this is bbc news, the headlines... today, the uk, was it a sufficiently prepared for the pandemic? the uk covert inquiry is answering exactly that question. —— covid inquiry. a european summit, building bridges and relationships. keir starmer will host 50 leaders at the european summit in england today. and also the lib dem leader ed davey labour's pat mcfadden, both former postal affairs ministers, will give evidence at the postal inquiry today. first, let's hear what we might get

from the covid inquiry report, which is due to be released injust from the covid inquiry report, which is due to be released in just a few hours. we will get details on the preparedness or not of the uk for the pandemic. let's go over to nicky schiller. i the pandemic. let's go over to nicky schiller. ., ., , ., schiller. i am outside the covid inuui schiller. i am outside the covid inquiry in _ schiller. i am outside the covid inquiry in london. _ schiller. i am outside the covid inquiry in london. this - schiller. i am outside the covid inquiry in london. this will- schiller. i am outside the covid inquiry in london. this will set | schiller. i am outside the covid i inquiry in london. this will set up backin inquiry in london. this will set up back in may 2021 by the then prime minister borisjohnson, to look at how the uk both prepared and dealt with the covid pandemic. today is the first report from the inquiry. but the inquiry hasn't stopped. it's being held in what is known as modules or stages, and they will go on until 2026. but this is the first report from the first stage or module. the hearing heard around this time last year, six weeks of evidence from 69 different people, experts, and also the politicians. at that time we heard from the

former health secretary matt hancock, and also another former health secretary who was chancellor of the time, jeremy hunt, and also the former prime minister as well, david cameron. they gave evidence as part of looking at how prepared the uk was for the covid pandemic. this doesn't look at anything that happened afterwards, it basically looks at how well the uk was prepared. things like were the hospitals, did they have enough ppe or protection equipment for doctors. and what was the plan if there was an outbreak. during that evidence, there were a number of areas that were looked at. one was the actual fact that most of the plans were around a flu or influenza outbreak, which is what a lot of people thought might happen. at that time, that plan relied on things like having immunisation, and being able

to tweak those vaccinations if needs be, as well as letting it run in the community, ratherthan, say, be, as well as letting it run in the community, rather than, say, for example what happened in asia, where they had already had two coronavirus outbreaks, where very much it was about to trying to contain it and do the test and tracing, and closing down borders to try to stop the spread of it. so there was that issue around that plan. then other things came into evidence that was given. 0ne things came into evidence that was given. one of them was brexit, and where there because a lot of departments at that time were focusing on planning for a no—deal brexit, whether they weren't planning enough for a possible outbreak. that was one of the other areas that was looked at. the other one was austerity. 0ne areas that was looked at. the other one was austerity. one that was part of the reason why david cameron and george osborne, who was the chancellor of the time of the

austerity programme, gave and whether the austerity had meant that there weren't enough staff and resources in the health service. at the time of the evidence, george osborne denied that, saying that 0sborne denied that, saying that actually it meant that the uk have more money to be able to spend on the pandemic when it came. those are the pandemic when it came. those are the sorts of areas we expect baroness hallett to look at. her report will be published at midday. what is happening at the moment is that all of the journalists are inside this building behind me, including our health editor hugh pym. and what they are being given is a copy of that report. so, they can read and digest it, and then they will be able to come out at midday and we will be able to tell you what is in the report. at around 12.05, we expect baroness hallett herself to give a statement. we don't think she will answer questions, it will be more a statement on what she has in her

report. we are expecting it to be quite critical of the planning, based on the evidence that was given during those six weeks last year. what she will also probably do is make some recommendations, which is one of the reasons why the public inquiry was set up in the first place, to look at what going forward to the uk needs to do. a lot of experts say that there is probably going to be another pandemic of some description, at some point in time. and we need to learn the lessons from covid to be able to deal with that. we are expecting her to outline what went wrong in planning, and then what needs to be done to carry that forward. however, it is a public inquiry. but the recommendations don't have to be picked up by the government. it will be interesting to see what the politicians do. patrick vallance was appointed into the new labour government, so there are some people who think that may be after this report is out, he will be given the task of taking those recommendations

on, to make sure that, going forward, the uk does take on board the mistakes that were made in the planning before covid, going forward in case there is another pandemic. so there will be political reactions to this. but there is also the human element to covid. 235,000 people have had a covid death up until the end of last year. it is an important moment for those families who have lost someone to covid. we spoke earlier to riva. herfather lost someone to covid. we spoke earlier to riva. her father was lost someone to covid. we spoke earlier to riva. herfather was 73 unhealthy at the time of covid. he came down with it the day before the first lockdown. he called the emergency services but they said to stay at home. he sadly died. she has been giving her reaction to the fact that the report will be out today. he was told to stay at home and take

paracetamol. there was no regard whatsoever for what has medical history _ whatsoever for what has medical history might be or what his symptoms really were. they were reading _ symptoms really were. they were reading from a script. that is when he was _ reading from a script. that is when he was able — reading from a script. that is when he was able to get through, because it take _ he was able to get through, because it take hours and hours to get through— it take hours and hours to get through to the nhs 111 service. it was very— through to the nhs 111 service. it was very clear that the system was not was very clear that the system was hot in _ was very clear that the system was hot in place — was very clear that the system was not in place to deal with a like this _ not in place to deal with a like this there _ not in place to deal with a like this. there was nowhere to turn. the only way— this. there was nowhere to turn. the only way he — this. there was nowhere to turn. the only way he managed to get it to hospital. — only way he managed to get it to hospital, which is where he died, was because a family friend who was a doctor— was because a family friend who was a doctor coached us on what to say in order— a doctor coached us on what to say in order to — a doctor coached us on what to say in order to get medical attention. and when— in order to get medical attention. and when the paramedics came round and examined him, they took him straight _ and examined him, they took him straight into hospital. two days later— straight into hospital. two days tater he — straight into hospital. two days later he was on a ventilator, and sadly— later he was on a ventilator, and sadly two— later he was on a ventilator, and sadly two weeks after that he died. she lost— sadly two weeks after that he died. she lost her father to covid, and we have also been speaking to naomi fuller, and her mother died at the age of 94, back injanuary 2021. interestingly, naomi is also a professor of health policy at university college london. so, she

has two hats. she lost someone to covid but also she has officially been looking at policies in terms of health. let's listen to what she said ahead of the report being published. said ahead of the report being ublished. ~ said ahead of the report being published-— said ahead of the report being ublished. ~ ., , ., published. well, the whole planning s stem published. well, the whole planning system needs _ published. well, the whole planning system needs to _ published. well, the whole planning system needs to improve. _ published. well, the whole planning system needs to improve. we - published. well, the whole planning system needs to improve. we need| published. well, the whole planning | system needs to improve. we need a whole system plan and my mother's death was affected, and 3000 people per day that were dying in january 2021, it was caused by the lack of planning for many years beforehand. we didn't have mass testing capability, which for example germany did. we all know of the impact of not having ppe. my mother had wonderful home carers who had inadequate ppe. that was likely how she contracted gene. we are calling for wes streeting, the secretary for health, to conduct a cross government audit for preparedness for the next pandemic. so, wes

streeting, if you are listening, it is your opportunity to grasp this and help the whole country feel like we are going to be prepared for the next one. , , , ., , next one. interestingly, she was talkin: next one. interestingly, she was talking about — next one. interestingly, she was talking about wes _ next one. interestingly, she was talking about wes streeting, - next one. interestingly, she was| talking about wes streeting, who next one. interestingly, she was i talking about wes streeting, who is the health secretary. and it is he who will have to take on the recommendations from this report thatis recommendations from this report that is out today. as we said, it is a public inquiry, but those recommendations that baroness hallett will make don't legally have to be taken up by the government. but it will be interesting, as it is a new labour government, what they do with that and what wes streeting, is the health secretary, says after this report is published later today. as i said, it will be out at 12 o'clock. at the moment, health journalists are inside reading the report. we don't know, because this is the first report that has been published by baroness hallett, who

is chairing the inquiry, how long it will be, indeed will be really pithy, will there be headlines in it? will it be detailed, and a lot of detail to go into before we find out what her recommendations are. 0r out what her recommendations are. or will they be simple one line sentences that she is making recommendations on. it will be interesting to see. as i said, the covid inquiry is ongoing, it is going to go on until 2026 and it is in different stages, different modules. future modules will look at how the politicians dealt with it once we were into the pandemic. things like partygate that we remember, but that is not what today's one is about. it is purely about the preparation that we had a head of covid. as i said, that report will be out at midday. we will then hear from report will be out at midday. we will then hearfrom baroness hallett. we think at around 12.05, and we will bring you that on bbc news. back to you in the studio. thank you very much indeed, we look

forward to hearing more about that report. let's go back to the news uk prime minister sir keir starmer is hosting a meeting of dozens of european leaders at blenheim palace in england. sir keir starmer says border security will be at the heart of the government reset with europe. the uk foreign secretary was asked if it is about trying to get the benefits of eu membership by the back door. well, let me answer the question. the first thing is to say the european union and its commission is not up and running after their elections last month. they won't be up and running until december. this is not a gathering of the european union. it's a gathering of the whole european family. and of course we're entering into discussions, but we're nowhere near a negotiation on the trade agreement, the paper—thin trade agreement that boris johnson struck, the veterinary deal, that we've said that we want to get,

the mutual qualifications that we want to work on and the uk—eu security pack that we're proposing to europe that will enable us to discuss a whole range of issues across the european families. we aren't at that stage two weeks into office. here we have the epc. it's a gathering now of 44 leaders from the wider european family, discussing issues of mutual concern. central to that is security and ukraine. second is migration. and it's an issue that all european leaders want to discuss and talk about. with me is henry zeffman. he says it is a huge opportunity for keir starmer. it’s he says it is a huge opportunity for keir starmer.— keir starmer. it's very good timing for him. keir starmer. it's very good timing for him- keir— keir starmer. it's very good timing for him. keir starmer— keir starmer. it's very good timing for him. keir starmer has - keir starmer. it's very good timing for him. keir starmer has talked i keir starmer. it's very good timing | for him. keir starmer has talked for some time about how he wants to reset, in his words, the uk relationship notjust with the

european union, but with europe more generally. the european political community could not have been better designed to help him do that, because this is a group of about 45 orso because this is a group of about 45 or so european leaders. just over half of them are eu leaders. the rest of them, like sir keir starmer, are not. and so, as they talk about defending ukraine against russia's invasion, as they talk about migration and strengthening europe's borders, as they talk about defending democracy, all the while, through that, the european leaders will be watching sir keir starmer for signs of how he intends to approach diplomacy. for keir starmer, it is an opportunity to give them a flavour of what he is all about. the way the summit works is much more informal than the g7 orgy 20, and the leaders could choose whether they wanted to take place in, take part, rather, in one

of several discussion topics. keir starmer has chosen to take part in the migration meeting. that will be co—chaired by giorgia meloni, the right—wing leader of italy, who has been very involved in that issue. the prime minister of albania is also going to take part. they have had a lot to do with this issue in discussions with the previous uk government, the previous conservative government. as you say, it's an issue that can divide european leaders. sir keir starmer, speaking in advance of the summit last night, said that he only believed that through cooperation code the uk and europe more generally solve the problem that many countries are grappling with of people flowing to europe's borders. let's go to pictures of the leaders arriving. as we have heard, some 40 leaders from european shores arriving. and they will be talking, no doubt, about migration being one

of the things on the agenda. a sunny day for it too. the independent advisers on climate change for the government say the uk is in danger of missing the 2030 target to cut carbon emissions. the climate change committee is calling for measures including more heat pumps to replace domestic gas boilers, saying keir starmer needs to reverse the steps taken by the previous prime minister to slow down the transition to net zero. from renewable energy to electric cars to home heating, the uk needs to rapidly speed up the energy transition, says the government's independent climate advisers. they're particularly concerned about how we keep households warm. we'll never force anyone to rip out their existing boiler and replace it with a heat pump. last autumn, former prime minister

rishi sunak announced a rollback of plans to replace gas boilers from 2035. but the climate committee says this move was ill advised. so we really need to get to these new technologies. they're more efficient, they'll lower costs for households and they will remove some of this vulnerability to these very volatile fossil fuel markets that we've seen over the last few years. it's caused so much hardship for so many households. this community—owned wind turbine near bristol is the tallest in england and one of the few built onshore in recent years. wind farms on land are now one of the cheapest sources of electricity. the climate change committee says lower cost energy is needed to boost the uptake of heat pumps. locals on the lawrence weston estate in bristol are very proud of their turbine, and they believe it will lower their bills in time. a small little community group and we've done it. you're going where lots of other people haven't gone. yeah, i mean, i know we're feeding the grid at the moment, but of course i don't

think we're getting much benefit ourselves yet. but we will. we will. be patient. to help more people across the uk switch to low—carbon lifestyles, such as getting heat pumps or more insulation, the government's advisers say that words alone aren't enough. they want to see strong policies from the new labour administration that will make that switch to a greener lifestyle attractive, affordable and easy. nature also needs a new approach, the committee says. current uk plans for new forests and peat restoration are advancing far too slowly. there needs to be a significant uptick in planting in the next 12 months, experts say, orthere won't be enough trees to soak up excess carbon by 2030. matt mcgrath, bbc news. two high—profile mps will give evidence to the post office inquiry later. the liberal democrat leader, sir ed davey, and labour's pat mcfadden — who is now in the cabinet —

will face questions about their time as post office minister. our business correspondent emma simpson has this report. here we go, folks. we've had some big witnesses — from the former post office boss... paula vennells, did you put profits before people? ..to the head of fujitsu, the firm behind the faulty computer system... there were bugs and errors and defects. ..and alan bates trying to expose the problems. how was that, mr bates? hello. but the post office is also owned by the government and now it's time for some of the politicians involved to explain what they knew and when. i wish i'd seen through the lies of the post office executives, just as i'm sure all ministers from all political parties wish they'd done, and all the judges and courts who presided over those appalling miscarriages ofjustice wish they'd seen through the lies. first up today is this man, pat mcfadden, heading back into the cabinet after labour's election victory. he was post office minister between 2007 and 2009. each time an mp raised a question about this,

the reply would come back from the post office that they thought the system was robust. they had no evidence to suggest there was anything wrong with horizon. subpostmasters think that ministers from all parties could have done more. every minister at some point has failed, uh, you know, in order to do their duty to the best of their ability. and they have a responsibility now to, you know, to come and answer the questions put to them, so that the postmasters can get the answers they deserve, hopefully the truth, and that we can get some kind of accountability for who was responsible. that's the job of this long running inquiry. and the spotlight�*s now on some of the politicians, whether they missed opportunities to act along the way. emma simpson, bbc news. let's talk to peter ruddock in

salford. as we were hearing in emma simpson's report, the focus of the inquiry now is what politicians knew, and when?— inquiry now is what politicians knew, and when? yes, the latest -hase knew, and when? yes, the latest hase of knew, and when? yes, the latest phase of this _ knew, and when? yes, the latest phase of this inquiry _ knew, and when? yes, the latest phase of this inquiry has - knew, and when? yes, the latest phase of this inquiry has all- knew, and when? yes, the latest phase of this inquiry has all been| phase of this inquiry has all been about who knew what and when. interestingly, i think we are going to see a lot of focus on that. absolutely, what it politicians know, were they given information about bugs in the horizon system and about bugs in the horizon system and about the prosecution is going on? but also about the structure of the post office, the relationship between the post office on the government, and whether the structure itself prevented ministers from getting information orfrom finding out more. of course, the government is the sole shareholder of the post office, as emma said in her report. so you would imagine that they would have ultimate responsibility, and accountability for what was going on. but we have heard already from pat mcfadden and ed davey, and otherformer ministers, that, essentially, they were told by civil servants that the post office was run as an arms

length body, meaning that they had to trust what executives were saying, and that matters to do with horizon and to do with issues that subpostmasters said they were facing, they were operational matters what the post office. in fact, if you go back through hansard and look at what was said in parliament around that time, 2009, 2010, the period we are going to be hearing about, you see this line quite a lot coming up in both written and oral answers to mps asking questions, essentially, these are operational matters for the post office. they were given a line from executives to say. what i think the lawyers for the inquiry will want to do today is really test that theory. let's look at the time line. in may 2009, that was when computer weekly magazine came out with the first public article that suggested that there were issues with the horizon system. they interviewed six or seven subpostmasters, including alan bates, of course, and that article suggested there were more, that this issue was wider than just those six

or seven. at the time we are talking about here. the question pat mcfadden especially will be asked, is, ok, it was an arms length body, you were told that the post office had operational control. but this article came out in the press, and mps were getting questions from constituents. shouldn't you, as post office minister, have been pressing a little bit more that line? should you have been, as the sole shareholder of the post office, should the government have been inquiring more about what was going on? , ., , inquiring more about what was going on? , ., ,, inquiring more about what was going on? , ,, on? this was an issue you raised, that postmasters _ on? this was an issue you raised, that postmasters and _ on? this was an issue you raised, - that postmasters and subpostmasters were constituents, so mps would have been presenting those questions. absolutely, anyone who watched the itv drama will have seen lord arbuthnot portrayed, he was then

james arbuthnot, an mp. in behalf of his constituents, who had written to pat mcfadden, who is here this morning, and pat mcfadden wrote back to say there is nothing to indicate there are any problems with the horizon system. i imagine that he will say that is what he was told to put in the latter, what he was told was true by civil servants and by executives at the post office. he also said the issues raised by your constituent are operational and contractual matters for post office unlawful government. this line was repeated by notjust pat mcfadden, by ministers of all of the three main political parties at the time in government. what i think lawyers will really want to test is, ok, that may be true, but shouldn't you have pushed back more? and if you did, and you kept getting a response that everything is fine, who in particular was telling you that? we heard yesterday the post office

minister a lot later than the period we are going to be talking about today, but she was suggesting that certain people within the government agency that sat on the post office board hand, in herwords, gone native. they were taking the post office line. it would be interesting to see if the politicians today have particular names of anyone they say was particularly stringent and strong in their view that there was nothing wrong. it’s strong in their view that there was nothing wrong-— nothing wrong. it's important to note that pat _ nothing wrong. it's important to note that pat mcfadden - nothing wrong. it's important to note that pat mcfadden now - nothing wrong. it's important to | note that pat mcfadden now has nothing wrong. it's important to i note that pat mcfadden now has a senior role in government. the next question becomes, what might be the implications if it is shown these politicians were found wanting? look, he's got a very senior role in government. interestingly, a role that involved the civil service, in the cabinet office. it would be very interesting to hear what he has to say in particular. we are looking back at a period today, 2009, 2010, 14 years ago. as well as the

specifics of what was going on at the time, we are going to have a wider discussion today, and in the next few weeks and months of the inquiry, about the overall current structure and whether that structure needs to change. those are big questions that perhaps will have to be dealt with once the inquiry reports. but they will likely have to be dealt with by pat mcfadden and others in the government. just to be dealt with by pat mcfadden and others in the government.— others in the government. just in terms of what _ others in the government. just in terms of what you _ others in the government. just in terms of what you described - others in the government. just in terms of what you described as i others in the government. just in i terms of what you described as the arm's—length relationship, it's quite interesting and a sense, in the context of the labour government, where we are talking about re—nationalisation of industry, exactly how the relationship should work. absolutely. the post office had a very particular arrangement. the government has involvement with all sorts of quangos and organisations, and businesses. they are all slightly different. the post office had a very particular arrangement and i think perhaps that is going to be unpicked, if you like, both today

and over the next weeks and months. it does raise a more general question, in circumstances like this, where you have the government has the sole shareholder or main shareholder of commercial interests like the railways, as more things like the railways, as more things like the railways come under government control, how should that relationship work? clearly, you may want the business to have some kind of operational control, but there needs to be clearly some government oversight as well. are there lessons that can be learned from the post office that can be implemented in other relationships, for example with the railways? find other relationships, for example with the railways?— with the railways? and for those that have not _ with the railways? and for those that have not watched _ with the railways? and for those that have not watched any - with the railways? and for those that have not watched any of. with the railways? and for those | that have not watched any of the inquiry, we of course have watched it very extensively, the questions are quite exacting, aren't they? they go on for some time.- are quite exacting, aren't they? they go on for some time. yes, this is not pmer _ they go on for some time. yes, this is not pmqs, it _ they go on for some time. yes, this is not pmqs, it is _ they go on for some time. yes, this is not pmqs, it is not _ they go on for some time. yes, this is not pmqs, it is not over— they go on for some time. yes, this is not pmqs, it is not over in - they go on for some time. yes, this is not pmqs, it is not over in a - is not pmqs, it is not over in a flash, although that can drag on sometimes if you are not keen on it. this is going to be quite a lengthy bit of questioning. we are

expecting, potentially, the two politicians today to face questions from lawyers representing the subpostmasters themselves. we have seen generally the inquiry lawyers asked quite detailed questions, going to witness statements and documents, then the lawyers for the subpostmasters, understandably, there questions can be quite emotional and quite tough, and less about the ins and outs, about what happened on what date and when, but about the emotional, should you not have been doing more, given the stories that you are hearing from your constituents? that stories that you are hearing from your constituents?— stories that you are hearing from your constituents? at the same time, this is not a — your constituents? at the same time, this is not a court _ your constituents? at the same time, this is not a court of— your constituents? at the same time, this is not a court of law, _ your constituents? at the same time, this is not a court of law, and - your constituents? at the same time, this is not a court of law, and so - this is not a court of law, and so the questions are really aiming to get to the bottom of what really happened. get to the bottom of what really hauened. �* , get to the bottom of what really hauened. , , happened. absolutely. it comes back to what we said _ happened. absolutely. it comes back to what we said at _ happened. absolutely. it comes back to what we said at the _ happened. absolutely. it comes back to what we said at the beginning - to what we said at the beginning of our chat. it is about who knew what, and when. above building of a timeline for the inquiry chair, so he can work—out at which point in the timeline interventions from either ministers or civil servants,

or people at the post office, lawyers, external and internal, could have changed the outcome. and the outcome of this is a number of subpostmasters who were wrongly prosecuted and many more who were wrongfully chased for the money they were accused of taking from the organisation. so so when williams will be looking forensically at this to try to work out if there were moments in time when, if a different path was taken, the outcome could have been different. looking more widely, let's look at the structure, are the things that can almost change in order to prevent this from happening again? of course, after the inquiry has finished, we are expecting other authorities, the met police, for example, to take a look at this and work out if there were specific criminal wrongdoing. there was no indication ministers were involved in any way whatsoever. but potentially some of the people we

have heard from may have questions to answer from other authorities as well. but this, today, it is all about who knew what and when, and if there were moments in the timeline that had a different path been taken we could have ended up with a different outcome.— we could have ended up with a different outcome. peter, thank you ve much different outcome. peter, thank you very much indeed. _ different outcome. peter, thank you very much indeed. we _ different outcome. peter, thank you very much indeed. we will - different outcome. peter, thank you very much indeed. we will be - different outcome. peter, thank you i very much indeed. we will be keeping an eye on those inquiry and what might emerge from it. also going on at blenheim palace is the summit that may involve some 40 leaders from around europe. a very large summit indeed. they are just arriving. this is oxford in the uk. you can see keir starmer on the right—hand side. they will be discussing a number of things, among them, the question of migration. the headlines are next.

gershkovich live from london, this is bbc news. the uk covid inquiry will release its first report today to answer that question.— its first report today to answer that question. its first report today to answer that ruestion. �* , , ., that question. building bridges and relationships. _ that question. building bridges and relationships, sir— that question. building bridges and relationships, sir keir— that question. building bridges and relationships, sir keir starmer- that question. building bridges and relationships, sir keir starmer will| relationships, sir keir starmer will host 50 leaders at the european political community summit today. lib dem leader ed davey and pat mcfadden will give evidence at the post office inquiry today. welcome. the failures and weaknesses in the uk's pandemic preparations are expected to be laid out in the first report published by the covid inquiry. baroness hallett will set out her findings at lunchtime. jim reid reports. spring, 2020.