equivocal . and as you say, i and equivocal. and as you say, i think that there will be many people who are concerned that this will basically just conclude the government was incompetent to incompetent and we need to outsource ourselves the outsource ourselves to the adults, international adults i >> -- >> the global pandemic comes along before inquiry is along before the inquiry is finished. i mean, what happens then lessons we then? what lessons have we learned?do you dragging out the >> how do you dragging out the world health organisation is going france, you going to say to france, you know, go out tonight know, you can't go out tonight to bistro . to le bistro. >> you've to stay at home. >> you've got to stay at home. the french are going, set the french are going, oh, set them on. the problem . you know, them on. the problem. you know, them on. the problem. you know, the organisation the world health organisation doesn't power. doesn't have that sort of power. >> space, mr p, >> oh, watch this space, mr p, you this is, this comes on to what we were discussing earlier, though, your were though, about your you were a big a digital id system, big fan of a digital id system, a regular of humanity. a regular notion of humanity. >> people would >> and some people would say membership society membership card for the society that this country. it won't that is this country. it won't be this country, unfortunately, as we've already got one. >> effectively, every time you use card your use your oyster card or your credit know so much credit card, they know so much about us. >> do we have one? emma digital footprint? i mean, to. that's >> i mean, we need to. that's true. i'm with beth on this. we need to resist of that. need to resist all of that. >> it's almost here

>> yeah, but it's almost here already, that's my already, isn't it? that's my point. completely point. no, it's completely nowhere near being here. >> moving that >> it's moving in that direction. it should be direction. but it should be resisted. and any of resisted. and any kind of digital identification option would just be consolidating a power that could be abused. absolutely >> and that's my concern with the covid inquiry. >> too much to to >> is that too much to ask to know who is actually in this country? and the only way to know who is actually in this count that.nd the only way to know who is actually in this count that is the only way to know who is actually in this count that is with only way to know who is actually in this count that is with onlcards. to yeah. >> and of course there'll be a lot more in country when lot more in this country when labour because labour win the election because they and the they won't even try and stop the boats did last yeah >> we did it last time and we'll do it next time. >> no, no, we're getting ready for prime minister's questions. >> no, no, we're getting ready for pand�* minister's questions. >> no, no, we're getting ready for pand emilyter's questions. >> no, no, we're getting ready for pand emily will questions. >> no, no, we're getting ready for pand emily will be estions. >> no, no, we're getting ready for pand emily will be intions. >> no, no, we're getting ready for pand emily will be in the ;. >> no, no, we're getting ready for pand emily will be in the hot tom and emily will be in the hot seat that happens. it's seat when that happens. it's going a pretty going to be a pretty feisty occasion. think, pure occasion. i think, and pure theatre because theatre afterwards because suella braverman, the home secretary, secretary secretary, former home secretary delivers a resignation statement. convention statement. the convention tradition heard silence . tradition is heard in silence. you nobody willing to you know, nobody willing to contradict her. >> spent so much time >> we spent so much time listening today listening to boris johnson today that to what that we barely listen to what you say at home. of you have to say at home. and of course, that is always important. so i'll out important. so i'll read out a few your emails before rishi few of your emails before rishi sunak the limelight. sunak steals the limelight. this this afternoon, this morning. this afternoon, stephen lot of stephen has said, like a lot of people, up with the people, i'm fed up with the inquiry. going on too long,

inquiry. it's going on too long, costs much . it's costs far too much. it's probably having negative probably having a negative effect. helpful to effect. it'd be more helpful to move a move on. what is it achieving? a lot jan, saying it's lot of you, jan, saying it's ridiculous, of money. the ridiculous, waste of money. the whole focussed ridiculous, waste of money. the wh how focussed ridiculous, waste of money. the wh how to focussed ridiculous, waste of money. the wh how to react focussed ridiculous, waste of money. the wh how to react betterocussed ridiculous, waste of money. the wh how to react better iansed ridiculous, waste of money. the wh how to react better in thed on how to react better in the future. it's hijacked by uncaring lawyers who are only interested in dragging this out to make money for themselves. there be loyalty there appears to be no loyalty to taxpayers , heather said. to uk taxpayers, heather said. this inquiry is being used as a vehicle to destroy boris johnson and the conservative party he she might be right about that . she might be right about that. >> the deputy speaker in the chair. >> well, it's unusual because maybe the speaker is sick or he's got no alternative. but he won't be the only covid. yeah, because of covid. because of the inquiry? no, i think he's got covid. oh, speaker's got covid. yep keep up, sir. lindsay hoyle has so he's obviously has got covid. so he's obviously he's recuperating , that he's still recuperating, that kind of thing. >> good. vaccines , >> no good. these vaccines, recovery . recovery. >> and before i answer, my honourable friend's question, i know the whole house will also want in offering our want to join me in offering our condolences to family condolences to the family and friends of alastair darling. glenys kinnock , and lord james

glenys kinnock, and lord james douglas—hamilton . they made each douglas—hamilton. they made each an enormous contribution to pubuc an enormous contribution to public life and will be deeply missed. madam deputy speaker, the hillsborough families have suffered multiple injustices the loss of 97 lives, the blaming of the fans and the unforgivable bill institutional defensiveness by public bodies. i am profoundly sorry for what they have been through today the government has published its response to bishop james jones's report to ensure the pain and the suffering of the hillsborough families is not repeated. i'm immensely grateful they have shared their experiences . i they have shared their experiences. i hope they have shared their experiences . i hope to meet them experiences. i hope to meet them in the new year and the justice secretary oral secretary will making an oral statement after turning to statement after pmqs. turning to honourable friends question the government continuing to work government is continuing to work closely of the closely with the mayor of the west to fully develop west midlands to fully develop his to deliver growth. sir his plans to deliver growth. sir michael fabricant well, firstly , michael fabricant well, firstly, may i join the prime minister in his comments about the hills borough families ? borough families? >> it's thanks to margaret thatcher. >> yeah, yeah, yeah , yeah .

>> yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. >> yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. >> and her robust treatment of militant trade unions in the west midlands. her contribution portion of £10 billion at today's prices to the motor industry in the west midlands. that iconic names like jaguar and land rover still exist. >> yeah. so does the prime minister share my boundless joy that on the road to damascus and in recognition of her great heritage and all that she achieved . and another another achieved. and another another fan boy, another fan boy has joined her great belief . joined her great belief. >> the leader of the opposition in prime minister >> yeah, well, madam . madam >> yeah, well, madam. madam deputy speaker, the right honourable gentleman is a

fantastic champion of his area and because of the pro—business policies of this government, i'm delighted to see the billions of pounds of investment by jlr in their move towards electrification in the region. but he is absolutely right. i am always happy to welcome new thatcherites from all sides of this house, but it does. >> it does. it does. >> it does. it does. >> it does. it does. >> it does say something about the leader of the opposition that the main female strong leader that he could praise is margaret thatcher and not his own fantastic . deputy since own fantastic. deputy since since question one was a closed question. >> we now go to question two. sarah champion yes , thank you, sarah champion yes, thank you, madam deputy speaker. >> question . number two. >> question. number two. >> question. number two. >> madam deputy speaker, this morning i had meetings with ministerial colleagues and others in addition to my duties in this house. i shall have further such meetings later today. >> sarah champion thank you,

madam speaker. madam deputy speaker. >> the government is set to close the household support scheme in march, cutting off crucial . free meals for 12,000 crucial. free meals for 12,000 rotheram's children in the lowest income families . lowest income families. >> with the government's cost of living crisis in full swing and energy prices about to increase again, how does the prime minister justify taking food from the mouths of my poorest children? shame >> well, madam, madam deputy speakeh >> well, madam, madam deputy speaker, what we are doing is ensuring that no child should grow up in poverty. and that's why not only this year we've provided considered cost of living support worth over £3,000 to a typical household , more to a typical household, more support this winter for pensioners is a record increase in the national living wage and a full indexation and uplifting of welfare for the next financial year. but when it comes to children and food, speakeh comes to children and food, speaker, not only do we fund the free school meals for almost 2 million children, we also introduced the holiday activity and programme,

and food programme, which provides food but provides not just food but enriching activities to deprive children up and down entire children up and down the entire country, including in her local authority . authority. >> connor ansell . >> connor ansell. >> connor ansell. >> if there is one place where everyone should feel safe, it's in their own home. >> but the reality is that for some of the most vulnerable people, home is precisely where they can be most at risk. >> terrorised by criminals who target them, move in, take control and set up a base camp from where they sell drugs or facilitate prostitution in in a horrendous form of exploitation known as cuckooing . it has known as cuckooing. it has happenedin known as cuckooing. it has happened in eastbourne and it is happening across the country. it is not an offence, but it should be and wasn't cited in the criminal justice bill debated last week. so can i ask my right honourable friend and the home secretary if they would meet with me and concerned colleagues to further discuss the issue ?

to further discuss the issue? prime minister i agree with my honourable friend that cuckooing is an abhorrent practice that does often prey on the most vulnerable in society city as part of the government's anti—social behaviour action plan, the home office engaged with relevant stakeholders about whether a new criminal offence was necessary . was necessary. >> the results of that engagement demonstrated that there are a of existing there are a range of existing powers be used to powers that can be used to disrupt this activity. but of course i'll ensure that the relevant meets with her relevant minister meets with her and updates on work. are and updates on the work. we are doing effective doing to share effective practice to tackle this abhorrent problem . abhorrent problem. >> leader of the opposition on sir keir starmer. >> thank you, madam deputy speakeh >> thank you, madam deputy speaker. and it's very good to see you in your place and we wish the speaker a speedy recovery . this week we lost two recovery. this week we lost two giants of the labour family and ithank giants of the labour family and i thank the prime minister for his comments. >> alastair darling was a man of unassuming intelligence , warmth unassuming intelligence, warmth and kindness , and he brought

and kindness, and he brought a calm expertise and in private, a cutting wit and devoted his love of his family was ever present. our thoughts are with maggie, his wife kate , adam, anna who he his wife kate, adam, anna who he loved so dearly . glenys kinnock loved so dearly. glenys kinnock was a passionate campaigner for social justice who changed lives home and abroad. she was a loving and supportive partner and mother, and her death is a huge loss to all of us. we are thinking of neil of stephen, rachel and of all the family . rachel and of all the family. can i also echo the prime minister's comments in relation to lord douglas—hamilton and relation to the hillsborough families? they deserve justice in a previous capacity i worked with the families. they waited a very, very long time for the findings . very, very long time for the findings. thanks to people in this house and they've waited a long time for this report. but

i'm glad it is now coming. long time for this report. but i'm glad it is now coming . madam i'm glad it is now coming. madam deputy speaker, if the purpose of the rwanda gimmick was to solve a political headache of the tories own making to get people out of the country who they simply couldn't deal with, then it's been a resounding success. after all, they've managed to send three home secretaries there , an secretaries there, an achievement for which the whole country can be grateful . so country can be grateful. so apart from members of his own cabinet, how many people does the prime minister sent to rwanda . rwanda. >> well, madam deputy speaker , >> well, madam deputy speaker, as i've been clear before , we as i've been clear before, we will do everything it takes. mr speakeh will do everything it takes. mr speaker, we will do everything it takes to get this scheme working so that we can indeed stop the boats. and that's why this week we have signed a new legally binding treaty with rwanda, which together with new legislation, will address all the concerns that have been raised because everyone should be in no doubt about our

absolute commitment to stop the boats and get flights off. because, madam deputy speaker, and this is the crucial point that the honourable gentleman doesn't is doesn't understand deterrence is critical. even the national crime agency have said that you need an effective removals and deterrence agreement if you truly want to break the cycle of tragedy that we see. but what we heard this morning from his own ministers was that was that they would scrap the scheme even when it is operational and working . it is operational and working. us as again, once again , mr us as again, once again, mr speakeh us as again, once again, mr speaker, once again, instead of being on the side of the british people, he finds himself on the side of the people smugglers . side of the people smugglers. tom moore . madam deputy speaker, tom moore. madam deputy speaker, when they first announced this gimmick, they claimed rwanda would settle tens of thousands of people , tens of thousands of people. >> then the deputy former prime minister quickly whittled it down to mere hundreds . and then down to mere hundreds. and then the court of appeal in june made clear this housing for just 100,

the current number of people sent there remains stubbornly consistent zero. at the same , at consistent zero. at the same, at the same time, at the same time. madam deputy article 19 of the treaty says the parties shall make arrangements for the united kingdom to resettle a portion of rwanda's most vulnerable refugees in the united kingdom. so how many refugees from rwanda de will be coming here to the uk under the treaty that mr speakeh under the treaty that mr speaker, what? >> madam deputy speaker. sorry, madam. order! prime minister, that addresses all the concerns of the supreme court. but it's a point of pride. madam deputy speakeh point of pride. madam deputy speaker, that we are a compassionate country, that does welcome people from around the world. >> but. but let'sjust world. >> but. but let's just let me just get the honourable gentleman up to speed on what we are doing. >> reduce the number of illegal arrivals from albania by 90, increase the number of illegal

working raids by 50% because of all the action we've taken, the number of small boat arrivals are down by a third. madam deputy speaker. but what is the honourable gentleman's plan ? honourable gentleman's plan? because it comes down to he just simply doesn't have a plan to address this problem. oh, no, no, no. i'm probably being unfair because he does have a plan. it's to cook up a deal with the eu that would see us accept 100,000 illegal migrants . accept 100,000 illegal migrants. keir starmer migration is trebled on his watch, and all he can do is make up numbers about the labor party. >> it's really pitiful. i'm not actually sure the prime minister can have read this thing. article says scheme article four says the scheme is capped rwanda's capacity. capped at rwanda's capacity. that's 100. article 5 says rwanda can turn them away if they want. article 19 says we actually have to take refugee from rwanda. how much did this fantastic deal cost us? >> prime minister. madam deputy speakeh >> prime minister. madam deputy speaker, is the home secretary who is crystal clear about there is no incremental money, there

is no incremental money, there is no incremental money, there is no incremental money that have been provided. this is about us ensuring that the concerns of the supreme court have all been addressed in a legally binding treaty that will allow us to operationalise the scheme. but i'm glad he raised the topic of legal migration, which i agree is absolutely far too high. madam deputy speaker. that's why this week we've outlined a plan bigger than any other government before to reduce the levels of legal migration by £300. it's an incredibly comprehensive plan. so if he cares so much about it, the simple question for him is does he support the plan . does he support the plan. >> madam deputy speaker, he clearly hasn't read it. an annexe. a annexe says on top, on top of the 140 million, he's already showered on rwanda. when we send people there under this treaty, we have to pay for their accommodation and their upkeep

for five years. and that's not all. this morning, a government minister admitted that anyone we send to rwanda who commits a crime can be returned to us. i'm beginning to see why the home secretary says the rwanda scheme is something to do with bats. i think wasn't it? >> what was what does he first think? >> attract said mr kagame , to >> attract said mr kagame, to hundreds of millions of pounds for nothing in return . for nothing in return. >> i've suddenly lost the thread of the question, madam deputy speakeh of the question, madam deputy speaker, but the simple point is the simple point . the simple the simple point. the simple point is there's a simple question here. if you believe in stopping the boats as we on this side of the house, do you need to have an effective deterrence and returns agreement? it's as simple as that. the honourable gentleman is not interested in stopping the boats , which is why stopping the boats, which is why he's not interested in the rwanda plan. fact, madam rwanda plan. in fact, madam deputy speaker, in we know deputy speaker, in fact, we know that don't to tackle

deputy speaker, in fact, we know that issue don't to tackle deputy speaker, in fact, we know thatissue because to tackle deputy speaker, in fact, we know thatissue because eventackle deputy speaker, in fact, we know thatissue because even when this issue because even when even when this government was trying to deport foreign national offenders out of this country, they opposed it . country, they opposed it. multiple members of his shadow frontbench all signed a letter to me to that effect . but but i to me to that effect. but but i don't need to tell him that because he signed it to . mr. okay. >> okay. that's that's enough . >> okay. that's that's enough. sir keir starmer. >> madam deputy speaker, i would say that this treaty has got more holes in than the swiss cheese, but i don't want to wind up the prime minister by talking about a european country. again madam deputy speaker , you have madam deputy speaker, you have to give credit to the rwandan government. they saw this prime minister coming a mile off. you can only imagine their delight, their sheer disbelief if when having already banked £140 million of british taxpayer money without housing a single

asylum seeker, the prime minister appears again with another offer they can't refuse another offer they can't refuse a gimmick that will send tax payers money to rwanda. refugees from rwanda to britain and won't stop the boats. it was mentioned of margaret thatcher earlier . of margaret thatcher earlier. how madam deputy speaker , how how madam deputy speaker, how this understandable excitement about the mention of the name. >> but the house must listen to the leader of the opposition , the leader of the opposition, sir keir starmer. >> how do you go from up yours? delors to take our money? kagame mr . well, this mr speaker mr. well, this mr speaker. >> well, madam, madam deputy speakeh >> well, madam, madam deputy speaker, when it comes when it comes to this european thing and margaret thatcher, this is this

is the week that the shadow foreign secretary i think didn't rule out rejoining the european union so he can role play margaret thatcher all he wants . margaret thatcher all he wants. but when it comes to europe, his answer is the same. yes. yes yes . madam speaker, for forget the private jet is not a private planet of his own . planet of his own. >> but as we daily mail readers learned this week that the prime minister has begun to feel sorry for himself , minister has begun to feel sorry for himself, he's even been heard comparing his plight to his beloved southampton football club. i do think that's a bit harsh because saints have been on an 11 game unbeaten run while as the song has it, the prime minister gets battered everywhere he goes . but if you everywhere he goes. but if you want the perfect example of how badly the tories have broken the asylum system , last week the asylum system, last week the home office admitted that .

home office admitted that. 17,000 people in the asylum system order! >> order! come on! sir keir starmer . thank you . starmer. thank you. >> if you want the perfect example of how badly they've broken the asylum system . madam broken the asylum system. madam deputy speaker, last week the home office admitted that 70,000 people in the asylum system have disappeared . reared their exact disappeared. reared their exact words. it's hard to believe this. we don't think we know where all these people are . now. where all these people are. now. you might lose your car keys. you might lose your car keys. you might lose your car keys. you might lose your headphones. you might lose your headphones. you might lose your headphones. you might lose your marbles. how do you lose 17,000 odd people , do you lose 17,000 odd people, prime minister? >> well, madam deputy speaker, on the topic of football teams, he used to describe this rwanda policy as immoral and yet his football team has a visit. >> rwanda badge on the side of them. >> but . them. >> but. but in

them. >> but . but in their meet in the >> but. but in their meet in the week. in the >> but. but in their meet in the week . in the week when he >> but. but in their meet in the week. in the week when he made his big economy speech, we're still waiting to hear how he's going to borrow £28 billion and still cut taxes and reduce debt. >> it's same old thing. the sums don't add up. but while they're struggling with their calculator, we are getting on struggling with their calc delivering are getting on struggling with their calc delivering ae getting on struggling with their calc delivering a new:ting on struggling with their calc delivering a new treatyn struggling with their calc delivering a new treaty with and delivering a new treaty with rwanda . the toughest measure rwanda. the toughest measure measures to cut legal migration. our marching up the our schools marching up the tables and tax cuts for millions . madam deputy speaker. so whether it's controlling our borders or lowering our taxes, just like the saints, the conservatives are marching . on conservatives are marching. on yeah, yeah, yeah , yeah, yeah . yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. >> oh oh. easy sound . >> oh oh. easy sound. >> oh oh. easy sound. >> thank you, madam speaker. >> thank you, madam speaker. >> and there we have it. the weekly exchange between sir keir starmer and rishi sunak today. all about the illegal migration of a huge amount of heckling in the house. >> they're in the chamber for

lots and lots of laughing , lots and lots of laughing, joking, but also quite a lot of anger , voices and interruptions. anger, voices and interruptions. i could hear from the backbenchers there quite a strong performance perhaps from keir starmer when it came to mocking the prime minister for. but we'll get some reaction on what you at home made of that exchange and also from our panellists in the studio . panellists in the studio. >> so yes , and i think one of >> so yes, and i think one of the interesting things to talk aboutis the interesting things to talk about is this nice joke that keir starmer made joining us joining us in the studio is khalid mahmood. of course , the khalid mahmood. of course, the labour mp for birmingham. perry barr. perry barr and khalid , barr. perry barr and khalid, first of all, it's a brave choice for the labour leader to go in on a legal migration. choice for the labour leader to go in on a legal migration . this go in on a legal migration. this is something that your party has faced criticism for before. >> well , the party's received >> well, the party's received criticism which is unwarranted for the last 13 years. >> we've had a conservative government who've not been able to deal with the boats. we've

had over 70,000 people coming, billions of pounds have been spent on this, which is absolutely ridiculous . and then absolutely ridiculous. and then you find out also legal migration has gone through the roof as well . roof as well. >> well, khalid, one of the questions that is often put to the labour party when they criticise the government on illegal migration and legal migration is what would the labour party do differently ? labour party do differently? because it's very easy to shout from the sidelines say from the sidelines and say you're thing. you're doing the wrong thing. you haven't improved the situation, got the situation, you haven't got the flights to rwanda, but what flights off to rwanda, but what would labour party under? would the labour party under? keir do differently to keir starmer do differently to what conservative party is what the conservative party is currently what the conservative party is curifirst' what the conservative party is curifirst of all, labour >> first of all, the labour party is not going to spend £140 million on rwanda deal. million plus on the rwanda deal. what's it going to do? first of all, have a decent agreement with french , which we've with the french, which we've not been have so far. and been able to have so far. and well, that's not true, is it? >> we do have an agreement. >> we do have an agreement. >> haven't had agreement >> we haven't had an agreement that's and the that's worked. and that's the key. haven't an key. we haven't had an additional ncaa people out there to making sure that people are first not allowed to come off

the beach. when you have people coming beach, is coming off the beach, that is the once they're the problem. once they're in waters, it's very difficult waters, then it's very difficult because you have a duty of care to their life. we can't obstruct them in any way which will cause them in any way which will cause them to drown. so what need them to drown. so what you need to them. there and to do is stop them. there and that's we want to look at. that's what we want to look at. i went along with the prime minister elysee palace in minister to the elysee palace in february it was february this year when it was the anglo—french summit, and also, should say the british also, i should say the british french summit. >> was interesting >> and it was interesting because they signed up to, because then they signed up to, for the first time joint patrols on the beaches. up until this yeah on the beaches. up until this year, it had always been french patrols. no british oversight from this year. it has included british oversight . we've created british oversight. we've created a new facility as well in north france. we've sent the french a lot of money for it. but james cleverly, when he became home secretary was referencing how interceptions have gone up. but they can't catch every boat on they can't catch every boat on the beach. there's only a limited amount of beach where they can get into those boats. but those that cooperation is occurring, it's occurring , but

occurring, it's occurring, but it's not effective. >> and what we want to do is have significant personnel there to monitor that beach because we're not doing that at the moment. you have electronic devices, you have drones that you can put up to do that. and we're not doing all of those things that we can do. and this is where these deals are, have huge amount of swiss roll, swiss cheese holes in. and this is what is referring to is we need water tight agreements where you have that 24 hour cover to stop the boats coming . the boats coming. >> do you understand how that might sound to some of our viewers and listeners essentially , what the labour essentially, what the labour party would is what the party would do is what the conservative government doing conservative government is doing , but would somehow be more , but it would somehow be more efficient and it would somehow be more at all. be more somehow at all. >> it actually what sir keir's pointed out today is that it would be efficient because you have much tighter deal. the have a much tighter deal. the deal that we've got with rwanda at the moment, the government has to pay some more has has now had to pay some more money it work. we've got money to make it work. we've got £5 billion a year going to these

these people, 70,000 people that we're trying to keep in. out of that, we've lost 17,000 already. we don't know where they've gone to. so these are the big to. and so these are the big issues that sir keir's highlighted. he would highlighted. and he would address issues. and that address those issues. and that is the problem the is the problem that the government on top government has not been on top of and may i ask you, with of that. and may i ask you, with the migration figures, we've the net migration figures, we've seen record seen immigration at record levels, comfortable with levels, are you comfortable with immigration running in the hundreds thousands? hundreds of thousands? absolutely not. i'll tell you one ihad absolutely not. i'll tell you one i had a meeting last one thing. i had a meeting last week continually having week and i'm continually having meetings dwp where we meetings with the dwp where we got young people coming out of school don't have school who don't have qualifications. got people qualifications. we've got people who forward, who want to move forward, haven't got the right qualifications be to qualifications to be able to move forward. so this friday, move forward. so on this friday, i'm speaking skills i'm speaking to the skills council my constituency with council in my constituency with with the mayor. when i've spoken to dwp, i've spoken to the to the dwp, i've spoken to the police, i'm getting together a unit people where we engage unit of people where we engage with young some with our young people and some people who able have people who are not able to have engush people who are not able to have english language, english as a second language, which been cut which the funding has been cut for. want to train my own for. so i want to train my own people constituency to people in my constituency to take and have less take those jobs and have less people through. people coming through. that's really interesting. people coming through. that's really inte you ng.

people coming through. that's really inte you therefore back the >> would you therefore back the changes that the office has changes that the home office has put forward at the start of this week, raising income week, raising that income threshold, up the threshold, tightening up the points system for inward points based system for inward migration that we do have? >> because that doesn't >> no because that doesn't work and the problem is . and that's what the problem is. i want there be properly i want there to be properly trained from my trained people from my constituency, from constituency, people from the united from united kingdom, people from birmingham those birmingham, taking those jobs with training , not with the proper training, not using the open up the system , using the open up the system, not tightening system, not tightening up the system, because they're doing, the because what they're doing, the limit increasing limit that they're increasing to, be able to get limit that they're increasing to, jobs. be able to get limit that they're increasing to, jobs. wellble to get limit that they're increasing to, jobs. well hang get limit that they're increasing to, jobs. well hang on. and those jobs. well hang on. and that's the problem. >> the shortage, occupation list is something. of is something. getting rid of that up that and tightening that up is something party, something that the labour party, the starmer, the labour leader, keir starmer, has in favour has said that he is in favour of. is the 20% discount of. this is the 20% discount that essentially that companies are allowed to recruit on to foreign workers. so essentially undercut paying british workers. you'd supportive of that you'd be supportive of that measure that businesses here measure so that businesses here cannot undercut cannot essentially undercut british workers. >> no, because i want as somebody who's been been a member of the union for a very long time, i want the unions to be engaged in people that are not undercutting other workers.

and i want them at the same level that's want. but level. that's what i want. but i don't think the conservative level. that's what i want. but i don't tworks1e conservative level. that's what i want. but i don't tworks at conservative level. that's what i want. but i don't tworks at the ervative level. that's what i want. but i don't tworks at the moment model works at the moment because they're the because they're now based the price such a high level, the people that we need , nurses care people that we need, nurses care workers will not be on that list of salary that they're talking about. and certainly the issue of bringing spouses in is something that has to be looked at well. having over three at as well. so having over three quarters of a million people coming legally when you've coming in legally when you've got people who are not able to get the jobs, are not able get the jobs, who are not able to do the work that they should be doing and unemployment benefit. government benefit. but the government is bringing saying benefit. but the government is bringigoing saying benefit. but the government is bringigoing to saying benefit. but the government is bringigoing to take saying benefit. but the government is bringigoing to take people ng benefit. but the government is bringigoing to take people off we're going to take people off disability allowance disability living allowance and put but put them back into work. but we're going to train them. we're not going to train them. so the problem, so that's the problem, is that we're look at this we're going to look at this properly in way deal properly in a in a way to deal with this. our own people are with this. so our own people are working. but opposing that threshold incoming people. >> with to people. >> with regard to the amount that they're stay with us. that they're paid. stay with us. we're dip in to the we're going to dip in now to the covid inquiry the former covid inquiry where the former prime boris johnson, is prime minister boris johnson, is giving evidence. we'll see if he's something interesting he's got something interesting to the reference to to say. note the reference to could die as opposed to a would

die once the virus is has self sustaining community transmission. >> the scientific advice is to use these numbers for planning. they're not a prediction. did anybody at that meeting or the meeting which you had and will come to the actual meeting itself in a moment but did anybody at the meeting at which this paper was discussed ask ms hammond why ? why is the so paper hammond why? why is the so paper from the civil contingencies secretariat at the crisis management body in the heart of government, suggesting that these figures are not a prediction when, as you've just described the information to cobra . on the 26th of february cobra. on the 26th of february was saying that the reasonable worst case planning assumption looks close to becoming reality ? looks close to becoming reality? >> i can't answer that question , >> i can't answer that question, but it's a very good question .

but it's a very good question. >> page two, paragraph . >> page two, paragraph. nine the report says we need to strike a balance between taking precautionary steps and overreacting as cases spread. the risk of overreacting is reducing. we're now planning for a potential global pandemic that would inevitably spread to the uk. so it would, in this paragraph, inevitably spread . paragraph, inevitably spread. did you assess reading this report, mrjohnson did you assess reading this report, mr johnson , that the report, mr johnson, that the reference to overreaction was was long past and that in fact, in the striking of that balance , in the striking of that balance, there was now a real emergency and a need to take precautionary steps straight away . steps straight away. >> i think that the i find the paper. >> i think that the i find the paper . very alarming arresting. paper. very alarming arresting. i went i think i remember going

to talk to my officials about it, saying which is it a severe to mild flu pandemic or an 580,000? because i just i couldn't understand what i was being asked to anticipate . being asked to anticipate. >> so i've referred to the meeting, your private secretary, edmund shaffi, refers that 146636 to the meeting . it's 146636 to the meeting. it's difficult to read his writing , difficult to read his writing, but there is a reference to the pm asking what's the strategy ? pm asking what's the strategy? there we are. thank you, prime minister what's the strategy? when are we going to take big decisions of what evidence ? on decisions of what evidence? on what evidence of what evidence? and then you say biggest damage done by overreaction . so it done by overreaction. so it looks from the face of this note that your your sense is that

there was a real crisis that you were extremely rattled. is prevalent in the first sentence. but in the second sentence, perhaps in reflection of the ccs report , you say the biggest report, you say the biggest damage is done by overreaction. >> i think i think i'm leaving both possibilities open because that's how it still it's still struck me . i think that . in that's how it still it's still struck me. i think that . in in struck me. i think that. in in disasters such as this , the disasters such as this, the actions that government take inevitably also have have costs and i'm sure going to come on to this. but that's the balance you have to strike as the prime minister instead of directing government to respond to the threat of a near existential crisis . crisis. >> you instead warned of the dangers of overreach. >> i know. that's what forgive me , i say. when are we going to

me, i say. when are we going to take some decisions? and on what evidence ? because i'm i'm evidence? because i'm i'm looking at a problem that's been presented to me . i need to know presented to me. i need to know what the plan is going to be. i've told you that i don't like the look of the way it's going in italy at all. and we need to do something. and that is the day. i think the 28th when i remember , though, i'm not sure remember, though, i'm not sure if chris would confirm this. i remember having a long conversation with him at some stage around that date when he he takes me through to mp is what we like to refer to as lockdowns and he and he tells me about the, the pros and cons about the, the pros and cons about it. he gives a sketch of the behavioural fatigue argument and he takes me through the, through the issues. so i'm, so i think what i'm saying is, well,

if this is the problem, then when, when am i going to be given a menu of options about, about what we're going to do about what we're going to do about this, the readout from the meeting, 1236750 shows that you called for a major ramp up of other other government department activity on domestic preparedness . and that was the preparedness. and that was the least we could do . least we could do. >> yes. if you just go over to the i think the second page under there we are. it's the top of the page. thank you. i've missed it. we need a major ramp up of activity on domestic preparedness . this we should use preparedness. this we should use the cobra meeting to land this point with the secretaries of state. the prime minister agreed with the approach to publish an action that's the plan with the approach to publish an acticwas that's the plan with the approach to publish an acticwas published the plan with the approach to publish an acticwas published on plan with the approach to publish an acticwas published on the n with the approach to publish an acticwas published on the 3rd of that was published on the 3rd of march, was it not? can train delay say he will review the

plan itself over the weekend. you read the draft plan over that weekend, did you not, the 29th and 30th, the first plan? yeah, 28th of february. in the 1st of march. and you agree to the need for early emergency legislation and then there was a debate about repatriation . do debate about repatriation. do you with hindsight and i emphasise hindsight, mrjohnson , emphasise hindsight, mrjohnson, accept that the level of seriousness may not have been sophia communicated in this direction from you. do you say you did enough? i think that i did what i could. >> i think the problem is that actually if you exclude borders and test and trace is not as good as it cracked up to be. and if you're told that we've got ample supplies of ppe . i was

ample supplies of ppe. i was finding it hard to conceptualise exactly what we should be doing. it except for the npis . and that it except for the npis. and that was the only thing that i'd been i'd been given and we had we had no plan for that. and i don't think the concept of lockdown or the or even the word lockdown had yet emerged . had yet emerged. >> and indeed there was a 25th of february sage meeting where non—pharmaceutical interventions were debated, but they didn't include lockdown. there was a debate about extreme social distancing in the beginning of march . lockdown doesn't appear march. lockdown doesn't appear to your answer, mr to leave, but your answer, mr johnson, is . i think the problem johnson, is. i think the problem is that if you exclude borders and trace is not as and test and trace is not as good as it's cracked up to be, and if you're told we've got ample supplies of ppe, i was finding it hard to conceptu analyse exactly what we should be doing . that debate, be doing. that debate, that realisation on on your part that there is no effective border control. the ppe may be

deficient , that there is no deficient, that there is no effective test and trace scaled up test and trace isolate contact system is absent from all this material. that debate simply does not take place . simply does not take place. there is no general realisation on the virus is coming. it's a 2% fatality rate or 1% and we haven't got the measures in place to be able to deal with it. that debate doesn't take place and i think that's and i think that's right. >> and i think basically >> and i think it's basically for same reason that i've for the same reason that i've given , which is that although given, which is that although people intellectually can see see that the rwc s could happen as katherine hammond puts it, they still don't think that it's very likely to happen. and that's the reality . that's the reality. >> we now, in march, on the second you shared your first cobra . 56217 if we look

cobra. 56217 if we look at page five, paragraph two, we can see that you're . told that contact that you're. told that contact tracing for the source of infection for the last two cases infection for the last two cases in the united kingdom had not been successful. so just pausing there , even the limited test and there, even the limited test and trace system in the united kingdom had failed to pick up what was still then only relatively few number of cases. it had not picked up the last two, and that in both france and germany there was now a sustained community transmission . so in terms of infection spread , it may be thought . well, spread, it may be thought. well, game over in terms of infection spread , the aim for the delay spread, the aim for the delay phase, if contained failed , was phase, if contained failed, was to delay the peak of infections , to delay the peak of infections, to delay the peak of infections, to reduce the peak and to minimise loss of life.

to reduce the peak and to minimise loss of life . and then . minimise loss of life. and then. in paragraph three, the cmo said that interventions to delay the spread of the virus must not be implemented too early in order to ensure maximum effectiveness . to ensure maximum effectiveness. and there is more material from some spi—b. one of the sage subcommittees on the fourth of 9th march, also . so cobra on the 9th march, also. so cobra on the 4th of march and the 9th of march, which which demonstrate that the chief medical officer in particular said timing of implementation is crucial . a implementation is crucial. a compliance or despondency is heavily dependent on timing. i'm going to use a well—known phrase behavioural fatigue, although it has no scientific genesis . as has no scientific genesis. as you understand the phrase in its meaning to what extent were your

decisions ? and we're now getting decisions? and we're now getting to in the phase of which social distancing measures were starting to be contemplated. to what extent was your decision making process influenced by this notion that interventions should not be imposed too early ? should not be imposed too early? >> well, it was . the prevailing >> well, it was. the prevailing view for a long time, and it wasn't just the cmo who articulated the concept of behavioural fatigue. if you look at . the many other meetings behavioural fatigue. if you look at. the many other meetings or the press conference of the 12th of march, you can see that the csa gives a very full description of what happens if you go in hard and early with a

population that has no immunity and then . in you release the and then. in you release the measures it bounces back, as i think you've described it, the spring. >> will you forgive me if i pause you there? mr johnson i was asking you questions about this idea that the population mustn't have measures imposed too early because they will become tired of it. yes, there is an issue about maximum effectiveness. i wasn't, in fact asking you about the recoiled or uncoiled spring. >> sorry, but the forgive me, you're quite right. but the two things connected because things are connected because what the csa went on to say on the 12th of march was that people get fed up and that you lose the if you have to keep and we'll come to this, i'm sure in the matter of the october, november lockdowns , you have to november lockdowns, you have to keep doing it. and so my anxiety

was in the absence of therapeutics and without a vaccination programme, what would happen if we simply went into a hard lockdown early and then had no alternative but to come out and so to answer your your main question, that was it was a an anxiety, a problem that was a an anxiety, a problem that was very prevalent during those early days. >> this issue appears to have been raised with you at a relatively early stage . on the relatively early stage. on the 2nd of march, we must not implement too early in order to ensure maximum effectiveness to what extent do you think it likely you would have proceeded to implement measures earlier than you did had you not been told you mustn't go too early to ensure maximum effectiveness? what is the impact of this ? what what is the impact of this? what should the inquiry make of this debate ? is it important? did it debate? is it important? did it make a difference?

>> it's fundamental. make a difference? >> it's fundamental . well, and >> it's fundamental. well, and it's as it goes because i'm afraid it's what happened . we afraid it's what happened. we have to be realistic about 2020. the whole year, the whole tragic, tragic year. we did lockdown . but then it bounced lockdown. but then it bounced back after we'd unlocked . and so back after we'd unlocked. and so you saw him and may i bring you back? >> is the first week in march had you not been told, don't go too early because there is a limit to which the population will be able to bear the implementation of these measures . would you have gone earlier than you did and by what time were you effectively forced to delay ? delay? >> i don't think i can i can't say that i would have gone earlier because i think i would have been guided by what advice

i was getting about when to put npis in. don't forget that this is a once in a century event where doing things we're enacting policy that has never been enacted in our lifetime in this country. and to do it at the drop of a hat is very it's very logistically difficult. but but it was . not something you but it was. not something you rushed into. but having been told by the cmo, be careful , told by the cmo, be careful, don't go too early because the population might not wear it, did you consider saying to him, well, in this general debate about non—pharmaceutical interventions and social distancing, the public health demands , the likelihood of death demands, the likelihood of death and hospitalisation demand that we take these measures, regard of whether the population are prepared to put up with it over time . time. >> did you push back against this , this this notion of don't

this, this this notion of don't go too early? i i thought that the short answer is no , i don't the short answer is no, i don't i don't i don't remember saying to myself , if absolutely to myself, if absolutely candidly, i don't remember saying to myself , this is so bad. >> they must be wrong. i must overrule the scientists or i must ignore the scientists. i must ignore the scientists. i must go. no question of overruling the scientists. >> you were following the science. >> forgive me. i must ignore all the. the was a very important distinction. i must ignore the scientific advice and the threats to public health and of worse outcomes is if we go too early and i must simply maximise guys i've got to deal with the problem in front of the windscreen. i've got to deal with it now . i didn't i didn't with it now. i didn't i didn't do that and i and perhaps with

hindsight i should have done. but as i said to you right at the outset of this hearing, i, i just don't know the answer . just don't know the answer. >> that's clear. mr keith is that a convenient moment by all means. it'sjust that a convenient moment by all means. it's just that we usually break every hour and a quarter. and i think that's probably enough for this morning. thank you.22 enough for this morning. thank you. 22 to please rise . you. 22 to please rise. >> well, there we have it. the covid inquiry breaking up. they'll be back at 20 to 2. but my goodness me, what a fascinating ing rip roaring. what account? >> of course, we went to prime minister's question and then dipped back into the covid inquiry and they were very much talking about that initial decision on over whether to lockdown or not. boris johnson there being pressed on whether he was taking advice from the chief medical officer when he made the decision to delay whether he made that decision on his own, whether he pushed back on advice that might have meant

we locked down earlier. it's all about that first lockdown, but also , i think interestingly, also, i think interestingly, hugo keith , the lawyer for the hugo keith, the lawyer for the inquiry , was saying he admitted inquiry, was saying he admitted and that the word lockdown hadnt and that the word lockdown hadn't even entered our lexicon as a country until mid—march. >> those early decisions , >> those early decisions, russians with sage weren't even mentioning lockdown as a possibility . they were talking possibility. they were talking about heavy suppression measures . they were talking about more extreme social distancing. they weren't talking about lockdown even into early march. i'd be quite happy to get i'd be quite happy if that word lockdown was removed from my lexicon at some point. >> but we shall see who knows what we have in store. but let's bfing what we have in store. but let's bring back in khalid mahmood mp, labour birmingham perry labour mp for birmingham perry barr thank you much. you barr thank you very much. you were listening there to boris johnson.i were listening there to boris johnson. i guess than get johnson. i guess rather than get into nitty gritty of that into the nitty gritty of that initial what's your initial lockdown, what's your take, take of what take, your overall take of what we're hearing from boris johnson ? >> 7. >>i ? >> i think basically he's trying to justify why the huge

testosterone filled downing street lots of men in there with all their egos trying to fight through and trying to be heard. dominic cummings on top of that list, mountain of people who thought he was the only one who could manage this and wanted it. his way and know no other way. but it's quite interesting because from what i've seen and listened to there. >> boris johnson doesn't appear to be wanting to throw anyone under the bus , whereas in under the bus, whereas in previous sessions, that's right. we've heard from a lot of people who do appear to be wanting to throw each other under the bus. so boris johnson does appear to be bit a high ground be taking a bit of a high ground in respect. in that respect. >> i think he's >> he's and i think he's admitted the fact also that there was too much testerone in admitted the fact also that the|whole too much testerone in admitted the fact also that the|whole of» much testerone in admitted the fact also that the|whole of» much te103rone in admitted the fact also that the|whole of» much t(10 ande in admitted the fact also that the|whole of» much t(10 and there the whole of number 10 and there should have been more women in there. think that's there. and i think that's a mistake most people make, mistake that most people make, is do we think that the is having do we think that the act of there being more women in act of there being more women in a would lead to different a room would lead to different decisions? i think the decisions? no i think the language would have been different. i some of different. and i think some of

the that were taken the actions that were taken would different. would have been different. i think what boris is think that's what boris is trying to say. and i generally agree be more agree that there should be more women making women in the decision making process tempers process because that tempers sometimes whole issue of sometimes the whole issue of mashonas. i don't know about that. >> so that might be a bit sexist , actually, because i don't think, you know, women can be just as aggressive lviv and women maybe not as much testosterone to be much more responsible in the action that they take, but more actually to they take, but more actually to the rule that they're trying to work to rather than just putting their own ego in the front. >> and i think that's what i'm trying to say. >> it's interesting because, of course, the inquiry has spoken about of male about sort of male characteristics female characteristics and female characteristics. i think we are really down a rabbit hole really going down a rabbit hole here it here of generalisation. but it is because looking is interesting because looking at the way in which that language has been focussed on, particularly in the testimony of dominic cummings , looking back dominic cummings, looking back at previous downing streets, there are previous communications directors for previous prime ministers have been famed for their blue

tongue. the way that alastair campbell , for example, worked in campbell, for example, worked in downing street in the early 2000. if anything, from what i've read , seems like it was i've read, seems like it was just as blue, perhaps even more or even more so. i think we've got to get to a situation where we actually can use language much more appropriately. >> and i said this again goes down to that cycle of ego, whether the more aggressive, the more swear words that you use, the more powerful you seem to be. and i think that has to be cut down. and i think language is important. we've had comrades and colleagues in parliament who decided down words decided to go down certain words that use , and dennis that they use, and dennis skinner, the most comrades, of course. yes of course. and you've had dennis skinner, who was the best of the lot was able to change that language to ensure the speaker was met with that. >> no, ijust that. >> no, i just to bring us very briefly away from boris johnson and the covid inquiry inquiry

inquiry , we are expecting to inquiry, we are expecting to hear from the former home secretary, suella braverman , who secretary, suella braverman, who is going to be delivering a rare resignation statement to the commons to the house at about just after to, i think maybe 230. >> the current timing, that's what's coming up now. >> of course, she's been very vocal since she left her position about the government. she believes the government should go further comes should go further when it comes to migration. she'd bring to legal migration. she'd bring that threshold higher. that salary threshold higher. she'd make sure that dependants were she's basically saying that she would make tough, tougher measures. and the same when it comes to stopping the boats . comes to stopping the boats. what do you expect her to say? >> i think you're exactly that. i think she's been completely outrageous the language that, outrageous in the language that, again, she's used and very again, that she's used and very much of what is what you much above of what is what you would expect. again from a home secretary and what she's done is she's she's made huge pronouncements and very stern pronouncements and very stem and pronounced , but not achieved and pronounced, but not achieved anything. so you know, when you don't achieve anything and

continue to make those pronouncements , i think that's pronouncements, i think that's what the problem is . she did all what the problem is. she did all that. what did achieve ? that. but what did she achieve? >> to talk about what >> i, i want to talk about what sir keir starmer said in prime minister's questions because there was a phrase that he cited. he said it's not so much up yours, delors , as it's more up yours, delors, as it's more take our money. kagame, of course, referring to the new treaty signed with rwanda. i think we can show a little picture of a famous son newspaper headline from 1990. there it is , up yours. delors there it is, up yours. delors i'm amazed we're allowed to show this on on daytime television. but this of course, refers to when margaret thatcher took the battle to the european union or as it was then the european community battling against ecu, the pre runner to the to the euro. and of course, margaret thatcher is someone who got a lot of money back from europe. yes, i suppose what what keir starmer is referring to is the deaungs starmer is referring to is the dealings this government's doing tend to giving a lot of money tend to be giving a lot of money to rwanda. exactly. to rwanda. yeah, exactly. >> the issue on

>> but the whole issue on migration has been throwing money it and that hasn't money at it and that hasn't achieved anything, whether it's been the hotels that we've used and people escaped from them or whether we huge deal whether we had a huge deal spending over £140 million, £18 million on the bibby stockholm . million on the bibby stockholm. it's money that we just thrown away without getting any return for it. >> if we do see a labour government come the next day, we will see a labour government very soon. if we it's looking probable, looking probable very soon. if we it's looking pr

>> i don't think so. i think the labour party is much more disciplined now. you've seen the way we've changed from jeremy corbyn's era, right across to where is now jeremy corbyn is suspended from the for party the fact that he wouldn't admit to his role in anti—semitism . and i his role in anti—semitism. and i think those sort of issues are very important. sir keir has had a very disciplined party and i don't think that will be an ongoing thing. there might be 1 or 2 individuals who might want to make a name in terms of that, but really, no, i think the overall party discipline will be very strong. >> fascinating looking back >> it's fascinating looking back to phrase up yours. delors to the phrase up yours. delors yes, indeed to take our yes, and indeed to take our money, i'm not sure whether that will catch on quite so much, but that was course all in 1990. that was of course all in 1990. in run up to the resignation in the run up to the resignation of geoffrey howe, who who in many ways resigned over european policy and then performed probably the most famous resignation statement in the history of the house of commons, talking about margaret thatcher

smashing his cricket bats and all the rest of it, something that many people argue brought her we're expecting suella her down. we're expecting suella braverman a similar braverman to give a similar statement later today. could braverman to give a similar statebring later today. could braverman to give a similar statebring down today. could braverman to give a similar statebring down rishi. could braverman to give a similar statebring down rishi sunak? that bring down rishi sunak? >> i think yes. and i think the fact that the infighting that's going the conservative going on in the conservative party now , rishi, is fairly weak party now, rishi, is fairly weak as it stands. and i think that's sort of an attack from suella i think will be certainly fatal , think will be certainly fatal, if not terminal. >> well, we'll be bringing you at home the very latest on that suella braverman statement. we'll also be dipping back into bofis we'll also be dipping back into boris johnson at the inquiry. so stay with us. >> looks like things are heating up . boxt boilers sponsor us of up. boxt boilers sponsor us of weather on gb news is . weather on gb news is. >> hi there. it's aidan mcgivern here from the met office. with the gb news forecast , it's been the gb news forecast, it's been a cold but bright start to the day and it will stay dry. for most us until later. that's most of us until later. that's when returns from the when rain returns from the atlantic. weather fronts are . atlantic. weather fronts are. geafing atlantic. weather fronts are. gearing up to move in from the

west . areas of pressure west. areas of low pressure coming a change in wind coming in a change in wind direction across the uk direction as well. across the uk will herald the return to milder but wetter weather through the next but for the time next few days. but for the time being, bright for being, it's crisp and bright for many , especially for parts of many, especially for parts of scotland. central and eastern england. we keep clear blue skies afternoon, skies into the afternoon, further west we've got the cloud building, the first signs of the rain pushing into northern ireland by the ireland and cornwall by the middle the afternoon, it's middle of the afternoon, it's going to milder 8 to 10 going to be milder here, 8 to 10 celsius. just 2 to 4 celsius celsius. but just 2 to 4 celsius further east, despite the blue skies. then an early frost in the east as we go into the evening. but quite quickly, the cloud rushes in, the rain pushes in and it's going to turn wet and windy across the uk as the night progresses. of course , as night progresses. of course, as the cloud builds, temperatures will rise through the night. so these are the kinds of temperatures by the end of the night, 4 celsius the night, 3 to 4 celsius in the east, further west, east, 8 to 10 further west, similar to the temperatures that we'll during day today. we'll see during the day today. then it's a damp start to the day on thursday . there will be day on thursday. there will be

some hill snow at first across higher parts of scotland and northern quite northern england. but quite quickly turns rain quickly that all turns to rain and that will be heavy at and that rain will be heavy at times, especially in the west through afternoon, be through the afternoon, it'll be windy of coastal windy with the risk of coastal gales, brighter skies gales, but some brighter skies in northern ireland the end in northern ireland by the end of , that warm feeling of the day, that warm feeling inside died from boxt boilers sponsors of weather on .

gb news. >> good afternoon , britain. >> good afternoon, britain. today an enormous day both in parliament and in paddington. why we're hearing from suella braverman , the former home braverman, the former home secretary and her astounding resignation statement that we're expecting within this hour. also, boris johnson before the covid inquiry. >> yes , i wonder what suella >> yes, i wonder what suella braverman will have to say. i imagine we can imagine quite a lot of what she will. i imagine she'll want to lay in to the prime minister a little, lay into the government's plans on immigration. she certainly does not believe they go far enough. she'll probably also rip apart the current plans for rwanda , the current plans for rwanda, suggesting she's already suggested that it doesn't go far enough. hasn't she? >> she has. and it's interesting because the government has announced a raft of new measures at the start of this week, not just to deal with illegal migration, with the new treaty

signed just yesterday by the home secretary, but also to the situation around legal migration, the tightening of controls and that points based system that was announced earlier this week, on monday , earlier this week, on monday, could the former home secretary have some pretty damning words for both of those moves? will they have gone far enough for her? >> yes, and of course, we'll be bringing you the highlights from bofis bringing you the highlights from boris johnson at the covid inquiry as we get them. but first, let's get your news headunes. headlines. >> tom, emily, thank you very much. it'sjust >> tom, emily, thank you very much. it's just gone 1:01. i'm sam francis in the newsroom . sam francis in the newsroom. well, as we've been hearing, bofis well, as we've been hearing, boris johnson has admitted that the government made mistakes in handung the government made mistakes in handling the pandemic under his watch. the prime minister watch. the former prime minister told the covid inquiry that things should have been done differently and that he takes full responsibility for the government's decisions. he indicated that only easy indicated that the only easy decision made to roll out decision he made was to roll out the vaccines . mr johnson,

the vaccines. mr johnson, who's been criticised by many been heavily criticised by many who've already given evidence , who've already given evidence, apologised suffering apologised for the suffering caused during the pandemic. >> i am deeply sorry for the pain and the loss and the suffering of those victims and their families . and grateful . their families. and grateful. thoughi their families. and grateful. though i am to the hundreds of thousands of health care workers and many other public servants , and many other public servants, people in all walks of life who helped to protect our country throughout that dreadful pandemic . i throughout that dreadful pandemic. i do throughout that dreadful pandemic . i do hope that this pandemic. i do hope that this inquiry will help to get the answers to the very difficult questions that those victims and those families are rightly are asking . asking. >> well, earlier, outside the inquiry, the families of those who died during the height of the pandemic demanded answers for need to be accountable. >> these decisions led to the deaths of thousands of people

who should never, should have died . and if we'd have had died. and if we'd have had a different government at the time, it wasn't so callous and chaotic. thousands more people would have been alive . would have been alive. >> i believe that mrjohnson's incompetence that he's incompetent to the degree that he employed people like matt hancock as a health secretary who's clearly out of his depth. and i just really want to sit here and look him in the eye and see what he has to say . see what he has to say. >> in the last hour, the prime minister has defended the government's approach to tackling migration with his latest treaty. it's after latest rwanda treaty. it's after the home secretary james cleverly signed a new agreement in kigali yesterday, which he says addresses the supreme court's concerns about sending asylum seekers to the african nafion asylum seekers to the african nation during prime minister's questions. rishi sunak said the agreement would serve as a deterrent for illegal migrants . deterrent for illegal migrants. >> we have signed a new legally binding treaty with rwanda, which, together with new legislation, will address all

the concerns that have been raised because everyone should be in no doubt about our absolute commitment to stop the boats and get flights off. because, madam deputy speaker, and this is the crucial point that the honourable gentleman doesn't understand deterrence is critical. even the national crime agency have said that you need an effective removals and deterrence agreement if you truly want to break the cycle of tragedy that we see. >> sir keir starmer , though, >> sir keir starmer, though, described the policy as a gimmick and said that the new deal meant some rwandan refugees will come to the uk. >> article 19 of the treaty says the parties shall make arrangements for the united kingdom to resettle a portion of rwanda's most vulnerable refugees in the united kingdom . refugees in the united kingdom. so how many refugees is from rwanda? will be coming here to the uk under the treaty ? the uk under the treaty? >> suella braverman is set to make a statement in the commons later at around 240. in what

could be a major intervention in the growing issue of migration. gb news understands the former home secretary will call the prime minister's leadership into question in up to ten mps have already threatened quit over already threatened to quit over the hardline the government's hardline approach . senior approach on rwanda. senior conservatives issued conservatives have issued a warning that overriding the european convention on human rights would be what they've described crossing a red line. today, a milestone for the families of victims of the hillsborough disaster. those are the words of bishop james jones. it says the government signed a new hillsborough charter . it new hillsborough charter. it sets out a series of expectations for how public bodies should act in the aftermath of a major incident . aftermath of a major incident. and it means bereaved families will be better supported. well, speaking a little earlier in the commons, the prime minister pledged that the experiences of victims families must be learnt from have suffered multiple injustices. >> the loss of 97 lives, the blaming of the fans and the unforgivable institution or defensiveness by public bodies .

defensiveness by public bodies. i am profoundly sorry for what they have been through. today. the government has published its response to bishop james jones's report ensure the pain and report to ensure the pain and the suffering of the hillsborough families is not repeated . repeated. >> veteran tv executive samir shahis >> veteran tv executive samir shah is expected to be appointed as the next chair of the bbc. he's said to follow richard sharpe after he resigned earlier this year. sharpe was found to have breached rules on public appointment in connection to a secret £800,000 loan made to bofis secret £800,000 loan made to boris johnson . he's since been boris johnson. he's since been replaced by acting bbc chairman chairwoman dame ellen closs stevens passage . others are stevens passage. others are facing yet another day of travel disruption as train drivers walk out in their long running dispute over pay. aslef union members at five train operators are striking for 24 hours in the latest of a series of stoppages this week. some of the busiest commuter rail routes in the country will have limited services or no trains at all, aslef says its members will continue taking industrial

action until they receive an improved pay offer on the one that was made earlier this year of 8. over the next two years, as this is gb news across the uk, we're on your tv, in your car, on digital radio and on your smart speaker. now back to tom and . emily tom and. emily >> right. well, the former prime minister, boris johnson, is appearing before the covid 19 inquiry and said he takes full responsibility for the decisions made during the pandemic. he also apologised for the pain and loss suffered by so many families up and down the country i >> -- >> but there have been some moments of content action as well and sitting through all of it so that you don't have to has been gb news presenter pip tomson. she's outside the covid inquiry in london for us now and pip, what were the biggest flash points that we've seen so far today ? today? >> one of the biggest

flashpoints. tom actually came just before the inquiry broke for lunch just before 1:00, when the former prime minister actually appeared to fight back tears . he became actually appeared to fight back tears. he became emotional when he was talking about the ongoing debate between going into lockdown, lockdown versus the risks of behavioural fatigue. bofis risks of behavioural fatigue. boris johnson has said he was anxious about locking down because of the lack of a vaccination programme. he said it was an anxiety, a problem that was very prevalent during those early days of the pandemic. february march 2020. and then his voice appeared to break and he said, we have to be realistic about 2020, the whole year , that whole tragic, tragic year, that whole tragic, tragic yeah he year, that whole tragic, tragic year. he then paused for a moment to compose himself, and at the very beginning of the inquiry where the room was packed full with families of the bereaved, they are outside now giving their reaction to what they've heard of boris johnson's three hours of evidence at the

beginning of the inquiry, he did make this apology. a listen i >> understand the feelings of these victims and their families. and i am deeply sorry for the pain and the loss and the suffering of those victims and their families . and grateful and their families. and grateful , though i am to the hundreds of thousands of healthcare workers and many other public servants and many other public servants and people in all walks of life who help to protect our country throughout dreadful pandemic. i do hope that this inquiry will help to get the answers to the very difficult questions that those victims and those families are rightly are asking . are rightly are asking. >> and it was around the time of that apology that berenice

baroness hallett, who's chairing the inquiry, she had to step in because a number of people had to be ejected from the room for standing up, holding up posters and then refusing to sit down again. what has become very clear during the course of boris johnson's evidence is that there was a complete disbelief, if you like, about the scale of this pandemic and he said, boris johnson, that his mindset, like the overwhelming majority of ministers and officials in whitehall between january and mid—february 2020, was simply not as alarmed as it should have been. not as alarmed as it should have been . and he said the scientific been. and he said the scientific community within whitehall wasn't telling us that this was something that was going to require the urgent and immediate action. he also said that the scenes from italy in february 2020 really rattled him. he said he remembered seeing a note somewhere that the fatality rate there was 8% and thinking that

it was appalling . and he said, it was appalling. and he said, i didn't think the number could be right. i looked at i looked at all this stuff with horror. now and should have collectively twigged much sooner. he was also asked about taking a half term holiday. it was dubbed by the media in february 2020. he said that he didn't take a long houday that he didn't take a long holiday and he actually returned to downing street three times dufing to downing street three times during the half term break. he also had conversations with president xi chinese president, to offer condolences and to compare notes. and he also spoke to president trump as well. he said a lot was going on and the tempo really started to change. and mount back at the end of february 2020. we very interesting pip and behind you, it appears as though there's a rather large crowd there. >> it's hard to differentiate between journalists and reporters and potentially bereaved families . are there are bereaved families. are there are there also political protests as

yeah, i don't know whether we can actually give you an idea of how big this this this hearing is today. >> of course, we know it's been going on for many weeks. it's going on for many weeks. it's going to go on for several years still. but today, because as it is, the former prime minister, bofis is, the former prime minister, boris johnson, giving evidence, it quite extraordinary. so it is quite extraordinary. so immediately around me, you have the media. but if paul, my camera man , can just pan off to camera man, can just pan off to the right here over my shoulder, you can see this truck that arrived early this morning. and then there are lots of bereaved families who have come out of the inquiry giving their reaction to what they have heard so far. they said to me that that they wanted accountability . that they wanted accountability. they did not want weak apologies. and i've been sitting in a media room on the first floor and you could hear all morning because there have been people standing outside holding banners. there's also been anti—vax campaign here as well.

there's been lots of motorists tooting , tooting away throughout tooting, tooting away throughout the course of boris johnson's evidence, but it has now broke open for lunch. this inquiry is due to reconvene at about 20 to 2 this afternoon . boris johnson 2 this afternoon. boris johnson will continue giving evidence into tomorrow as well. >> thank you very much indeed. pip tomson there outside the covid inquiry in london. gb news presenter very interesting to see how how large the crowds are. there many people gathering and that was at lunch. so presumably people will have presumably some people will have disappeared off the moment. disappeared off for the moment. >> absolutely . but it has been >> absolutely. but it has been really interesting this covid inquiry, believe it or not. and one moment this morning took my eye there was a dramatic point of contention this morning . yes, of contention this morning. yes, dramatic . the of contention this morning. yes, dramatic. the inquiry lawyer hugo keith kc said that the uk had one of the highest rates of excess deaths in europe. yes, thatis excess deaths in europe. yes, that is the direct quote . should

that is the direct quote. should we explore the data? in reality ? we explore the data? in reality? >> obe yes. so here, compiled by the excellent oxford university publication our world in data . publication our world in data. this is the actual list. >> yes , the actual list shows >> yes, the actual list shows the uk is not even near the top quartile of european countries for excess deaths over 2020 and 2021. it's hard to read , but 2021. it's hard to read, but we're in the lower half . we're in the lower half. >> indeed, the inquiry lawyer himself backtracked instead , himself backtracked instead, confirming his comparison was actually about western european countries. i noticed . the that countries. i noticed. the that in your opening preamble a few months ago, you produced a slide saying that the uk was, i think second only to italy for excess deaths. >> correct . that's not the best >> correct. that's not the best of my knowledge. the case and i think that many all i would say is that many other countries suffered terrible losses from

covid and the evidence before milady is that the united kingdom had one of the highest rates of excess death in europe . rates of excess death in europe. >> almost all other western european countries had a lower level of excess deaths. i've seen italy was tragically in a worse position than the united kingdom . kingdom. >> i do not wish to contradict you, mr keith, but the evidence, the ons data i saw put us, i think, about 16 or 19 in a table of 33, in western europe. >> we were one of the worst off, if not the second worst off. >> so all he did there , he >> so all he did there, he changed his parameters from europe to western europe. perhaps next he'll change it. even smaller will be the worst in the british isles. but what's the truth? here's the scrambled mess of excess death tolls across european countries. it's impossible to see britain amongst all of these lines

because it's buried in the middle . middle. >> yeah, there we are in the middle of the pack. but mr keith kc quickly insisted he was instead talking about only western europe, which is . here western europe, which is. here on this graph. >> now it's probably quite easier to see where we are. we are if we look at the next slide right there in around the middle of the pack of western europe , of the pack of western europe, not the highest. so the only way you make the uk look as if it's anywhere near the top of the range is if you include the scandinavian countries. >> yes . scandinavian countries. >> yes. including sweden. >> yes. including sweden. >> how very interesting. i'm not sure the covid inquiry lawyer would want to make that comparison. again, the uk, not even the top country, not the second top, not the third top in that group of western european countries . but it's interesting. countries. but it's interesting. it does beg the question where hugo, keith, kc is getting his information from. >> shall we speak to barrister and writer stephen barrett?

stephen thank you very much for joining us on good afternoon. britain. did you you just saw those graphs that we showed to explain. firstly what hugo keith claimed was true , that the uk claimed was true, that the uk had some of the highest excess deaths. what exactly was his claim again? >> his claim was that among the highest in europe, he then backtracked and said amongst the highest in western europe. but i'm i'm not sure that's even a an uncontested statement . an uncontested statement. stephen barrett, should the inquiry lawyer be proffering his own evidence like this ? own evidence like this? >> no. and i wasn't intending to watch any of this inquiry. i stumbled on it quite by accident because i was sat here doing something else that wasn't taking my full attention and i found myself getting irritated with the kc , which which is odd with the kc, which which is odd because i don't have a political position on on covid or lockdowns or not locking down or anything like that. and i just simply neutral. so so, so asked myself what is going on? and

it's just how he is questioning is not neutral. it is not what you would expect of a scrupulously neutral inquiry or barrister. and with that event, he's absolutely caught out red handed there. and he keeps doing a trick which is very irritating and also very wrong. every time he says there is evidence before milady . well, milady hasn't milady. well, milady hasn't reached any conclusions on the evidence because the inquiry hasn't finished, which means none of that has any extra validity. so why is he getting to pick and choose which of the bits of evidence that are before her are compelling? and the only reason i can think of is that the end point is predetermined andifs the end point is predetermined and it's looking incredibly like they have already decided that we didn't go into lockdown soon enough , that the government was enough, that the government was confused and they are simply pursuing that outcome and questions are being asked to elicit answers. i think he got some out of boris after couple some out of boris after a couple of doubt those will

of hours and no doubt those will be the bits that actually go into report. but i suspect into the report. but i suspect we this report right we could write this report right now given i'm am neutral on now and given i'm am neutral on all of this , the only point all of this, the only point i can make is that, well, it would save an awful lot of money if we wrote baroness hallett report. now because she's not behaving like a judge. a judge if tried to questions like if to ask questions like that, if tried questions at tried to ask two questions at once witness, you can't do once to a witness, you can't do that. witness that. if ask a witness a question and then shut them up, shut can't do shut them off. no, you can't do that. if a witness starts replying and then add in additional which i saw him additional words which i saw him do with the word system failure. no, do with the word system failure. n0, i'd do with the word system failure. no, i'd get told off. you can't do that. she is not controlling this inquiry in the way that i would expect a judge to, to control this inquiry. would expect a judge to, to control this inquiry . you know, control this inquiry. you know, mr keith appears to have a predetermined outcome and to be pursuing it rigorously . and she pursuing it rigorously. and she is doing nothing to prevent that . i've seen she does feel could be written now. >> i've seen a number of days of this inquiry now where they bfing this inquiry now where they bring extra lawyers , people bring out extra lawyers, people representing, for example , the

representing, for example, the bereaved families for justice group, a group that doesn't look like it's looking for answers in terms of what to do next time if there's a pandemic, but is looking for retro fashion justice they would put it, to justice as they would put it, to try and find a villain in this whole story. as long as that villain isn't the chinese communist party. but if we're looking precisely at is looking precisely at what is going hugo keith kc going on here, the hugo keith kc sort of started his piece by saying, look how bad britain is. look how awfully we have done trying to find evidence to match his conclusion , ignoring the his conclusion, ignoring the fact that according to the data that i've been looking at this morning from our world in data, a very respect rooted institution, italy, portugal, spain, many other western european countries have higher accumulated death tolls. what doesit accumulated death tolls. what does it tell you that the covid inquiry lawyer is starting from this position , starting to say this position, starting to say that britain is oh, so bad ? that britain is oh, so bad? >> yes. and this mean i've felt quite bad doing it. i tweeted that this was quasi religious

because think it is quasi religious. and then i felt slightly better because i got a whatsapp from a fellow barrister who is no fan boris johnson, who is no fan of boris johnson, who is no fan of boris johnson, who absolutely outraged at who was absolutely outraged at the lack independence the total lack of independence and objectivity. appears to and objectivity. that appears to be . he appears to be happening. he also appears to have decided that the covid mortality rate is 2% and that that's absolute true, fixed and mean . i don't think that that's absolute true, fixed and mean. i don't think that is fixed in stone . if i went to fixed in stone. if i went to have a look at it, there's a rather large and exciting report you can read on the mortality rate mean just not as clear rate mean it's just not as clear as thinks it but it does as he thinks it is, but it does seem we're being seem as though we're being fed, spoon predetermined and spoon fed, predetermined and outcomes predetermined opinions as as gospel truth as as a new religious truth. and along with it, we've got this focus on feeling and there is this this massive focus on feelings mean that that feels totally alien to me. there are no feelings in a courtroom when i'm in it, you know, we deal with facts and we deal with law and we analyse what's going on. i don't understand why my feelings have

become the priority of this. what feels like predetermined inquiry ? inquiry? >> absolutely. stephen if you're right and there is a predetermined outcome or there are predetermined conclusions , are predetermined conclusions, opens to this inquiry , what does opens to this inquiry, what does that tell us about the state of our democracy in the state of these kind of processes that we're seeing? we're expecting this to cost millions in taxpayer money. for example, would you say that the covid inquiry isn't worth it, isn't fulfilling what it should be doing is a waste of time and resources is i think it's going too far. >> if i take a position on the inquiry, i think my role generally is just to highlight what's going on and to speak truth to course perfectly truth seem to course perfectly enough offence just just by being to being honest. so don't need to start own opinions start giving my own opinions causing extra offence. it is certainly an awful lot of money to spend on something which has every feeling of a predetermined outcome. it's an awful lot of money to be spent on on feelings andifsit money to be spent on on feelings and it's it is a large

investment of our time and resources. how are we as a society, what are we doing? because, you know, a democracy is very simple. everybody is equal and democratic votes matter and are respected and they're taken seriously. and you don't belittle another your political opponent, but there are other types of human society where there are elites and they use emotion and show trials and bread and circuses to control the masses. and they indulge people. and, you know, that's a different type of society, which one are we? because i've always thought we were the first kind. and this is really exposing i mean, this just feels like the kangaroo court all over again. certain people have a vendetta against boris johnson and they're willing to use any means to pursue a vendetta against him . now, other the mean, . now, other than the mean, probably the only point i can make about that is that that's quite dull because we have done that once, know, and may that once, you know, and it may well the reason this well be that the reason this inquiry getting as much inquiry is not getting as much attention we attention is because we have we have this. have done all this. >> obviously, they would say

that are performing a that they are performing well. a pubuc that they are performing well. a public a service. this is public a public service. this is really to try to try to improve the way our government will approach the next pandemic. but we shall see what conclusions are drawn come the end of this very lengthy inquiry. >> i hope they stop talking about gender balance and swearing, are. swearing, but there we are. stephen you so stephen barrett, thank you so much us. always much for joining us. always a pleasure you and pleasure to talk to you and really, really interesting insight there in terms of how a normal courtroom would run versus how this inquiry is running. yes, indeed. >> we'll be back very >> well, we'll be back very shortly. so stay with

sunday mornings from 930 on gb news . news. >> good afternoon , britain. now, >> good afternoon, britain. now, you might have noticed that emily has nipped off to get a cup of tea, but she'll be back in any moment and it is interesting. we've been looking at all the big stories today, not just boris johnson before the covid inquiry but also in the covid inquiry but also in the run up to a pretty important speech by suella braverman . speech by suella braverman. we'll be bringing you that in around half an hour's time. but beyond that, there's also another further story today , another further story today, which is that number 10 has responded to a report . it responded to a report. it published in 2017, examining the ordeals faced by the families affected by the hillsborough disaster. the government has today confirmed the signing off of the hillsborough charter, pledging to learn lessons following the disaster . pledging to learn lessons following the disaster. a duty of candour will also be placed

for in policing in england and wales, promoting an environment of openness, honesty and transparency. well consultations are expected to take place to supply free legal help for bereaved families after inquests after major incidents and terrorist attacks. let's speak to our political correspondent tonight, katherine forster catherine, this announcement has been a long time coming . been a long time coming. >> yes, it certainly has, tom. the home office have , in fact, the home office have, in fact, taken a full six years to issue this 70 page response to bishop james jones . this 70 page response to bishop james jones. his report on the experiences of bereaved families from hillsborough and that report was submitted at the end of 2017. the government have apologised for taking so long. we've cycled through numerous justice secretaries and home secretaries since then. of course , but the hillsborough

course, but the hillsborough families are used to long waits, aren't they? it's now 34 years since that horrendous day in april 19th, 1989, where there was that crush in hillsborough stadium in sheffield, 947 men, women and children lost their lives as a result of police failings of police mismanagement. now, at the time, the police lied. they were deceitful. they passed the buck. they blamed the fans , and they they blamed the fans, and they said that they were effectively a rabble, that they were hooligans, that it was their fault, that was quickly disproved . but in 1991, the disproved. but in 1991, the first inquest found said that these people had died accidentally and it took until 2009 60. pardon until it was said that they had in fact been un lawfully killed. despite that , only one person was ever prosecuted and that person got away with a fine. so today , this

away with a fine. so today, this report from the home office, this hillsborough charter , as this hillsborough charter, as you have mentioned, the government are basically saying that all department will be made aware, will be signing up to this. and the plan is to stress that public bodies must be transformed and that they must operate in the interest of victims and bereaved families in the event of any sort of major tragedy that they must not act in their own interests if they are at fault, they must not cover up . they must not cover up. they must not obfuscate, they must not deflect other things that have been announced . this duty of candour announced. this duty of candour to be introduced for the police in england and wales. now that will be required by law failure to cooperate could lead to criminal sanctions or the sack then plans to expand , expand then plans to expand, expand free legal aid and representation for bereaved families. that's only being

consulted on a few days ago, too, we had an announcement of this independent public advocate that bereaved families said that they struggled amongst everything else. they didn't have a central point of contact and they didn't know who to deal with, who to help them. that's to help them. but i suspect a lot of the bereaved families will want to have seen the government go further to have brought this duty of candour, if you like. this hillsborough charter to have wanted to see an actual law applying to all pubuc actual law applying to all public sector workers to do the right thing. and that at the moment is still lacking . moment is still lacking. >> well, catherine, thank you so much for bringing us the very latest from such an important announcement today . okay. now, announcement today. okay. now, up next here on gb news, we'll be talking to our political edhoh be talking to our political editor, christopher hope , who editor, christopher hope, who has some very interesting news as to why the prime minister will be missing. suella braverman resignation statement that to come after the bulletins with sam . tom, emily, thanks

with sam. tom, emily, thanks very much. >> it's just gone. 132 i'm sam francis in the gb newsroom. our top story this hour is boris johnson admitting the mistakes that mistakes were made during the pandemic under his watch , the pandemic under his watch, the pandemic under his watch, the former prime minister told the former prime minister told the covid inquiry that things should have been done differently and that he takes full responsibility for the government's mr government's decisions. mr johnson, who's been heavily criticised by who've given criticised by many who've given evidence the inquiry , already evidence in the inquiry, already apologised suffering apologised for the suffering caused during the pandemic. the prime minister has defended the government's approach to tackling migration with his latest latest rwanda treaty . latest latest rwanda treaty. it's after a new agreement was signed with kigali, which the which, which excuse me, which rishi sunak says addresses the supreme court's concerns about sending asylum seekers to the country . he told the commons country. he told the commons that the agreement will make illegal migrants think twice

about crossing the channel >> this is the crucial point that the honourable gentleman doesn't understand deterrence is critical. even the national crime agency have said that you need an effective removals and deterrence agreement if you truly want to break the cycle of tragedy that we see. >> suella braverman is due to due to make a statement in the commons later in what could be a major intervention in the growing issue of migration. gb news understands that the former home secretary will call the prime minister's leadership into question. up to ten question. it comes as up to ten mps have already threatened to quit over the government's hardline approach rwanda. hardline approach on rwanda. senior have issued senior conservatives have issued a warning that overriding the european convention on human rights would cross a red line . rights would cross a red line. and the government has signed a new hillsborough charter. responding to the report published in 2017 that examined the experiences of the families affected by the hillsborough disaster, a duty of candour will also be introduced for policing in england and wales that

promotes an environment of openness , honesty and openness, honesty and transparency . the charter also transparency. the charter also sets out a series of expectations for how public bodies should act in the aftermath of a major incident. and it means bereaved families will be better supported as eveh will be better supported as ever, you can get more on all of those stories by visiting our website, gbnews.com . website, gbnews.com. >> for a valuable legacy. >> for a valuable legacy. >> your family can own gold coins will always shine bright rose and gold proudly sponsors the gb news financial report . the gb news financial report. >> well, here's a quick snapshot of today's markets . the pound of today's markets. the pound will buy you 1.25, eight, nine and ,1.167. the price of gold is £1,612.32 per ounce. and the ftse 100 is . at 7525 points. ftse 100 is. at 7525 points. >> rosalind gold proudly sponsors the gb news financial

report . report. >> right. stay with us because we've got some very interesting news coming from christopher hope, our political editor. he's on suella braverman watch. and apparently the prime minister may not be there to see suella braverman's resignation. stay why could that be? we'll find out after

isabel monday to thursdays from. six till 930 .

six till 930. well the former home secretary suella braverman , will deliver suella braverman, will deliver a resignation statement to mps later today . later today. >> it's set to call into question the leadership of rishi sunak. question the leadership of rishi sunak . but will he even be sunak. but will he even be there? has he found something better to do? convenient or political editor christopher hope joins us from westminster and has the answer. >> christopher, will. rishi sunak be in the commons for suella bravermans statement in around half an hour's time ? around half an hour's time? >> look, tom emily, he's a busy man. he's got the country to run. of course he's not going to be there. no, he's got a phone call with a g7. world leaders discussed big stuff, important stuff. israel hamas and the like. the time around like. at the same time around 2:00, be showing on 2:00, which will be showing on gb hear the first gb news, we'll hear the first pubuc gb news, we'll hear the first public statements from suella braverman, who he sacked as home secretary this is called a personal statement. they're very secretary this is called a perscnot statement. they're very secretary this is called a perscnot often nent. they're very secretary this is called a perscnot often granted|ey're very secretary this is called a perscnot often granted by re very secretary this is called a perscnot often granted by the ery rare, not often granted by the speaker of the house of commons, the last one to be granted, in fact, was by sajid javid in july last who boris last year, when guess who boris

johnson minister johnson was? prime minister and at point javid said at that point mrjavid said enough was with that enough was enough with that leader . now enough was enough with that leader. now we don't think that ms braverman will go that. as far as that in her statement, she'll lot about she'll be talking a lot about immigration, echr immigration, a lot about echr the european court of human rights, the uk should rights, whether the uk should partially that partially withdraw from that to get rwanda plan off the get these rwanda plan off the ground . it comes at a very, very ground. it comes at a very, very sensitive for sensitive time for the government this plan , government right now. this plan, this rwanda bill, this bill, the rwanda bill, we're calling it in shorthand, was not discussed at lobby in the cabinet yesterday, we the cabinet yesterday, but we understand should be understand it should be published soon as today or published as soon as today or tomorrow. when that emerges , tomorrow. so when that emerges, a lot of tory mps on the right will over the detail will be poring over the detail to they think it can to see if they think it can actually deliver on the promise of making this rwanda plan work to process this. small boats arrivals in the uk but in arrivals not in the uk but in rwanda of course, the rwanda bail is required bail bill is required because the ruled last the supreme court ruled last month, didn't they, that the current plan was in breach of european human rights law. it's a real test for here mr sunak. can he control command the right 7 can he control command the right ? i can reveal that the common sense group of tory mps is

meeting tonight with the erg. the european research group of tory mps, the so—called awkward squadis tory mps, the so—called awkward squad is holding its third meeting in three days tonight. mps ministers from both mps and ministers from both sides of the government on the left are on left and right are on resignation. where this resignation. watch where this bill lands is absolutely vital to ensure that the pm can have a quiet weekend. >> now i can understand why rishi sunak might find something wrong, more important to go to at that time . but rishi sunak he at that time. but rishi sunak he didn't want to meet with the greek prime minister because it was inconvenient. he now doesn't want to sit through suella braverman's statement because it would also be inconvenient . what would also be inconvenient. what is he running scared ? is he running scared? >> well, to be fair to him , he's >> well, to be fair to him, he's not. i did ask number 10 whether mr sunak could arrange this g7 call to coincide with the moment when ms braverman speaks and they said no. it was arranged by other people. it wasn't a uk request it. and to be fair to him, we when there are no

ministerial statements , often ministerial statements, often these personal statements are heard straight after pmqs, when it it very hard for the pm it makes it very hard for the pm to go anywhere. he's going to sit there and listen in silence while person because while the person speaks because there are two ministerial statements after the prime minister's questions, he's gone for meeting for lunch and he's meeting people. moving on with his people. he's moving on with his day and it'd be probably unfair , day and it'd be probably unfair, i think, to demand that he goes back the to listen back into the chamber to listen to braverman. but when it to suella braverman. but when it happens will dramatic. as happens, it will be dramatic. as i first one since july i say, the first one since july last year, very granted last year, very rarely granted by speaker speaker's office by the speaker speaker's office in they are granted in the commons. they are granted to who quit government to ministers who quit government or government, or leave government, not necessarily resigning. you can be sacked . it's your chance to be sacked. it's your chance to give your and it's heard in give your say and it's heard in complete silence. no one can speak. there's no interventions. it's silence it's heard in respectful silence and the language she uses could be an issue for mr sunak. no one thinks there's going to be a challenge in leadership in the same that johnson was same way that boris johnson was brought geoffrey brought down or even geoffrey howe 1990s. his howe back in the 1990s. his speech michael heseltine speech led to michael heseltine challenging margaret thatcher. an mp has said to me this this

could be her. geoffrey howe moment. her aides , her team are moment. her aides, her team are saying that's not the case. it is about immigration and echr. but i think this will provide a rallying point for the tory right in what will be a really crucial 24 hours for the prime minister to really, really crucial 24 hours. >> it was interesting thinking back to sajid javid's speech, of course, that came after pmqs, a full chamber. it might not be a full chamber. it might not be a full chamber. it might not be a full chamber this afternoon at 2:00, but it might still be significant. we remember back to sajid's speech. i was up there in the press gallery for it. it fell a little bit flat. it didn't feel like it quite rose to the occasion. he's sometimes been criticised as not an orator, but then thinking back to geoffrey howe's speech where he that famous cricketing he gave that famous cricketing metaphor , not that they were all metaphor, not that they were all batting for the same side, but that have found that that the team have found that the been broken before the bats had been broken before the bats had been broken before the match by the team captain in which if you were a betting man, we where do you think this

suella braverman speech will land on the spectrum of these seismic historic speeches from howe to javid . towards javid on howe to javid. towards javid on your spectrum there? >> tom, i don't think it'll be necessarily as full on as howe. i mean. howe essentially that was a coup de grace. that was the moment authority the moment at which authority drained from margaret drained away from margaret thatcher, had thatcher, who by then had been prime for 11 years, of prime minister for 11 years, of course. and with johnson it was the of the end, the beginning of the end, although been signalled although that had been signalled really resignation of really by the resignation of javid also, of course, rishi javid and also, of course, rishi sunak, the prime sunak, who's now the prime minister a few days earlier. and i events train and i think events were in train and the javid's statement wasn't a part of that . i think this is part of that. i think this is more a kind of creed occur from the tory, right, the right field bruised in government. they are no longer really at the top table cabinet since celebrate table of cabinet since celebrate was removed, feel they was removed, they feel they don't know what's going on. they're these groups don't know what's going on. theymeet these groups don't know what's going on. theymeet outside iese groups don't know what's going on. theymeet outside of; groups don't know what's going on. theymeet outside of whips, s that meet outside of whips, outside of the government to work out what to do next. but what they can't really replace

him. no one's thinking is going to be a challenge against sunak. it votes of no it may be that votes of no confidence in. let's have confidence go in. let's have no confidence. go graham confidence. go in to graham brady, the chairman of the 22 committee, it may be that committee, and it may be that number, the of or so number, the number of 50 or so letters is passed and there may be confidence. is be a vote of no confidence. is a way to almost a wake up call for the prime minister. but no one thinks going thinks anyone's going to dethrone this stage. thinks anyone's going to det well, this stage. thinks anyone's going to detwell, we'll this stage. thinks anyone's going to det well, we'll be 1is stage. thinks anyone's going to det well, we'll be watching thinks anyone's going to detwell, we'll be watching on >> well, we'll be watching on this channel when she does stand up commons up in the commons to deliver that resignation will up in the commons to deliver th be �*esignation will up in the commons to deliver thbe moreation will up in the commons to deliver thbe more javid will up in the commons to deliver thbe more javid or will up in the commons to deliver th be more javid or will will up in the commons to deliver thbe more javid or will it will up in the commons to deliver th be more javid or will it be i/ill it be more javid or will it be more? howe we'll find it be more javid or will it be morethank howe we'll find it be more javid or will it be morethank you howe we'll find it be more javid or will it be morethank you very; we'll find it be more javid or will it be morethank you very muchl find it be more javid or will it be morethank you very much indeed. out. thank you very much indeed. christopher political christopher hope, our political editor johnson oh, editor. right. boris johnson oh, sorry. was going to sorry. no, i was just going to say less than minutes to go say less than 15 minutes to go now, suella. now, but to get to suella. >> before let's back in >> but before let's dip back in to johnson . to boris johnson. >> it's going to be what we do to fight it rather than the actual impact of the of the disease. but i was i was increasingly concerned about it. >> you have, in fact, already got given evidence to the inquiry in relation to why you

suggested an earlier stage . suggested an earlier stage. there were comparisons properly to be drawn with swine flu. and you've described the importance to you of not talking the economy down the first line. he doesn't think anything can be done. doesn't think anything can be done . may i just ask you this? done. may i just ask you this? this date, the 3rd of march, comes , of course, after your comes, of course, after your meeting with the civil contingencies secretariat . it contingencies secretariat. it comes after the cobra at which there is some early debate about measures and what can be done at. and if you did say on the 3rd of march to mr cummings, i don't think anything can be done on that course . very significant on that course. very significant light upon what you were being told around that time. >> i don't think i, i can't say exactly what i said to my adviser nor would i necessarily

place too much reliance on his his reporting of what i said. but i think my impression was at that time that that, you know, because of what we've said about borders, because of what we said about the other measures open to us that it i it goes back to the to the questions i was asking. i couldn't see yet the plan. i couldn't see yet the plan. i couldn't see yet the plan. i couldn't see what so the npis were to me and this is probably what imran is getting at in his email. what imran is getting at in his email . pretty what imran is getting at in his email. pretty far what imran is getting at in his email . pretty far fetched . still email. pretty far fetched. still in my imagination. i was. email. pretty far fetched. still in my imagination. i was . i was in my imagination. i was. i was still. i was still gestating. that at a press conference on the 3rd of march. >> you said that we were, as a country, extremely well prepared of course, as it turns out , that

of course, as it turns out, that was not so . but i want to ask was not so. but i want to ask you the weekend before you'd received the draft action plan that contained delayed document , that contained delayed document, which you'd been shown in draft form and in that document there is that assertion we are well prepared and we have plans in place . et cetera. do you think place. et cetera. do you think you told the world that we were well prepared on the third because you had seen it in that action plan, the draft of which you'd been reading over the weekend? >> yes. this is the second. this is the weekend of the 28th. february 1st of 20. was it a leap year? was there a 29th? >> i really don't know, mr johnson.i >> i really don't know, mr johnson. i can't assist you with that. >> anyway . it's certainly true >> anyway. it's certainly true that i was the general. the general reassurances i was getting were that we were well,

we were well prepared. so. so the scales have not yet fallen in about , for instance, test and in about, for instance, test and trace . trace. >> indeed. and you you shook hands with patients at the royal free hospital on the 1st of march. you know, of course you were later criticised for that . were later criticised for that. may we take it that you hadn't seen or at least you hadn't been advised of the content of the spi—b paper of around that time. in fact, the paper came later, the 3rd of march, but advice was given generally before that , given generally before that, advising against greeting such as shaking hands. did you know ? as shaking hands. did you know? >> i didn't. but i do think that it was i shouldn't have i shouldn't have done that in retrospect. and i should have i should have been more precautious tionary, but but i wanted i wanted to be encouraging to people and so i think it's on that day that i go to colindale . to the to phe and

to colindale. to the to phe and although i've been told this is my in my statement, although i've been told that we have a fantastic belt and braces system, i was i was a little bit concerned about that. i had a feeling that perhaps they weren't really as across the situation as as i'd been led to believe . believe. >> mr hancock gave evidence to the effect that he was told on the effect that he was told on the 18th of february by public health england that the test system was unsustainable , that system was unsustainable, that it wouldn't be able to operate beyond the handful of first few hundred cases or first few hundred cases or first few hundred cases. did you know that when visited colindale? when you visited colindale? >> and in fact, i think >> no. and in fact, i think i gave a clip to the to the media, which i gave some figure for the number of daily tests that we were. i believed then that we were. i believed then that we were doing . and i do remember were doing. and i do remember chris being a cmo , being quite

chris being a cmo, being quite sounding confident, at least to me, about the number of tests we were capable of, of doing at around that time . i no, i can't around that time. i no, i can't remember the exact date. >> cobra on the 4th of march you chaired that you were presented with a paper potential impact of behavioural and social interventions. 56158 it's illustrative of, of what you were being told at the time. mr johnson because it makes plain that behavioural and social interventions can be applied as part of an hmg response , part of an hmg response, including the expected impact . including the expected impact. the note does not cover economic , operational or policy considerations . sage has not considerations. sage has not provided a recommendation of which interventions or package of interventions. the government may choose to apply . so the may choose to apply. so the first question is did you understand ? and that sage was understand? and that sage was

never going to be telling you? mr johnson, you you must do this . it could only ever provide advice about the nature of the intervention and the consequences and the risks and so on. it could never tell you what to do or what you had to consider doing. that's right. >> i mean, sage is sage is like a it's a doctor patient relationship. the doctor can't order you to do things. the doctor is not responsible for , doctor is not responsible for, for what you do. the doctor says if you do this, then that if you do, if you fail to do it, then. then the other and that's that's basically how it works. and should work. >> was the chief medical officer around that time the 4th of march telling you however you must now start consider ing these behavioural and social interventions . and of course the interventions. and of course the first one you'll recall is

imposed on the 12th of march. yes, we don't know. when you first started to so as i said before the break, actually, we had the cmo and i had had a heart to heart about what? >> about non—pharmacy interventions, about a lot of aspects , particularly from a aspects, particularly from a pubuc aspects, particularly from a public health point of view. the costs. and he and he really he really stressed that . so we had really stressed that. so we had thought about it and i could see that that was the direction in which things were starting to go . and it's only it's only a few days later when i actually tell the public, i think for the first time, i think on the i think it's the ninth or thereabouts, we're going to have to start ramping. we're going have to start restricting social contact . contact. >> and that answers perhaps my next question, which is why was

there a delay between the first debate between you and the chief medical officer about the possible imposition of these behavioural and social interventions and the 12th of march, when the first really significant intervention was imposed ? imposed? >> i think there we have to go back to the earlier conversation that we had about mindset, timeliness . that we had about mindset, timeliness. no, that we had about mindset, timeliness . no, no, no, not not timeliness. no, no, no, not not timeliness. no, no, no, not not time set, but mind going early. about about going early, about about the issues that were raised by going hard , going raised by going hard, going early, which later became the mantra but which . in in march . mantra but which. in in march. the problem was that if you so i was told repeatedly by both csa and cmo you you risked bounce back and behavioural fatigue and yet more behavioural fatigue as a consequence of bounce back.

>> there's a graph on page two of this document which shows what the waves that's to say the transmission of the virus would be likely to be depending on whether or not there was mitigation versus say, intervention or no mitigation or moderate moderate intervention . moderate moderate intervention. an and you can see the different colours of the of the of the lines . mrjohnson depending lines. mrjohnson depending whether or not they were very stringent or less stringent. so it was plain to you, wasn't it, that if no steps were taken, there would be a massive first wave? that's the black wave. but if it was reduced to some extent, there would be moderate transmission, the blue wave, and then a more severe intervention would be would be the high transmission reduction . but to transmission reduction. but to make absolutely plain, if we look at page five, there was at this stage on the 4th of march, no no mention of a lockdown as such. there were a range of

potential interventions from stopping large events , closure stopping large events, closure of schools, home isolation , of schools, home isolation, whole household isolation, social distancing, impact . we social distancing, impact. we can see there on the right all these things. but no lockdown. no. >> and that's quite right . and >> and that's quite right. and so this is the sort of the double hump graph that really became very influential in all our thinking and indeed is what i'm afraid, tragically is more or less what what happened. but but the measures that we could take to depress the first curve of first wave were all very much couched in the with caveats about timeliness and not going going at the right moment. >> and it's right to say, isn't it, that the wording that the chief medical officer used with you and spoke in cobra on the

2nd of march must not be implemented too early was with reference to interventions , plural? >> yes. and if i if i could offer a suggest as to what was what was really going on, i think that this is clear. we simply didn't realise how fast the disease was spreading and if you remember, the predictions were that the peak was going to come in mid—may or june. i think come in mid—may orjune. i think , and it was really well in advance of that. >> if we go back to page two and the graph . you can see that it's the graph. you can see that it's put there in terms of spring, summer and autumn. but there was no suggestion on that graph that the peak of the black unmitigated wave would would be the march or the the end of march or the beginning april . and that's beginning of april. and that's correct. speeding up now because we're coming now to the final decisions in march . whatsapp

decisions in march. whatsapp messages from mr hancock or rather his whatsapp group, the whatsapp group. he shared with mr cummings and mr slack suggests that around this time on the 5th of march, they debate telling you to stop saying business as usual. do you recall that debate with them? i do not, and nor do i even remember saying that. >> but using the phrase but. i think what i might have said is until such time as we tell you to do x, y, z, it's business as usual. but i don't i don't remember that debate you've described the genesis of the herd immunity debate may i just please show you a whatsapp entry or . whatsapp please show you a whatsapp entry or. whatsapp communication from the 14th of march? >> so running forward a bit to the weekend, of which there was a distinct change in strategy. yeah. we could just look at

yeah. if we could just look at 14 the 14th of march . seven 14 the 14th of march. seven 17:09 am. so i think it's page three of 48399 . we can . see i'm three of 48399. we can. see i'm not sure that's the correct document. 483999 yes, it is. thank you very much . so just to thank you very much. so just to put it in its context , thank you very much. so just to put it in its context, mr johnson, over the weekend , of johnson, over the weekend, of which there was a change in strategy , there were there were strategy, there were there were repeated conversations between you all. of course , but you you all. of course, but you raised that this point, you all. of course, but you raised that this point , the raised that this point, the point of . the impact of a herd point of. the impact of a herd immunity debate at and you make the point further down the page. i think it's . at six 4939 yes.

i think it's. at six 4939 yes. yes. here's the problem with the herd immunity argument. so just very shortly , you've described very shortly, you've described to the inquiry how the herd immunity debate arose at the beginning of march the 5th of march. it appeared , was that you march. it appeared, was that you were still debating or your advisers and you were still debating the full meaning of and the nature and the extent of the herd immunity debate as late as the 14th of march, it appears to have trundled on as a as a bone of contention for weeks . of contention for weeks. >> can i think i can understand what i mean. i'm looking at this for the first time. but let me let me try to explain what i think this is. let me try to explain what i think this is . this is about think this is. this is about what happened on the 12th of the 12th of march was that there was a press conference in which we were trying to deal with . the were trying to deal with. the i was i had to level with the pubuc was i had to level with the public and say, i'm afraid a

large number of people are going to lose their loved ones before their time. and it was a pretty grim press conference. and in in that discussion, we were asked about how the way through . and about how the way through. and i think patrick said the idea was to flatten the curve, suppress the virus with some measure of herd immunity by september being i think a good outcome was what he said . and . i think he also he said. and. i think he also said something to the effect of it might not . be you needed to it might not. be you needed to suppress, suppress the curve, but not it might not be necessary to stop everybody or even desirable to stop everybody getting the getting the virus because, again , then you might because, again, then you might want some, i think some measure of herd immunity. anyway, that

was the moment when people all pficked was the moment when people all pricked up their ears and say , pricked up their ears and say, are they trying to allow this thing to just pass through the population unchecked and with a view to establishing herd immunity, which was not what we wanted, not what patrick meant. and we had to do quite a lot of work to clear it up because what we asked our objective was to protect the nhs and save life and to save lives by protecting the nhs. that was our objective. our strategy b was to suppress the curve and to keep the r below one as much as we could . below one as much as we could. we're going to use everything we could to do that herd immunity was going to be, we hoped it a by—product of that campaign , by—product of that campaign, which might be very long and very difficult at the same time in cobra on the 9th of march, in sage, on the 12th of march, in

cobra, on the 12th of march, and in an interview that the chief medical officer gave to the press on the 13th, there were repeated references to the need to of the virus to delay the peak of the virus as opposed to suppressing it in tali because of the risk of an uncoiled spring of it bouncing back the second wave and if we could just have that document back for a399 and said . 730 9:42 a.m. >> please the 14th of march probably page three of that document 48399 it appears that this debate about herd immunity and the debate about on cold spfing and the debate about on cold spring had caused you considerable concern because at seven 3942, you say that's why i was concerned when some of the team were suggesting last week that we actively need a proportion the population to proportion of the population to be then you say be infected. and then you say civil need grasp. be infected. and then you say civil did need grasp.

be infected. and then you say civil did you1eed grasp. be infected. and then you say civil did you mean grasp. be infected. and then you say civil did you mean by'asp. be infected. and then you say civil did you mean by that ? what did you mean by that? >> so can't say exactly what civil servants i was thinking of in that . in that context, in that. in that context, i think probably what i mean is, look , we've set a hare running look, we've set a hare running by mistake. i think patrick really did a huge job to try to clear it up. we all we all need to, to set the public's mind at rest and explain what we're doing. it's to protect the nhs and save lives. and that's that's the priority. >> further down the page 1049 15in fact, it's the 15th of march. page six of this document , you can be seen to be saying, given what's happened in italy , given what's happened in italy, we simply have no time. yeah. and we can see that . the 15th and we can see that. the 15th 1049 15 there we are two thirds of the way down the page, 15th of the way down the page, 15th of march. we have no time. we've jumped forward but that of course, is the sunday, the 15th

of march in the middle of all the debates that you were having with your advisors. all right. just to finish off some other points, which you've addressed in relation to behavioural fatigue and you being told that the timing of implementations , the timing of implementations, the timing of implementations, the timing of implementations, the timing of implementation of interventions was vital. the evidence before the inquiry shows that the sage meeting on the 13th of march on the friday, you weren't of course, an attendee at sage. no. was told. and the minutes of the sage meeting make this plain difficult . 80 maintaining difficult. 80 maintaining behaviours should not be taken as a reason to delay implementation . ben warner, your implementation. ben warner, your advisor , was present at that advisor, was present at that meeting and he was reporting back to number 10 on were you told that in contrast to what you've been told about the need for timing and behavioural fatigue and so on, sage was in

fact saying by the 13th, don't take that as a reason to delay implementation . implementation. >> well , in effect, yes, implementation. >> well, in effect, yes, in implementation. >> well , in effect, yes, in the >> well, in effect, yes, in the sense that that was the and i wasn't told that particular detail about it . behavioural detail about it. behavioural fatigue not being a reason to delay the implementation. but what i was told was that we had a new data . we were at least. a new data. we were at least. 5 to 7 days further on, possibly more in the curve than we thought we were, and that the margin of manoeuvre that sage had seemed to think we had and was offering to us on the 12th, if you remember, they they say then you know, there are four things you can you can do self—isolation for seven days. if you've got any kind of

symptoms though even that they say we could postpone till the till the monday, the 16th. then there's household isolation of a 14 for 14 days. then there's a couple more measures , advice, couple more measures, advice, advice for the elderly, for the for the vulnerable and then for those over 70 and those those last three, they they say, can actually be put . off for1 last three, they they say, can actually be put . off for 1 to actually be put. off for 1 to 3 weeks on the on the 12th. then on the 13th, that's the key moment really , because that's moment really, because that's when i get called back on the friday evening . i come back on friday evening. i come back on the first thing in the morning and you know, the rest . and you know, the rest. >> on the 12th of march, there was a cobra meeting which you . was a cobra meeting which you. chaired five six, 209. and there is at page six a graph.

chaired five six, 209. and there is at page six a graph . yeah is at page six a graph. yeah >> and i remember looking at this page is entitled what would the effect be on the nhs of interventions ? interventions? >> this is this is what date is this again. >> this is this is the 12th of march. so it's the thursday now on the right hand side you can see graph , no measures. so see graph, no measures. so that's to say no interventions and on the bottom right hand corner graph be measures one and two implemented one and two were seven day isolation and number two was household isolation . if two was household isolation. if we could scroll back out again, please, in both graphs, the red line, friable beds and the black line, friable beds and the black line total nhs beds make plain that whatever you do, unmitigated or mitigated through measures one and two the nhs will be massively overwhelmed . will be massively overwhelmed. yes. what did you make of that? >> i was bewildered, to be honest. i remember! remember honest. i remember i remember looking at that graph and

thinking in either case, we are facing . a an absolutely facing. a an absolutely intolerable situation . and i. intolerable situation. and i. i but although i clocked it, i, i thought, well , there must be thought, well, there must be a reason why we're not being told to, to go , go urgently. maybe to, to go, go urgently. maybe that reason is all the things that reason is all the things that we've , we've discussed so that we've, we've discussed so i have to admit and i think i say in my statement that i think at this point there is a certain amount of incoherence in our thinking because that graph makes it clear that things are

going wrong and that is cleared up the following day. >> you didn't yourself ask , >> you didn't yourself ask, firstly, what can be done to bfing firstly, what can be done to bring now this has been perhaps a very pivotal moment in boris johnson's evidence to the inquiry. >> to recap, we're looking at that period at the beginning of march 2020. boris johnson has been shown graphs showing that the nhs may well collapse . but the nhs may well collapse. but at this stage sage , the advisory at this stage sage, the advisory scientific group, has not even come up with the word lockdown. theidea come up with the word lockdown. the idea that people would be told to stay in their homes and not do any social interaction at all seems so alien to the political leaders and even to the scientists at this stage that they're sitting there and to use boris johnson's word, bewildered, not quite knowing

what to do. a fascinating insight into those early days in march. >> yes. and as we were talking to pip johnson, gb news presenter earlier , there was a presenter earlier, there was a bit of a crackle in boris johnson's voice a little earlier when he was talking about those first couple of months when he was looking at italy and looking at the hospitals being packed out and overflowing with patients agents and the worry and the anxiety around what to do here. but it's very interesting, that point on lockdown. lockdown wasn't in our lexicon at that stage. so obviously, with hindsight , very obviously, with hindsight, very interesting. lots of you getting interesting. lots of you getting in touch on inquiry. not so in touch on this inquiry. not so many of you impressed with what's going on. i've seen the word witchhunt used in our inbox quite a few times. you're not sure whether the uk there, the lawyer is asking the right questions. interesting to and has been pointed out by some of you at home is that boris johnson is staying away from name calling. he's staying away from point scoring so far,

taking responsibility for decisions that were made . i decisions that were made. i think it's fair to say that and so many other people who've appeared before this inquiry have tried put their have tried to put their colleagues in it to say, oh, it was all matt hancock's fault or it was all dominic cummings fault, or it was all of fault, or it was all because of sweary whatever. fault, or it was all because of swe boris whatever. fault, or it was all because of swe boris johnson whatever. fault, or it was all because of swe boris johnson hasn't atever. fault, or it was all because of swe boris johnson hasn't doner. fault, or it was all because of sweboris johnson hasn't done any >> boris johnson hasn't done any of that today. he said it was an incredibly stressful environment . looking at scenes . you're looking at scenes around world in china, which around the world in china, which has started seeing people's windows and italy, which of course had seen hospitals overflowing . it must have been overflowing. it must have been incredibly stressful time there . incredibly stressful time there. at the heart of government, not really knowing what to do because we'd never entered a situation where we told people to stay inside their own homes ever before . ever before. >> yeah, absolutely. absolutely. and it's interesting he did use that. and it's interesting he did use that . an historical comparison that. an historical comparison to thatcher earlier in the day, earlier in the inquiry, when he was asked about whatsapp messages, whether they were the right kind of language was being used. said, well, back, back

used. he said, well, back, back in thatcher's day, he imagined if there if they had whatsapp, there would fruity would have been some fruity language would have been some fruity lan absolutely. and i find it >> absolutely. and i find it very difficult listening to some labour politicians who try and take the high ground, try and say, oh, it's so awful . all say, oh, it's so awful. all these awful advisers using swear words and i'm just sitting there thinking, have you read alastair campbell's diaries ? have you campbell's diaries? have you heard anything about how about how downing street worked under tony blair or under gordon brown , who's alleged to have thrown things across the room? i mean, it's a high pressure, high stress environment for prime minister of any party. yes. >> sometimes i throw things at you. don't. i'm joking. i only metaphoric inquiry. the metaphoric inquiry. back to the inquiry on the ninth. >> so several days before that, they were going to have to restrict social contact and on the 12th i had given them . a the 12th i had given them. a i think a pretty powerful . and in

think a pretty powerful. and in many ways frightening message about what was going to happen. but and the excuse me, the effect . so sorry. forgive me. effect. so sorry. forgive me. the effect of that. i think did did show up in people's behaviour . did show up in people's behaviour. yeah. >> so that we are clear . the >> so that we are clear. the cheltenham festival continued the week of the 10th. there was a atletico madrid match. yes and mass gatherings, sporting events were not. in fact shut until the following week. >> yes. and as a with hindsight it as a symbol of the of the government's earnestness rather than just sort as a, you know , a than just sort as a, you know, a being guided by the science , we being guided by the science, we should perhaps have done that. and i agree with you . and i agree with you. >> and no doubt that was in accordance with your own libertarian instincts. >> well , at every stage i

libertarian instincts. >> well, at every stage i was weighing the massive costs of what we were doing to people's psyche , to people's life psyche, to people's life chances, to . to when you talk chances, to. to when you talk about an economy , we you're about an economy, we you're talking about people in all walks of life who suddenly can't get to do the thing that they need to do to earn a living and it's a it's a what we were obuged it's a it's a what we were obliged to do was very, very destructive . for a lot of people destructive. for a lot of people who at least able to bear the costs and least able to manage it . it. >> over the weekend, the 13th, 14th of march, there was what has been described by a variety of witnesses as that change in

strategy and it matters not for these purposes. mrjohnson whether it was an acceleration of the existing plan, a change in strategy a redirection, in strategy or a redirection, there was on any view, a significant . change it's there was on any view, a significant. change it's plain from the evidence. but but obviously the ultimate decision is from a lady that there were a number of individuals who were pushing for change. mr cummings with his colleagues, ben and mark warner and also helen macnamara and imran shafi , all macnamara and imran shafi, all met on the friday night and with mr cummings's whiteboard , they mr cummings's whiteboard, they worked out that immediate , much worked out that immediate, much more stringent measures were required to prevent the nhs from from being overwhelmed during the course of that week. the days before that weekend of the 14th and 15th of march. it's obvious from data being provided

to number 10, we've seen part of it in that memo to sage showed the likely impact on the nhs . the likely impact on the nhs. why why wasn't the lead government department, the dhsc responsible for public health, pushing you harder during that week to introduce the more stringent changes? why why do you think that department, it appears from the evidence, was still trying to go for the squash, the sombrero part mitigation on herd immunity route as opposed to recognising we must have suppression . we've we must have suppression. we've got to stop this now before it's too late. i think probably so . too late. i think probably so. >> my interpretation, my memory of it is, is slightly is slightly different from , from slightly different from, from from that account or maybe might be the same, but, but what i felt happened was that we were

we were in a state now where we knew we had a massive problem. we knew we were probably going to have to act in ways that we didn't really hadn't bargained for and didn't and were still being developed . at we still being developed. at we still thought we had a bit of time, but not very much. probably and that was what the scientific guidance seemed to say. that was what the scientific guidance seemed to say . and if guidance seemed to say. and if you look at those those that long paper by sage on the on the 12th, you can you can see that i've quoted a bit of it. my impression and i may be wrong about this, but my impression was that on the 13th, the radical change that you you refer to is really one about the timeliness thing. and what i think sage saw, and this is what was conveyed to me by the cmo and csa, was that the virus was now spreading much more rapidly in the uk than they had bargained for, and therefore we

had to accelerate it. and so i think that it was . a confluence think that it was. a confluence of opinion . on but, but the of opinion. on but, but the people i talk to on the on the saturday morning were the people you would expect it was chris patrick imran stew , my other patrick imran stew, my other advisers . so i wouldn't want to advisers. so i wouldn't want to i wouldn't want . to allow the i wouldn't want. to allow the inquiry to just to run away with the idea that it all would have sailed on had it not been for the intervention of number 10. i think that sage themselves on the 13th had had seen very

seriously and very clearly see that something needed to be done that something needed to be done that was that was at any rate was my impression that until saturday, the 14th of march, when mr cummings presented his whiteboard in the middle of no numerous other meetings and talked about plan b until till that point, no one in the dhsc has said we're off the mark. >> we've gone wrong. we've got to accelerate and impose more stringent measures. today >> my impression is that at the critical moment, it was indeed, as you say , that that sage as you say, that that sage meeting when i think that a number of scientists, epidemiologists look at looked at the data and said we are we are i'm afraid we're off the pace here. and i think that was what happened in is evidence to this inquiry. >> mr hancock said that on that friday the 13th of march, he called you to tell you that there needed to an immediate there needed to be an immediate lockdown. recall that lockdown. do you recall that call not? i i'm afraid i

call or not? i i'm afraid i don't with it's been a long time. in his witness statement, mr cummings says at page 49, dufing mr cummings says at page 49, during the course of the saturday, quote, the prime minister asked reasonable questions, including why aren't hancock whitty vallance telling me this ? do you recall that me this? do you recall that discussion ? discussion? >> i remember them being there, but i might be. >> there was a meeting. well, there were there were four meetings. there was a meeting with sedwill, vallance whitty, then a meeting with cummings, reynolds, shaffi , mr whitty and reynolds, shaffi, mr whitty and a of others . and then a host of others. and then a follow up meeting your self with mr cummings and the warners. then a follow up meeting then a second follow up meeting and then another meeting. you had meetings that day. had a lot of meetings that day. yeah one of them. mr cummings, says you turn to him and said, why aren't hancock whitty vallance telling me this? do you recall that debate? >> i think i don't recall it, but what certainly possible is

that i was alluding to the i was i was looking with no dis may at what was happening, dismay about what was happening, dismay about what we were going to have to do. and reflecting that this was not the message i i'm conjecturing this is not the message that i've been having from them in the past few days. you don't recall? i don't recall saying that . saying that. >> right. let's let's have a >> all right. let's let's have a quick look at the one of the papers, the briefing on the covid response that was put before you on the saturday 183889. >> this is the document which sets out the current plan on and the proposed alternative plan on briefing on covid 19 response. there's a variant on the graph that you saw before, but yes, i saw the page current plan . if saw the page current plan. if you could scroll back out again, we can see current plan, an

alternative plan at the bottom of the page and in summary, is this correct? mr johnson throughout that weekend of the 14th and 15th of march, there were multiple meetings as a variety of different people pushed for different speeds of intervention . an we can see from intervention. an we can see from the whatsapps that some people said go now. other people said we've got to move fast. but there was in any event, a very real understanding that more had to be done, more stringent measures had to be imposed and cobra would have to consider all that on the monday when it next convened. >> yes . >> yes. >> yes. >> so my impression was that what ben warner and others were were doing and i don't know about the differences in in in views, but but what they were doing was trying to take the

sage meeting of the previous day and really give to me the logical consequences of that. >> but only you could decide the strategies and you decided, did you not by the sunday night when you not by the sunday night when you called sir patrick vallance and sir chris whitty to another meeting and you decided that the alternative plan would have to be followed . and you gave, as be followed. and you gave, as we'll see in a moment, a number of directions as to what needed to be done . to be done. >> yes, i mean, it became it was it was absolute clear by the saturday that we had to act mean. we were out of time . the mean. we were out of time. the inquiry needs to ask you this, to what extent did you appreciate by the sunday night that a lockdown decision , a stay that a lockdown decision, a stay at home mandatory order was inevitable?

>> it obviously wasn't imposed until monday, the 23rd of march. and during the course of the week, there were a great deal, many complex , extremely complex many complex, extremely complex operational issues to circumnavigate a shielding system having to be built effectively from scratch . effectively from scratch. getting ahold of data from the nhs . as we can see, there were nhs. as we can see, there were real issues about the preparedness of the cabinet office around that time. mr cummings whatsapps that refer to of being terrifying . no plans of being terrifying. no plans totally behind the piece was it a question? a of you deciding that there had to be a lockdown, but that time would be needed to put it into place or or b you would start the arrangements which could accommodate a lockdown, but that that decision wouldn't then be taken for another week. >> i think that looking at the graphs . i was reconciled

>> i think that looking at the graphs. i was reconciled or getting increasingly reconciled to the fact that we were going to the fact that we were going to have to do a huge amount more to have to do a huge amount more to suppress the virus. and i, i, you know , just to get back to an you know, just to get back to an earlier point, this was not something we'd done for a country had been through. it was it was hard to get one's one's head around the legal complications were enormous . how complications were enormous. how to do it. as you rightly say, mr keith, that all that needed to be to be worked through. we had started the bill along a long time ago , 5th of february we time ago, 5th of february we start the connor ansell . but start the connor ansell. but i think my state of mind then is, is i'm now i'm now more or less in virus fighting mode. i'm thinking i'm thinking we've we this is . you know, there's this is. you know, there's absolutely nothing we've got to throw we've got to we've got to sort this out. and so there's then a series of things that we

do leading up to the to the 23rd. but you weren't entirely in virus fighting mood. >> if we look at 273872 , page >> if we look at 273872, page 55, we can see part of the seemingly perennial debate in your own mind as to what should be done in. mr cummings asks the lee cain if you could just scroll into that screenshot . scroll into that screenshot. getting here is melting down. richard saying bond markets may not fund our dirties back to jaws mode . i've literally said jaws mode. i've literally said the same thing ten times and he still won't absorb it. i'm exhausted talking to him. i've had to sit for two hours just to stop him saying stupid things . stop him saying stupid things. mr johnson , you would be inhuman

mr johnson, you would be inhuman , perhaps if you hadn't in that terrible week , oscillated and terrible week, oscillated and backed and veered in your own mind about what had to be done . mind about what had to be done. but is it fair to say that you made your doubts and your oscillation clear to those around you? >> i think it was my job to address all the consequences of what we were doing and to test out the policy , which i was . as out the policy, which i was. as you can see, determined that we deliver and get on and do . and deliver and get on and do. and it was even though it was a completely novel policy. absolutely dramatic thing to do . absolutely dramatic thing to do. i what what he's referring to here is a conversation with the chancellor where i'm i'm talking about the downsides. i'm talking about the downsides. i'm talking about the downsides. i'm talking about the costs and how negligent it would have been. totally negligent, not to have had such a conversation, not to have gone through with the with .

have gone through with the with. the treasury, the economic ramifications of what i was proposing to do. and i need to i need to do that. it didn't it didn't in any way. just i think the key thing is it didn't in any way stop us or divert us from the crescendo of actions that we took. >> forgive me the suggestion is not being made here that it you have reached a view on public health grounds, took yourself off to speak to the treasury and see what arguments needed to be made properly on behalf of the economic consequences that would ensue from a lockdown. it is that your own decision making, your own judgement backed and veered , and that, by implication veered, and that, by implication in this is a poor example of leadership function. you

couldn't make up your own mind as to what should be done. >> on the contrary, i've made up my mind. we are getting on and doing it . we are not being doing it. we are not being diverted. i'm i've got the chancellor of the exchequer with me saying that there's a risk to the uk bond markets and our ability to raise sovereign debt . ability to raise sovereign debt. this matters massively to people in this country. it matters to the livelihoods of people up and down the land . i have to go down the land. i have to go through the arguments and that is what i was doing. >> 146636. page 92 of your own private secretary, imran shafi, recorded in his notebook that on thursday, the 19th of march, the same day , in fact, as these same day, in fact, as these those communiques , as you said, those communiques, as you said, we're killing the patient to tackle the tumour. large people who will die . why are we

who will die. why are we destroying everything for people who will die anyway soon? bed blockers is that not indicative of a absence of consistent position by you and a clear decision that on the basis of the scientific advice that you had received, these stringent interventions were necessary? >> no, it's no, it's an indication of the cruelty of the choice that we faced and the appalling balancing act that i had to do throughout the pandemic. and in . order to what pandemic. and in. order to what if i indeed , i said something if i indeed, i said something like that, what i was saying, which is the truth, which is that in order to drive down the virus , to stamp out the virus, virus, to stamp out the virus, you you have to do things that are going to be very damaging in all sorts of other ways, perhaps

it's not it wasn't design to be a publicly broadcast . but it's not it wasn't design to be a publicly broadcast. but i was trying to i was trying to find a way crisply to summarise what i saw as part of the part of the problem . and saw as part of the part of the problem .and i needed people . problem. and i needed people. all to. and i think, by the way, that what i hope the inquiry will be able to do, i needed people to be able to do a faster reckoning of the benefits, the impacts of the of the npis and the costs at the same time. as for the reference to so—called bed blockers that that that is i assume this is this is the 19th

of march is it. yes. and well we've we've only a couple of days previous nicely decided . to days previous nicely decided. to do the march discharge strategy and the issue there is that we're facing a crisis. we only have about 100,000 beds in the nhs and in the acute sector and plainly sadly many of those were delayed discharge patients. and we needed to sort that out to other issues in relation to the thursday and the friday on the 19th of march, that thursday you had a meeting with the newspaper proprietor . proprietor. >> cummings has suggested >> mr cummings has suggested that meeting, which that that meeting, which appeared in your diary, is a personal social matter, was not perhaps the best use of your time in the middle of this crisis. >> well, i can't remember exactly what happened that exactly what happened in that meeting. very brief meeting. it was a very brief meeting. it was a very brief meeting. . the newspaper meeting. mr. the newspaper proprietor in question doubtless

wanted to know about what was happening to london and why and where he owned and indeed the whole country. and wanted to be informed . and i wanted him to be informed. and i wanted him to be supportive . supportive. >> so was the meeting to do with covid? was it covid related? mr johnson i can't remember, but i'm absolutely certain it must have been on that thursday and friday. there was then debate also, wasn't there, about whether or not, in light of the figures showing that the nhs in london would be overwhelmed sooner , there might have to be a sooner, there might have to be a lockdown for london first before the rest of the country. but that debate resolved itself , that debate resolved itself, didn't it, when it became apparent that there was little point in locking london down if the rest of the country was going to be locked down just a matter of days thereafter? >> yeah, that's exactly right. all right . all right. >> the final weekend of the 21st, 22nd of march, sir chris whitty produced a paper dated

the 22nd of march. in fact called coronavirus summary of strategic and tactical approach to the epidemic. and that was presented to you at the second of a covid 19 strategy meeting on the 22nd. the lockdown was, of course, ordered . on the 23rd of course, ordered. on the 23rd following a meeting of the cobra and a strategy ministerial group meeting . the material i put meeting. the material i put before you, mr johnson, over that weekend shows that whilst there were positive, some positive trends , the level of positive trends, the level of compliance by the population in relation to the measures which had previously been imposed on the 16 and 20th march, failed to reach the necessary 75% required to have some degree of certainty that the r number could be brought below one. is that a

fair summary? >> yeah, that's that's completely right. and i remember i think patrick making some point, making points about there being too much social mixing in in parks and so on. now obviously the schools had been shut from the 20th. >> you had directed the closure of non—essential retail and leisure outlets and everything else. on friday, the 20th. yes a few days before on the 16th, you'd had the first set of interventions . why on that interventions. why on that monday did you not wait to see whether or not the measures from the previous week, which had of course, been imposed in good faith . and specifically designed faith. and specifically designed to bring the r below one, which was your overriding strategy? might work? why didn't you wait to see whether or not those measures would , over the course

measures would, over the course of that week start to bring our down below one as you had fervently hoped and properly believed they would when you impose them the week before? >> i think that by this stage . >> i think that by this stage. the for the simple reason the scientific advice was was was starting to become much more precautionary and i think that the i, i, i sensed from what i was being told about the effectiveness of the previous messages is that we had to do more and looking at the shape of the curves that i had seen, i thought that we we'd run out of we'd run out of wiggle room and i thought we had to . do what we could. >> there was no hard data, of

course , as to when the nhs would course, as to when the nhs would be overwhelmed . you are not in be overwhelmed. you are not in the position of being able to ever to being given hard data. so when that would be because you were in the context of a epidemiological exponen social curve. >> and nor was it you could not know how exactly how many additional deaths would be spared if you took the measures on the 23rd of march as opposed to waiting to see whether the measures from the 20th would work. >> you just weren't in that territory and that being so, why . why didn't you wait to see whether or not the previous measures should be allowed to work? you say looking at the shape of the curves, i thought we'd run out of wriggle room. i sensed more needed to be done . sensed more needed to be done. that was a very , very . and this

that was a very, very. and this is the suggestion to you , a very is the suggestion to you, a very uncertain foundation upon which to order the ultimate sanction, the mandatory stay at home order. >> i accept that . i think that. >> i accept that. i think that. and i'm troubled by the decisions that . i took for all decisions that. i took for all sorts of reasons. and none of them, as we said at the beginning , them, as we said at the beginning, were were easy. i've been , you know, the government been, you know, the government clearly from some quarters gets criticised for going ahead with a lockdown. and as we were discussing earlier, the very word lockdown doesn't really appearin word lockdown doesn't really appear in government vocabulary until until the 14th. but we did it completely on the on the 23rd. i think it was really a

measure of . my anxiety about the measure of. my anxiety about the about the curve. it just it seemed to me that . the i no seemed to me that. the i no longer had the luxury of waiting . i just it was over. we had. to the what i was hearing from the from the scientists, the my sense that probably they were right to be doubtful about the efficacy of the of the measures. i had a hunch that that might be that might be correct. i couldn't know . i thought we couldn't know. i thought we couldn't know. i thought we could know. i thought we could we were out of time and we had to do everything that we could. and so that's why we went to you know, we closed schools on the on the friday we closed non—essential retail. and then we do the stay at home on on the

monday . monday. >> but on the friday when you close the schools and you shut the retail , you weren't at that the retail, you weren't at that stage you hadn't at that stage already determined that there would be a lockdown on the monday that decision was only made in light of the information over the weekend about levels of compliance . compliance. >> that . that's correct, >> i think that. that's correct, isn't it? i think that's that's that's probably true. but i think that . my general sense of think that. my general sense of where we were likely to be going had had had changed. and i and i thought that we were going to have to do whatever it took five, 6213. >> page four. >> page four. >> well , there we have it. the >> well, there we have it. the former prime minister, boris johnson, saying the moment at which he decided that he would have to do whatever it took his words . words. >> yes. he also spoke about the

balancing act, >> yes. he also spoke about the balancing act , the terrible balancing act, the terrible balance, the appalling balance act that he had to go through out the pandemic , making these out the pandemic, making these decision ins life and death decisions for the entire nation and how difficult it was to decide to lock down the country and to implement these non—pharmaceutical interventions and social distancing and the like. also spoke a little bit about there was talk initially about there was talk initially about locking down only the capital and then that was quite quickly. well events took over. >> i remember writing a story at the time we got a little leak out of government and we did. we ran with london lockdown and everyone was talking it everyone was talking about it for days . and i for a couple of days. and i think the conversation at that time was , well, try and time was, well, if they try and lock london, everyone will lock down london, everyone will just leave and will just leave and that will spread the disease. true, the disease. but it is true, everyone would depart. everyone would just depart. >> we saw that in >> like i think we saw that in france, people moving out france, italy, people moving out of the capital cities, but also france, italy, people moving out of did capital cities, but also france, italy, people moving out of did saytal cities, but also france, italy, people moving out

of did say thatities, but also france, italy, people moving out of did say that hes, but also france, italy, people moving out of did say that he suggested he did say that he suggested that perhaps people could have been quicker with their cost benefit analysis. yes. >> and i think this was a very interesting point. the inquiry lawyer, hugo keith kc, raised a piece of paper, a scrap of note paper that i think has become fairly famous in the course of this inquiry where it is alleged that boris johnson said something along the lines of why are we shutting down our country? why are we destroying our economy to save the lives of people who will die anyway? now, bofis people who will die anyway? now, boris johnson didn't not say that those were his exact words. no, but what he did say was if he said something along those lines , what he was trying to do lines, what he was trying to do was to find a way to summarise crisply what he saw was part of the problem. this this horrible balancing act restored , balancing act restored, affecting people's liberties on the one side and hope trying to avoid overwhelm ing the nhs on

the other side . the other side. >> but it does give that the impression that those at the top of government, including boris johnson himself, didn't know what to do , didn't know what the what to do, didn't know what the right answer at the right time was . some people will have was. some people will have sympathy with that. with the ever changing situation that the government was faced with, others will see this as mistakes being made that the government acted too soon, or indeed those on the lockdown sceptic side will argue that boris johnson should have never done so. so all up for interpretation , but all up for interpretation, but quite interesting to hear what bofis quite interesting to hear what boris johnson had to say there. >> but it is interesting also to look the scientists were look at what the scientists were saying there's saying at this time. there's been narrative that has been this narrative that has been this narrative that has been perhaps ever since been growing perhaps ever since the first lockdown that the scientist were always saying, oh, have shut the schools, oh, we have to shut the schools, we to lock the country we have to lock down the country , i'm going to interrupt >> i'm going to interrupt because okay because. oh, no. okay >> we should we should say we are waiting for the former home secretary, suella braverman to

stand up and deliver her resignation . so we keep calling resignation. so we keep calling it a resignation statement . she it a resignation statement. she was actually sacked by the prime minister that due very minister but that is due very shortly, believe badenoch minister but that is due very sh still, believe badenoch minister but that is due very sh still is believe badenoch minister but that is due very sh still is stillzve badenoch minister but that is due very shstill is still talking badenoch minister but that is due very sh still is still talking thereenoch is still is still talking there in the house of commons. >> we will go to suella braverman as soon as she stands up because we're expecting well, what are we expecting? fireworks. fireworks yes, indeed we are. >> there are famous sets of resignation statements in the history of parliament, perhaps the most famous one that we've spoken little bit today spoken about a little bit today was that of geoffrey howe , who was that of geoffrey howe, who resigned sensationally from margaret thatcher's cabinet in 1990 and his speech on the green benches in the house of commons on those very benches. we're looking at now, was something that precipitated the fall of margaret thatcher's premiership. now i don't think anyone's going to say that this is going to be the same level of precision imitation of events. >> one ally of suella braverman, told christopher hope that it would be, did they not? >> that's true. so there we go. but i think one of the big

things about geoffrey howe was he was a quiet, mild mannered team player who then resigned of his accord . and i think the his own accord. and i think the difference is that suella braverman was seen to be a critic of rishi sunak for quite a while, while she was in his cabinet. and then, of course, was sacked in a reshuffle. but it's really, really interesting to see just how hard she will go. many people will look at this not so much as a resignation statement, but perhaps more as a leadership pitch. >> well, we saw how she commands an audience when she was gave that speech about multiculturalism and how she thought it had failed . it may be thought it had failed. it may be that kind of calibre of speech. we know that she's been very vocal on her social media for and in the papers as well in the last couple of weeks commenting on the government on what the government has been doing. she's been out of doing. well she's been out of her position. so on legal migration and on illegal migration, she does not believe the government is willing to go

far enough when it comes to clamping down on both those areas, terms of stopping areas, both in terms of stopping the and terms of the boats and in terms of getting those record levels of migration down, down. >> and it was interesting at conservative party conference in manchester at the end of september , suella braverman was september, suella braverman was probably the most had the biggest crowd of any official cabinet minister speech below the prime minister it was fascinating to see that atmosphere here amongst activists. i think you can't really overstate the popularity of suella braverman within a certain section of the electorate. now there are questions in terms of how high suella braverman ceiling of support goes , but among those support goes, but among those who support her, they do so ferociously and that is a powerful base with which to build upon in any sort of leadership election that might well take place after the next election . right. election. right. >> we're just going to nip back to boris johnson and we'll bring you braverman as soon as you suella braverman as soon as she stands up of the kind we'd seen in in lombardy was very

real. >> and thank heavens that did not happen. thanks to the amazing work of the of the nhs. and as i said, at the right at the beginning, hundreds of thousands of people. but i felt i had to, to do what i could to give them the best possible chance. and i had no other i had no other tool literally nothing else . thank you. and is that else. thank you. and is that why, mrjohnson else. thank you. and is that why, mr johnson , else. thank you. and is that why, mrjohnson , examination of . why, mr johnson, examination of. the covid 19 strategy ministerial group meeting on the . saturday the covid 19 strategy, we are going to we are going to head straight to the house of commons because suella braverman former home secretary is standing. braverman former home secretary is sshe's|g. braverman former home secretary is sshe's speaking now. >> she's speaking now. >> she's speaking now. >> he makes a speedy recovery. >> he makes a speedy recovery. >> madam deputy speaker, serving in cabinet for just >> madam deputy speaker, serving in cabinet forjust under four in cabinet for just under four years, has been a true honour

and i'm thankful for the opportunity , kitty, and grateful opportunity, kitty, and grateful to the many civil servants and ministers with whom i worked. >> we achieved a great deal in the last 12 months landmark legislation , action in the legislation, action in the pubuc legislation, action in the public order act and the national security act. >> 20,000 new police officers more than england, wales have ever seen before . one of the ever seen before. one of the largest ever pay rises for the police force. greater powers to dismiss rogue officers and a review of the legal protections to empower our brave firearms officers . officers. >> but madam deputy speaker , i >> but madam deputy speaker, i want to talk about the crisis on which i spent more time working than any other mass uncontrolled illegal immigration. we are all here familiar with the problem . here familiar with the problem. tens of thousands of mostly young men, many with values and

social mores , at odds with our social mores, at odds with our own pouring into our country day after day , month after month , after day, month after month, year after year. many come from safe countries. many are not refugees, but are economic migrants . all have paid migrants. all have paid thousands of pounds to criminal gangs to break into britain . all gangs to break into britain. all have come from a safe country , have come from a safe country, france, who let's face it, should be doing so much more to stop them . this is putting stop them. this is putting unsustainable pressure on our pubuc unsustainable pressure on our public finances and our public services . it's public finances and our public services. it's straining community cohesion , often community cohesion, often jeopardising national security and harming public safety. the british people all understand this. madam deputy speaker. british people all understand this. madam deputy speaker . the this. madam deputy speaker. the question is , does the government question is, does the government and will it now finally act to stop it? the prime minister

rightly committed to doing whatever it takes to stop the boats and he should be commended for dedicating more time and toil than any of his predecessors to this endeavour and unlike the leader of the opposition , who would rather opposition, who would rather bury his head in the sand, he has actually advanced a plan . we has actually advanced a plan. we made some progress during my tenure as home secretary . the tenure as home secretary. the overall crossings have fallen by 30. the number of illegal albanian arrivals down by 90. and we were starting to close down asylum hotels. but madam deputy speaker, crossings are down is not the same as stopping the boats. no and as home secretary, i consistently advocated for legislative measures that would have secured the delivery of our rwanda partnership as soon as the bill

became law last summer , became law last summer, following defeat in the court of appeali following defeat in the court of appeal, i advised used that we should scrap rather than continue passage of the illegal migration act bill in favour of a more robust alternative that excluded international and human rights laws when that was rejected, i urged that we needed to work up a credible plan b in the event of a supreme court loss following defeat in the supreme court , the prime supreme court, the prime minister has finally agreed to introduce emergency legislation and i welcome his decision. but madam deputy speaker , it is now madam deputy speaker, it is now three weeks on from that judgement and we are yet to see a bill. i'm told its publication is imminent, but we are running out of time. this is an emergency and we need to see the bill now . now madam deputy

bill now. now madam deputy speaker , my deeper concern, speaker, my deeper concern, however , relates to the however, relates to the substance of what may be in that bill. previous attempts have failed because they did not address the root cause of the problem. expand massive human rights laws flowing from the european convention on human rights. replicate in labours human rights act are being interpreted elastically by courts, domestic and foreign, to literally prevent our rwanda plan from getting off the ground and this problem relate to so much more than just illegal arrivals is from my time as home secretary, i can say that the same human rights framework work is producing insanity is that the public would scarcely believe foreign terrorists we can't deport because of their human rights as terrorists. we

have to let back in because of their human rights. foreign rapists and paedophiles who should have been removed. but are released back into the community only to reoffend yet because of their human rights violent criminals pulled off deportation flights at the last minute , thanks to the help of minute, thanks to the help of labour mps is free to wander the streets and commit further horrific crimes , including horrific crimes, including murder . a pro horrific crimes, including murder. a pro protesters let horrific crimes, including murder . a pro protesters let off murder. a pro protesters let off the hook for tearing down statues and gluing themselves to roads and our brave military veterans harassed through the courts. some 40 years after their service . madam deputy their service. madam deputy speakeh their service. madam deputy speaker, it is no secret that i support leaving the european convention on human rights and replacing the human rights act

with a british bill of rights that protects the vulnerable and our national security and finishes the job of brexit by extra skating. us from the foreign court and restores real parliamentary supremacy . foreign court and restores real parliamentary supremacy. but i accept that the government won't do that and that it is a debate for another day. and crucially , for another day. and crucially, when it comes to stopping the boats now leaving the echr is not the only way to cut the gordian knot. emergency legislation would enable this only if it meets the following tests . firstly, the bill must tests. firstly, the bill must address a supreme court's concerns about the safety of rwanda. secondly the bill must enable flights before the next election by blocking off all routes of challenge. the powers to detain and remove must be exercisable, not with standing the human rights act. the european convention on human

rights the refugee convention, and all other international law . and all other international law. thirdly the bill must remedy deficiencies in the illegal migration act to ensure that removals can take place within days , rather than allowing days, rather than allowing individual claims and challenges which drag on for months. fourth, the bill must enable the administrative detention of illegal arrivals until they are removed and just as we rapidly built 19 gail hospitals to deal with covid. so we must build a nightingale style detention facilities to deliver the necessary capacity to greece and turkey have done so . greece and turkey have done so. greece and turkey have done so. greece and turkey have done so. greece and turkey have done so and the only way to do this, as i advocated for in government, is with the support of the ministry of defence . fifth, parliament must defence. fifth, parliament must be prepared to sit over christmas to get this bill done .

christmas to get this bill done. all of this , madam deputy all of this, madam deputy speakeh all of this, madam deputy speaker, comes down to a simple question who governs britain ? question who governs britain? where does ultimate authority for the uk lie ? is it with the for the uk lie? is it with the british people and their elected representative lives? or is it in the vague shifting and unaccountable concept of international law ? on monday, international law? on monday, madam deputy speaker, the prime minister announced eight measures that start to better reflect public frustration on legal migration. he can now follow that up with a bill that reflects public fury on illegal migration and actually stop the boats . finally, madam deputy boats. finally, madam deputy speakeh boats. finally, madam deputy speaker, it is now or never the conservative party faces electoral oblivion in a matter of months. if we introduce this , of months. if we introduce this,

the conservative party faces electoral oblivion in a matter of months . if we introduce yet of months. if we introduce yet another bill destined to fail, do we fight for sovereignty or do we fight for sovereignty or do we fight for sovereignty or do we let our party die ? by now, do we let our party die? by now, i may not have always found the right words in the past. madam deputy speaker , but i refuse . i deputy speaker, but i refuse. i refuse to sit by and allow us to fail. the trust that millions of people placed in us cannot be discarded as an inconvenience . discarded as an inconvenience. poignant detail if we summon the political courage to do what is truly necessary. difficult, though it may be, to fight for the british people, we will regain their trust. and if the prime minister leads that fight, he has my total support. prime minister leads that fight, he has my total support . thank he has my total support. thank you . you. >> the right honourable lady for her personal statement. and we now , now move on to the

now, now move on to the presentation of bills . i will presentation of bills. i will allow those who wish to leave to do so . do so. as quickly and quietly as possible . possible. >> resignation speech. there in parliament. hugely anticipated laying down the gauntlet. really the strongest comment at the end . it is now or never. the conservative party faces electoral oblivion if we introduce another bill that does not work. a five point plan. thank you for joining not work. a five point plan. thank you forjoining me. i'm thank you for joining me. i'm martin daubney. here thank you for joining me. i'm martin daubney . here between thank you for joining me. i'm martin daubney. here between 3 and 6 pm. cutting into the show live now braverman basically

breaking ranks. rishi sunak