realise the vision and how it's going to ensure that it is using _ and how it's going to ensure that it is using some of the same conditions and some _ is using some of the same conditions and some very well—meaning, who have been involved with the service has failed _ been involved with the service has failed children so badly and how is it going _ failed children so badly and how is it going to— failed children so badly and how is it going to ensure that there is a new approach which some may be very attached _ new approach which some may be very attached to _ new approach which some may be very attached to the old model is based on ideology, not evidence about what works _ on ideology, not evidence about what works for— on ideology, not evidence about what works for children and young people. on the _ works for children and young people. on the toxicity issue, is the fact that health care professionals are afraid to say what they think in

case, for example, on social media and it is blown up as we have seen in previous cases when we talk about the trans— issue? in previous cases when we talk about the trans- issue?— the trans- issue? yes, if you look above interim _ the trans- issue? yes, if you look above interim report _ the trans- issue? yes, if you look above interim report on _ the trans- issue? yes, if you look above interim report on the i the trans- issue? yes, if you look above interim report on the finall above interim report on the final report— above interim report on the final report and — above interim report on the final report and she has done a lot of work— report and she has done a lot of work with— report and she has done a lot of work with clinicians to understand views _ work with clinicians to understand views in— work with clinicians to understand views in this area, because the debate — views in this area, because the debate was so toxic in these whistle—blowers were tarnished and any newspaper, my newspaper had in reporting _ any newspaper, my newspaper had in reporting this issue, others have come _ reporting this issue, others have come at — reporting this issue, others have come at bbc newsnight did, there was a lot of— come at bbc newsnight did, there was a lot of backlash against reporting which _ a lot of backlash against reporting which is _ a lot of backlash against reporting which is reporting is legitimate concerns— which is reporting is legitimate concerns so it has a real—world impact — concerns so it has a real—world impact on _ concerns so it has a real—world impact on children and young people because _ impact on children and young people because clinicians working with young — because clinicians working with young people look at that backlash and they— young people look at that backlash and they are scared that when children— and they are scared that when children come to them and say we are questioning _ children come to them and say we are questioning our gender we think i was born— questioning our gender we think i was born a — questioning our gender we think i was born a girl but i might be a boy. _ was born a girl but i might be a boy, clinicians become wary of treating — boy, clinicians become wary of treating those children and that is so damaging for children and young people _ so damaging for children and young people and that's why when you get these _ people and that's why when you get these activists driving debates and

arguments, adult ideology, that harms _ arguments, adult ideology, that harms children and that what is being _ harms children and that what is being called out in this report. and this re ort being called out in this report. situc this report specifically being called out in this report. fific this report specifically is being called out in this report. e'"ic this report specifically is about england, what about the rest of the uk and how gender services are provided for young people? the tavistock and _ provided for young people? t"ia: tavistock and portman trust provided for young people? t"i2 tavistock and portman trust in london provided the service for all of england and wales, so the consequences of this report are important for wales is well as england. in scotland, there is a clinic in edinburgh and the scottish government has said that it will study very carefully the report to find out how they can address these issues with gender services in scotland and we haven't had a reaction yet from the administration in northern ireland but i think this report will resonate around the uk. it's interesting to just add on the

thought that hillary cass makes the report that there are different approaches are no clear view indifferent different health care systems and germany, switzerland and austria have continued to be liberal in their views on the use of puberty blockers, whereas in sweden, finland and now england by definition that the uk has taken a different view on that issue of puberty blockers. {lane that issue of puberty blockers. one final oint that issue of puberty blockers. one final point to _ that issue of puberty blockers. one final point to you, sonia. are you optimistic that we can now deal with this going forward in an open way? i think this report is incredibly important in taking the heat out and going _ important in taking the heat out and going back— important in taking the heat out and going back to the evidence. i am optimistic. — going back to the evidence. i am optimistic, i think it's a really important _ optimistic, i think it's a really important moment but as i was saying before. _ important moment but as i was saying before. i do— important moment but as i was saying before, i do think there are big challenges for the nhs. it's not 'ust challenges for the nhs. it's not just a _ challenges for the nhs. it's not just a case that you, in an area so contested. — just a case that you, in an area so contested, it's not the case that you get— contested, it's not the case that you get a — contested, it's not the case that you get a report based on the evidence _ you get a report based on the evidence and then everything magically changes. nhs commissioning managers _ magically changes. nhs commissioning managers have to work very hard to ensure _ managers have to work very hard to ensure that — managers have to work very hard to ensure that children and young

people — ensure that children and young people do get the services they deserve — people do get the services they deserve as