this is bbc news. i'm rebecca jones with the latest headlines. downing street braces itself for revelations on the government's handling of the covid pandemic as the prime minister's former adviser dominic cummings is questioned by mps. new guidance for people living in eight coronavirus hotspots in england — they're now advised to minimise travel. ministers have admitted there's been confusion. sofia sapega, detained with herjournalist boyfriend romaan protasevich when their flight was forced to land in belarus, has appeared in an apparent confession video. she appears to be speaking under duress. prosecutors in new york have convened a grand jury to examine

the business affairs of the former president donald trump. he denies any wrongdoing constructors say building materials are running short in the uk due to increased demand, leaving diy projects in doubt and companies struggling. and look at those views — the royal geographical society unveils its list of natural wonders of the uk. in the next half an hour, the prime minister's former chief adviser, dominic cummings, will appear in front of mps to answer questions about the government's handling of the coronavirus pandemic. he is expected to criticise the actions taken by the government, particularly around the decision not

to toughen up restrictions last autumn. but mps are likely to question his own choice to travel to barnard castle in the spring. here's our political correspondent helen catt and just to warn you her report does contain flashing images. it was a year ago that one of the prime minister's most senior behind—the—scenes advisers found himself in the spotlight. this was dominic cummings taking the highly unusual step of giving a press conference in the garden of downing street, after he made a trip from london to durham while england was in its first lockdown. it included a drive to barnard castle, he said, to test his eyesight before heading home. the whole point was, now i had been extremely ill, my vision had been a bit weird. we were all going to go back. my wife said we should... ..we should drive down the road, you should see if you can actually drive and see if your vision is weird or if you're 0k. and i thought, that's

a good idea, i should do. today he will be quizzed again, but this time it will be mps asking questions in their own look at the lessons learned from the pandemic so far. mr cummings appeared before one committee back in march. then, he described the department of health as a "smoking ruin" in terms of procurement and ppe. it is expected today's evidence will also be highly critical of the government. in a series of tweets over recent days, he made a number of claims about its handling of the pandemic. he claimed that secrecy at the start had contributed greatly to the catastrophe. he said the government's plans had been "part disaster, part nonexistent". and he claimed that the official plan had originally been to allow the virus to spread to reach herd immunity, which ministers deny. it's expected that he will also criticise the prime minister's attitude towards bringing back restrictions last september. downing street said that throughout this pandemic, the government's priority had been to save lives, protect the nhs and support people's jobs and livelihoods across the united kingdom. dominic cummings left number ten in november last year.

up to that point, he had been one of the few people who had been in the room when many of the big decisions of the pandemic were taken. he wasn'tjust an observer, but he's certainly become a critic. helen catt, bbc news, westminster. our chief political correspondent, adam fleming, joins me now. this promises to be political theatre but it is much more important than that, isn't it? what can we expect? the important than that, isn't it? what can we meet?— important than that, isn't it? what can we expect? the big question at the end of this, _ can we expect? the big question at the end of this, and _ can we expect? the big question at the end of this, and we _ can we expect? the big question at the end of this, and we are - the end of this, and we are expecting for hours of testimony from dominic cummings today, is whether it changes anyone's mind but could already getting information about what he's going to say. all week he's been doing an incredibly long thread on twitter, making his argument, making his case, and it was 64 tweets long and a couple of minutes ago we got a 65th tweet which is worth looking at in detail because it's quite an amazing bit of history that he's showing here. it is a white board and the prime

minister's study in downing street on the 13th of march last year, ten days before the full lockdown was implemented, where you can see the government strategising about what to do. they start off with one big assumption, that there is not going to be a vaccine in 2020, which turned out to be more pessimistic than the real world, and you can see them going through the things they've got to do. number two must avoid the nhs collapsing and i think it is a suggestion that if the nhs did collapse, we look at 2% of the population dying as a result. then you get into points three and four where they are talking about, what do you do about it? and they coin a new word, lock down. and you can see them theorising about what a lockdown actually is. how do you restrict the social contact we all have? do you have the message of less contact or do you actually make contact illegal? and right at the bottom, .6, most of —— one of the most telling things i've seen, a simple question from the government,

who do we not save? —— one of the most chilling things. people will argue about the meaning of it and the motivations behind it but are fascinating to see nonetheless. dramatic information but i wonder how much credibility he's got, especially after his trip to barnard castle during the first lockdown. and mps will ask about that because everyone is agreed now that public confidence in the lockdown and the government's handling of the pandemic took a knock as a result of him breaking the lockdown rules at the start of the pandemic when he went to the north of england to be near his family and then when he took a drive to barnard castle to test his eyesight, as he said, before he drove home. also, he was the prime minister's right—hand man when all these decisions were being made so i'm sure people will say he has to be just as much responsibility for what happened as the prime minister.—

the prime minister. adam, many thanks. the prime minister. adam, many thanrs- and _ the prime minister. adam, many thanks. and we _ the prime minister. adam, many thanks. and we will— the prime minister. adam, many thanks. and we will bring - the prime minister. adam, many thanks. and we will bring you - thanks. and we will bring you dominic cummings' questioning by mps here from 9:30am. belarus' president alexander lukashenko says it's a "total lie" that a ryanair plane was forced to divert by a belarusian fighterjet. he says he acted entirely lawfully and sought to protect people in line with international law. romaan protasevich, an opposition belarusian journalist, was arrested after the ryanair plane he was travelling on was forced to divert to minsk. his girlfriend sofia sapega, who was detained at the same time, has since appeared in a confession video, admitting to releasing information on belarusian security forces, but appears to be speaking under duress. let's talk to our moscow correspondent, steve rosenberg.

can you give us more of a sense of this video? we can you give us more of a sense of this video?— can you give us more of a sense of this video? ~ ., ., , , this video? we have to be extremely wa of this video? we have to be extremely wary of this — this video? we have to be extremely wary of this video. _ this video? we have to be extremely wary of this video. it _ this video? we have to be extremely wary of this video. it was _ this video? we have to be extremely wary of this video. it was a _ this video? we have to be extremely wary of this video. it was a short - wary of this video. it was a short video in which sofia sapega said that she was the editor of a telegraph channel which publishes the personal data of belarusian security forces. it's widely believed that video, the confession, was made under duress. she has now been remanded in custody for two months in a kgb pre—trial detention facility in minsk but we have to be extremely wary about that video. i5 extremely wary about that video. is a russian citizen. being held in this jail in minsk, could the arrest caused tensions with moscow? i don't think it will cost _ caused tensions with moscow? i don't think it will cost tensions, _ caused tensions with moscow? i don't think it will cost tensions, judging - think it will cost tensions, judging by what russian officials have said. there have been some comments by the foreign ministry here but i think moscow is watching and waiting to

see what happens. obviously the two countries are close and certainly i think moscow sees this whole drama as an opportunity for deeper integration with belarus and to get greater influence in belarus which i think is something vladimir putin seeks, and the weaker alexander lukashenko is in minsk, the more possibilities i think that gives the kremlin. this speech he came out with this morning, president alexander lukashenko, really painted a picture of the world according to him and it is a world in which he, alexander lukashenko, is innocent, he is the victim, and he's surrounded by external forces which are trying to get him and destroy him. that's the kind of picture he painted today. him. that's the kind of picture he painted today-— him. that's the kind of picture he painted today. steve, we will leave it there. thank _ painted today. steve, we will leave it there. thank you _ painted today. steve, we will leave it there. thank you for _ painted today. steve, we will leave it there. thank you for that - painted today. steve, we will leave | it there. thank you for that update. ingrida simonyte is the prime minister of lithuania, the country romaan protasevich was travelling to when he was taken from a ryanair flight diverted

to the belarusian capital minsk. shejoins us now. we are she joins us now. we are very grateful to you forjoining us here on bbc news, thank you. the plane had been heading to vilnius when it was ordered to land in belarus. do you see this as an attack on your country? you see this as an attack on your count ? ~ , , ., , you see this as an attack on your count ? ~ , , .,, ., country? well, i see this as an attack, country? well, i see this as an attack. but _ country? well, i see this as an attack, but not _ country? well, i see this as an attack, but not only _ country? well, i see this as an attack, but not only on - country? well, i see this as an attack, but not only on my - country? well, i see this as an - attack, but not only on my country, but on european union, an international community because it was, as i mentioned before, a pure accident that that was a flight between athens and vilnius. it might have been a flight between two european capitals and it was an accident that mainly passengers were holding passports but still citizens from more than ten eu countries, not

mentioning citizens from countries outside of the eu including the united states, so i think this is not any sort of bilateral issue between belarus and minsk, this is an issue for the international community and taller —— totalitarian regimes. community and taller -- totalitarian reuimes. ., ., i. , community and taller -- totalitarian reuimes. ., ., , ., regimes. how do you respond to alexander _ regimes. how do you respond to alexander lukashenko's - regimes. how do you respond to i alexander lukashenko's comments regimes. how do you respond to - alexander lukashenko's comments that he acted lawfully and sought to protect people in line with international law? it’s protect people in line with international law?- international law? it's so complicated _ international law? it's so complicated for - international law? it's so complicated for anyone l international law? it's so i complicated for anyone who international law? it's so - complicated for anyone who is in a sane mind to comment on alexander lukashenko, he claims to be president but we all know that nobody recognises the result of the elections that he forged last august, so nobody of a sane mind can commend his words. investigation is

going on and of course there will be much more information given by authorities, both lithuanian and from other countries, but still, this is a narrative constantly used by the kremlin or alexander lukashenko, they try to portray themselves as some victims of western democracy and they try to portray themselves as some saviours of real values or christianity or whatever they can invent. this is not for me to comment. european leaders have — not for me to comment. european leaders have imposed _ not for me to comment. european leaders have imposed sanctions i not for me to comment. european | leaders have imposed sanctions on belarus. in your view, leaders have imposed sanctions on belarus. in yourview, do leaders have imposed sanctions on belarus. in your view, do they go far enough? i must say that the good news on this is that the reaction was swift and the main issues were included in the reactions. now the challenge will be implementation

because if we talk about bands for international flights or a state owned air company of belarus —— bans for international flights, there owned air company of belarus —— bans for internationalflights, there is coordination needed between countries to get the result, but further mentions will —— further measures will have to be taken and the further you read about the sanctions, and the following sanctions, and the following sanctions, i think they should follow suit immediately. and, of course, there is a very strong understanding and agreement to absolutely demand the release of political prisoners. romaan protasevich's father has told the bbc he fears his son may be tortured. how concerned are you about him?— tortured. how concerned are you about him? very much concerned because just _ about him? very much concerned because just a — about him? very much concerned because just a week— about him? very much concerned because just a week ago, - about him? very much concerned because just a week ago, one - about him? very much concerned because just a week ago, one of. about him? very much concerned i because just a week ago, one of the

prisoners died and i have no reason to believe it was a natural death so i must say anyone who has been kept in belarusian prisons or some other kgb institutions are telling stories about atrocities and cruel behaviour of people who work there and i'm very much concerned about his life, as well as the life of anyone else jailed or sentenced.— jailed or sentenced. ingrida simonyte. _ jailed or sentenced. ingrida simonyte, prime _ jailed or sentenced. ingrida simonyte, prime minister l jailed or sentenced. ingrida| simonyte, prime minister of lithuania, where very grateful for your many thanks. —— we are very grateful. in quarter ofan in quarter of an hour, dominic cummings will appear in quarter of an hour, dominic cummings willappear in in quarter of an hour, dominic cummings will appear in front of mps to answer questions about the government's handling of the

coronavirus pandemic. we've got pictures of him arriving on his way to that committee hearing, as you might expect, surrounded by members of the media and we will bring you that meeting live here on the bbc news channel. ministers have admitted there's been confusion about the advice given to eight areas in england worst—hit by the indian variant. the guidance has now been updated from telling people to avoid travel, to asking them to "minimise" it but the changing advice has already started to affect residents' plans for work, travel and family reunions. graham satchell reports. eight local councils covering more than two million people and total confusion about government guidance published on a website on friday. how are these people supposed to know? not everyone goes on the internet, do they? my nana wouldn't have a clue, she doesn't have a computer. one minute they tell you one thing and then the next minute you look

on the government website they're telling you something completely different. so, yeah, it can be very confusing. a wet whitley bay in north tyneside. having been told last week people could meet indoors, the new guidance says people in areas where the indian variant is on the rise should once again only meet outside. this is pam and suzette, meeting up for the first time in months. you've just got to guess where you're meant to be and what you're meant to be doing. so it's not clear at all. we alljust want to get out and about now that we can and obviously if we're not sure what we're supposed to be doing, it is confusing. more confusion in kirklees in west yorkshire. i think people will be really fed up. they'll say, we've had enough now. i think people were starting to think, great, we can go off for weekends, we can have hopefully a holiday in england and it's going to stop all that, isn't it? if we've got to be safe. and here in leicester...

you don't know where you stand with it. every half hour it's changing, so what do you do? the impact on the high street has been immediate. migel runs a cafe in leicester. the effects it has short—term on business, especially when you talk about a business that relies on footfall, and we've onlyjust reopened, is that it stops people coming into town. ijust wish they'd get their messaging straight. in all honesty, we've been really quiet today. i think that's due to the news that there were going to be restrictions, so people haven't come in and that's obviously affected trade. this is hounslow in west london, home to brentford football club. part of the new guidance says people shouldn't travel outside their borough, so more confusion. should fans go to the play—off game at wembley this weekend? we could have had the ridiculous situation, where you can have fans coming from swansea going to wembley but people in hounslow, the fans here couldn't go! it's preposterous, isn't it?

the government has now made it clear they're not imposing new restrictions, merely giving advice for people to be more cautious. it was left to local health chiefs to spell things out. actually, there are no travel restrictions in and out of north tyneside. actually people can continue to come to the borough, they can come and visit our attractions and they can come for a holiday. our businesses are open and they will continue to welcome both residents and visitors. clear messaging in a pandemic is vital. what's happened in the last 48 hours is a great deal of confusion. graham satchell, bbc news. transport secretary grant shapps said that the updated guidance doesn't mean a change in the law, and that the government is not imposing restricitons on people being able to travel in and out of areas worst hit by the indian variant.

the law is the law, is the same wherever you are in england. it doesn't vary and you can see exactly where we are in stages of the unlock and looking towards what happens on stage four. however, use your common stage foui’. however, use your common sense. stage four. however, use your common sense. we all know enough about this virus after more than a year of tackling it that it has a very easy way of transmitting, it's when people get close together, so just apply common sense. the further apart you are, the less likely you are to spread it, but this is advice, its guidance, it's not the law so you can do exactly as you can do elsewhere in the country, but be aware that there is a heightened case rate in these particular areas. people aged 30 and 31 in england are now being offered a first dose of a covid vaccine. they will start receiving invitations to book their jab from today. nearly three—quarters of adults in the uk have already had one dose, and more than two—fifths

have had two. the foreign secretary has arrived in israel for talks aimed at upholding the ceasefire between the country's military and hamas militants. dominic raab is expected to stress the uk's commitment to a two—state solution, when he meets both the israeli prime minister and the palestinian president on the one—day visit. it comes after an israel—gaza ceasefire was declared following deadly violence in the region. prosecutors in new york have convened a grand jury to examine the business affairs of the former president donald trump. the panel will decide whether there's evidence to charge anyone with a crime. mr trump denies wrong—doing and says he's a victim of a witch—hunt. our correspondent, will grant, in washington explains what this development signals. it's clearly an important step by

the manhattan district attorney to try to take things to a final point of a courtroom, more the point of trying to see whether or not there was sufficient evidence in this two year long investigation into mr trump's business dealings to actually bring a case against anyone, whether or not that be mr trump himself are members of his organisation, members of his family, and obviously that is what he is trying to do at this stage, having done this investigation through a whole swathe of different areas. they include the question of whether or not assets were being artificially inflated or devalued so that they could obtain a tax write—offs and things of this nature, so there's a lot there but it's certainly a significant development.

marks & spencer has reported an annual loss of more of £201 million after what its ceo described as a year like no other. the 57—year—old chain said clothing and homeware sales had fallen by 31.5%, reflecting the "heavy impact" of lockdowns on stores. food sales were up by i.3%. after accounting for one—off restructuring costs, the business did make a profit of more than 41 million, but this is still down almost 90% on the previous year. the government has announced plans to electrify half of the transpennine rail network, which runs from manchester to york. the department for transport said more than 300 million will be spent on improving "punctuality, reliability and connectivity" for passengers. building materials are running short in the uk, leaving diy projects in doubt and building companies under pressure. the construction leadership council

has warned that cement, some electrical components, timber, steel and paints are all in short supply. construction industry projects have surged since lockdown began easing which has led to skyrocketing demand for already scarce materials. the federation of master builders said that some building firms may have to delay projects and others could be forced to close as a result. hundreds of women forced into giving up their babies for adoption in the 1950s, �*60s and �*70s have called on the prime minister to issue a government apology. up to 250,000 women in britain were coerced into handing over their babies because they were unmarried. many of the women never had more children and say the loss caused them to lead a lifetime of grief. our correspondent, duncan kennedy, has the story. my mum was 16 years old.

she got sent to a mother and baby home because it was a disgrace. that disgrace was something gaynor weatherley had to live with. born in 1963, she was adopted into a new family, but the shame of illegitimacy followed her through childhood. what would you have wished for? to have stayed with my mum, to have been allowed to have been kept by the lady, the woman that gave birth to me. ok, she was only a girl, but she was still with my dad. this, ladies and gentlemen, is london. gaynor�*s mother was one of around a quarter of a million unmarried women in britain forced into giving up their babies for adoption in the three decades after the second world war. i was 18. i don't think i wanted to believe that i was pregnant for a long time. judy baker became pregnant in 1967, and was one of the unmarried women to face the unrelenting pressure

to give up her baby for adoption. she says the worst day was the handover. she was asleep. she never woke up. and they took her from me and gave her to the people who were waiting in the next room to adopt her. and that was it. how could that have happened to me? but my mum was waiting for me downstairs, and we went shopping. we went shopping! an apology is at the heart of this story. both the birth mothers and their children say britain should now follow what's happened in other countries, like australia. today, this parliament, on behalf of the australian people, takes responsibility and apologises.

cheering. the birth mothers and their children in britain have now written to borisjohnson, urging him to agree to a government apology here to help put right what they say is an historical injustice. the government has expressed its sympathy, saying it can't undo the past, but hasn't offered an apology. the events surrounding forced adoption may have taken place 50 years ago, but those who've lived it say it is now time to say sorry. duncan kennedy, bbc news. we are expecting to hear from dominit— we are expecting to hear from dominic coming shortly. the health secretary matt hancock was doorstepped this morning before he left home today. he was asked about herd immunity following dominic cumming's claims the government pursued the policy

during the pandemic. was herd immunity government policy, mr hancock? ., , was herd immunity government policy, mr hancock?— mr hancock? today, anybody over 30 can aet mr hancock? today, anybody over 30 can get your — mr hancock? today, anybody over 30 can get your vaccine, _ mr hancock? today, anybody over 30 can get your vaccine, so _ mr hancock? today, anybody over 30 can get your vaccine, so get - mr hancock? today, anybody over 30 can get your vaccine, so get out - can get your vaccine, so get out there and get your vaccine. share can get your vaccine, so get out there and get your vaccine. are you worried about _ there and get your vaccine. are you worried about dominic— there and get your vaccine. are you worried about dominic cummings i worried about dominic cummings giving evidence later, mr hancock? matt hancock, the health secretary, out running this morning. now it's time for a look at the weather with carol kirkwood. hello again. today we still have some patchy rain and and some showers in ourforecast, but after today, things turn a bit drier and warmer. you can see where we've got a weather front which is increasingly tending to fade, but behind it, a

lot of showers developing across scotland, northern and eastern parts of england. not all of us will catch them, but they could be heavy and thundery. on either side, there will be bright skies with sunshine, but a bit more cloud across the south—west, particularly the isles of scilly introducing some drizzle. we hang on to the showers through the evening but they fade overnight as cloud comes in, some patchy mist and fog form, but the bulk of the uk will still have some clear skies. no issues with frost — overnight low temperatures between 5 and 8 degrees. by the end of the night, you can see the clouds thickening across the south—west. this is heralding the arrival of a weather front. tomorrow, we are looking at high pressure dominating our weather, so there will be a lot of dry conditions, fairweather cloud building, but a little bit of rain getting into some western areas

hello, this is bbc news. the headlines: downing street braces itself for revelations on the government's handling of the covid pandemic — as the pm's former adviser dominic cummings is questioned by mps. new guidance for people living in eight coronavirus hotspots in england — they're now advised to minimise travel

welcome to viewers watching around the uk and around the world. in the next few minutes, dominic cummings will appear before mps to answer questions about the government's handling of the coronavirus pandemic. handling of the coronavirus pandemic— handling of the coronavirus andemic. ~ ., ~ . pandemic. we will take evidence well after the pandemic _ pandemic. we will take evidence well after the pandemic is _ pandemic. we will take evidence well after the pandemic is over. _ pandemic. we will take evidence well after the pandemic is over. our- after the pandemic is over. our enquiry will be complimentary to this focusing on lessons that can be learnt already and applied during the months ahead to benefit decisions that have to be taken during those months ahead. the evidence we gather in our enquiry will be available to the public

enquiry. we will hear from the health secretary in two weeks, on the 10th ofjune, after which we will make a report to parliament. a word on how we will organise this morning's proceedings. this is a hybrid meeting, some members will join remotely and some in person. there will be four sections. early days of the pandemic, jeremy hunt will chair a disc cash in on lockdown measures and performance of test and trace, i will chair a section on vaccines, and jeremy hunt will chair the final section on the lockdown of the autumn and winter period. we will have a short pause between these sections which the cameras will be briefly turned off. i am very pleased to welcome dominic cummings, the chief advisor to the prime ministerfrom july

cummings, the chief advisor to the prime minister from july 2019 to november 2020. prime minister from july 2019 to november2020. good prime minister from july 2019 to november 2020. good morning and thank you. perhaps i could start with some general questions, the background to the covid—19 pandemic before turning to my colleagues. in your statement, you said for years i have warned of the dangers of pandemics. last year i wrote about the possible threat of coronavirus and the urgent need for planning. in your blog of march 2019 warned of escapes of virus from laboratories in asia, i quote, a real danger of a worldwide pandemic that could kill human beings on a vast scale. given this context, on the 22nd of january, a city the size of london was sealed off from the rest of the world, on the 30th of january the who declared a public health emergency of international concern.

given what you had thought about this over the years passed, did set alarm bells ringing? did you think what you had thought about in advance was happening? i what you had thought about in advance was happening? i think it is riaht advance was happening? i think it is ri . ht that advance was happening? i think it is right that the _ advance was happening? i think it is right that the public _ advance was happening? i think it is right that the public selected - right that the public selected representatives are trying to figure out what happened and the lessons to be learned. i hope you will get all senior people involved in here to speak to you about it. the truth is that senior ministers, officials, advisers like me fail disastrously short of the standards that the public has the right to expect of its government and a crisis like this. when the public needed us most, the government failed. i would like to say to all the families of those who died, unnecessarily, how sorry i am for the mistakes that we made. regarding the beginning of this crisis, yes, you are right, i

like many people had talked about this before. when it started, in january, i thought in part of my mind, oh, my goodness, is this act? is this what people had been warning about all this time? at the time, however, the who and the cdc generally speaking, across the western world, were not ringing alarm bells about it. then. in retrospect, it is completely obvious that many institutions failed on this early question. the truth is, i cannot remember the precise date, but i think the taiwan government

hit the panic button on new year's eve of 2019, within a few days. they put into effect a plan they had figured out from having been terrified of previous outbreaks. the immediately closed their borders, very strict quarantine systems, the did a lot of things injanuary. it is obvious that the western world including britainjust is obvious that the western world including britain just completely failed to see the smoke and hear the alarm bells injanuary. do failed to see the smoke and hear the alarm bells in january.— alarm bells in january. do you remember — alarm bells in january. do you remember a _ alarm bells in january. do you remember a time _ alarm bells in january. do you remember a time when - alarm bells in january. do you remember a time when you i alarm bells in january. do you - remember a time when you personally were seized of the importance of it? i spoke to people injanuary on the 25th of january, i spoke to people injanuary on the 25th ofjanuary, i said to i spoke to people injanuary on the 25th of january, i said to the private office in number ten, that we should look at pandemic planning. we should talk to some people about

it on the same day, i think, positively one day before or after, i said to matt hancock, where are we in terms of scanning the pandemic preparations plans? are we up to speed on this? is it resourced the way it should be?— way it should be? sounds like the 25th ofjanuary- — way it should be? sounds like the 25th ofjanuary. do _ way it should be? sounds like the 25th ofjanuary. do you _ way it should be? sounds like the 25th ofjanuary. do you want - way it should be? sounds like the 25th ofjanuary. do you want the l 25th ofjanuary. do you want the exact date? _ 25th ofjanuary. do you want the exact date? it _ 25th ofjanuary. do you want the exact date? it was _ 25th ofjanuary. do you want the exact date? it was the _ 25th ofjanuary. do you want the exact date? it was the 25th - 25th ofjanuary. do you want the exact date? it was the 25th of i exact date? it was the 25th of january i spoke to private office and i said to the secretary of state, i actually...— and i said to the secretary of state, i actually... was that a conversation _ state, i actually... was that a conversation or _ state, i actually... was that a conversation or a _ state, i actually... was that a conversation or a memo - state, i actually... was that a conversation or a memo or i state, i actually... was that a conversation or a memo or a | state, i actually... was that a - conversation or a memo or a text? i have the words of a text i sent to him. i spoke to him that day, possibly the next day, in a meeting, about it as well. i said, quote, to

what extent have you investigated the possibilities of a pandemic? abbreviation for spending review, matt hancock replied, we have got full plans up to and including pandemic levels. we are stress testing our top tier stress register, me, i replied, great, but really about the cdc preparations for a flu pandemic, really about the cdc preparations fora flu pandemic, it really about the cdc preparations for a flu pandemic, it is very worrying. for a flu pandemic, it is very worrying-— for a flu pandemic, it is very wor inc. ., ._ worrying. the 25th ofjanuary, you instirated worrying. the 25th ofjanuary, you instigated a _ worrying. the 25th ofjanuary, you instigated a set _ worrying. the 25th ofjanuary, you instigated a set of— worrying. the 25th ofjanuary, you instigated a set of enquiries - worrying. the 25th ofjanuary, you| instigated a set of enquiries within the system. i instigated a set of enquiries within the system-— the system. i would like to stress that and apologised _ the system. i would like to stress that and apologised for— the system. i would like to stress that and apologised for the - the system. i would like to stress that and apologised for the fact i that and apologised for the fact that and apologised for the fact that it that and apologised for the fact thatitis that and apologised for the fact that it is true that i did this, but i did not... i did not follow up on

this and push at the way that i should have done. we were told in number ten at the time this is literally top of the risk register, it has been planned over and over again, everyone knows exactly what to do, and it sort of tragic in a way that someone who runs so often about running red teams, whilst i was planning red teams and lots of other things in government at this time, i did not do it on this, if i had said at the end ofjanuary, we are going to take a saturday and i want all of these documents on the table and i want outside experts are to at it all, we would have figured out much earlier that all the claims about preparations and how everything was in order were

basically hollow, but we did not figure this out until the end of february. brute figure this out until the end of februa . ~ . ., ., figure this out until the end of februa . ~ .., ., ., february. we will come to more detailed aspects _ february. we will come to more detailed aspects of _ february. we will come to more detailed aspects of that. - february. we will come to more detailed aspects of that. in - february. we will come to more | detailed aspects of that. in terms of those texts that you refer to, the first documented your concerns, your involvement, would you share them with the committee after the meeting? to them with the committee after the meetin: ? ., , . ., meeting? to be clear, there were conversations _ meeting? to be clear, there were conversations before _ meeting? to be clear, there were conversations before that - meeting? to be clear, there were conversations before that in - meeting? to be clear, there were i conversations before that in number ten because periodically it was on the news, it would flare up and then die out again. i do not want to imply that was the first time at number ten talked about it. there were conversations the first week backin were conversations the first week back in january. were conversations the first week back injanuary. brute were conversations the first week back in january-— were conversations the first week back in january. we will talk about number ten. _ back in january. we will talk about number ten, there _ back in january. we will talk about number ten, there are _ back in january. we will talk about number ten, there are lots - back in january. we will talk about number ten, there are lots of - back in january. we will talk about i number ten, there are lots of people who work in number ten, when did you talk to the prime minister about it first? it talk to the prime minister about it first? ., , , talk to the prime minister about it first? . , , ., , first? it was definitely raised with the prime minister _ first? it was definitely raised with the prime minister in _ first? it was definitely raised with the prime minister in the - first? it was definitely raised with the prime minister in the first - first? it was definitely raised with | the prime minister in the first half ofjanuary the prime minister in the first half of january because it was on the news. , y ., . of january because it was on the news. , ., ., ., news. did you have a conversation with him about _ news. did you have a conversation

with him about it? _ news. did you have a conversation with him about it? yes, _ news. did you have a conversation with him about it? yes, the - news. did you have a conversation with him about it? yes, the first i with him about it? yes, the first half ofjanuary- _ with him about it? yes, the first half ofjanuary. was _ with him about it? yes, the first half of january. was at - with him about it? yes, the first half ofjanuary. was at a - with him about it? yes, the first half ofjanuary. was at a chart i with him about it? yes, the first| half ofjanuary. was at a chart or with him about it? yes, the first i half ofjanuary. was at a chart or a conversation? _ half ofjanuary. was at a chart or a conversation? a _ half ofjanuary. was at a chart or a conversation? a chat. _ half ofjanuary. was at a chart or a conversation? a chat. during - half ofjanuary. was at a chart or a conversation? a chat. during the l conversation? a chat. during the months that _ conversation? a chat. during the months that followed, _ conversation? a chat. during the months that followed, was - conversation? a chat. during the i months that followed, was covid-19 months that followed, was covid—19 the most important matter that you dealt with from january onwards? ? it depends what you mean. retrospectively, it was the most important, but at the time, the government... in no way shape or form that the government act like it was the most important thing. not evenin was the most important thing. not even in february never mind in january. what proportion of your time in those early months, february for example, what proportion of your time is devoted to it in february? injanuary, not very much, in february, a lot of my personal time, a more. a, ., ., ., february, a lot of my personal time, a more. ., ., ., ,, february, a lot of my personal time, amore. ., ., ., ,, ., a more. more than half or less than

that? the first — a more. more than half or less than that? the first half _ a more. more than half or less than that? the first half of _ a more. more than half or less than that? the first half of february, - that? the first half of february, robabl that? the first half of february, probably less — that? the first half of february, probably less than _ that? the first half of february, probably less than half, - that? the first half of february, probably less than half, after i that? the first half of february, | probably less than half, after the reshuffle which was the 12th, more than half. ., reshuffle which was the 12th, more than half. . . ., , ., reshuffle which was the 12th, more than half. . . ., ., than half. that increase after that? b the last than half. that increase after that? by the last week, _ than half. that increase after that? by the last week, the _ than half. that increase after that? by the last week, the last - than half. that increase after that? by the last week, the last ten - than half. that increase after that? by the last week, the last ten days | by the last week, the last ten days of february, it was over 90% of what i was personally spending my time on although there were other things floating in and out. it was certainly not, i think this is really important point to register, the government itself and number ten was not operating in february unless in any way shape or form. lots of key people were skiing in middle of february. it was not until the last week of february that there was any

sense of urgency, i would say, across... in terms of number ten cabinet office. across. .. in terms of number ten cabinet office.— across... in terms of number ten cabinet office. where you operating on a in february? _ cabinet office. where you operating on a in february? in _ cabinet office. where you operating on a in february? in the _ cabinet office. where you operating on a in february? in the first - cabinet office. where you operating on a in february? in the first ten i on a in february? in the first ten da s of on a in february? in the first ten days of february, _ on a in february? in the first ten days of february, no, _ on a in february? in the first ten days of february, no, there - on a in february? in the first ten | days of february, no, there were lots of things going on, the hst nightmare, the reshuffle, and that happened on the 12th, and the prime minister went on holiday for two weeks. then i did not go on holiday, i was in downing street throughout that period and i spent more and more of my time. however, and, again, i would apologise for this, i did not... obviously, in retrospect, i should have been hitting the panic button far more than i was in february. i hit the panic button as february. i hit the panic button as

february went on, but like most people, i was wrongly reassured by things like who and what we were being told internally. the things like who and what we were being told internally.— being told internally. the who declared a _ being told internally. the who declared a public _ being told internally. the who declared a public health - being told internally. the who - declared a public health emergency on the 30th of january. they were not giving reassurance, quietly of the opposite. the not giving reassurance, quietly of the opposite-— the opposite. the did say that. after the 30th _ the opposite. the did say that. after the 30th of _ the opposite. the did say that. after the 30th ofjanuary, - the opposite. the did say that. after the 30th ofjanuary, it i the opposite. the did say that. | after the 30th of january, it was not seen in whitehall that there was going to be a pandemic here. i am talkin: going to be a pandemic here. i am talking about _ going to be a pandemic here. i am talking about what _ going to be a pandemic here. i am talking about what is _ going to be a pandemic here. i —n talking about what is going on around the world. television pictures of wall hand being sealed off, —— wuhan. you have explained that it is something that you regret. finally on this, this did not occupy the majority of your time during fairy, it increased over

time, give a summary of the other things that you are dealing with. what were the principal demands on your time during february? there was... your time during february? there was--- well. _ your time during february? there was... well, i— your time during february? there was... well, i was _ your time during february? there was... well, i was working - your time during february? there was... well, i was working very i your time during february? there was... well, i was working very much on the and technology agenda. procurement reform. ironically in january and early february one of the things i spent my own time on was getting to grips with the procurement system. we ended up... i had regularly weekly meetings in the cabinet room on procurement in january and ferry to get to grips with the nightmare of that whole thing. that was completely overtaken by the covid—19. we had to win the procurement meetings i was running because of the procurement problems with covid—19. because of the procurement problems with covid-19-— with covid-19. anything else? security issues _ with covid-19. anything else? security issues i _ with covid-19. anything else? security issues i was - with covid-19. anything else? security issues i was dealing i with covid-19. anything else? - security issues i was dealing with, essentially, the first ten days of february which were hst, reshuffle,

various things like that. and then the prime minister went on holiday, and i was dealing with some of those things from the 12th, and increasingly with covid—19 in the second half of the last two weeks of february. i also sent, after the election, i hired a physicist called bain warnerand election, i hired a physicist called bain warner and brought him into number ten to build an analytical officer number ten because one of the great problems that number ten had in 2019 when i was there was a huge lack of these kind of skills. i brought him in. i sent him off to start attending the sage meetings. some contextual questions. _

attending the sage meetings. fin- contextual questions. obviously you are the chief advisor to the prime minister. did you have to book meetings with him or did you pop in and out of his office? then, i would p0p and out of his office? then, i would pop in and out of his office. you sat outside the door? is that right? not literally, but yes. did sat outside the door? is that right? not literally, but yes.— not literally, but yes. did you write notes _ not literally, but yes. did you write notes to _ not literally, but yes. did you write notes to him _ not literally, but yes. did you write notes to him as - not literally, but yes. did you write notes to him as well- not literally, but yes. did you write notes to him as well or| not literally, but yes. did you i write notes to him as well or was not literally, but yes. did you - write notes to him as well or was it through the informal popping into the office? i through the informal popping into the office? _, , through the informal popping into the office? , ., through the informal popping into theoffice? , ., ., , the office? i sometimes wrote notes, but most of — the office? i sometimes wrote notes, but most of our _ the office? i sometimes wrote notes, but most of our interaction _ the office? i sometimes wrote notes, but most of our interaction was - but most of our interaction was talking. did but most of our interaction was talkina. , ,, but most of our interaction was talkina. , ,~ ., , but most of our interaction was talkina. , i. ., , ., talking. did you write notes about the covid-19 _ talking. did you write notes about the covid-19 situation _ talking. did you write notes about the covid-19 situation in - talking. did you write notes about the covid-19 situation in january i the covid—19 situation injanuary and february? i the covid-19 situation in january and february?— the covid-19 situation in january and februa ? , ., , ., and february? i did in february, not sure injanuary- _ and february? i did in february, not sure in january. did _ and february? i did in february, not sure in january. did you _ and february? i did in february, not sure in january. did you keep - and february? i did in february, not sure in january. did you keep a - sure in january. did you keep a co ? i sure in january. did you keep a copy? i can _ sure in january. did you keep a copy? i can check _ sure in january. did you keep a copy? i can check exactly - sure in january. did you keep a copy? i can check exactly what | sure in january. did you keep a | copy? i can check exactly what i said to him _ copy? i can check exactly what i said to him in _ copy? i can check exactly what i said to him in february. - copy? i can check exactly what i said to him in february. in - copy? i can check exactly what i | said to him in february. in terms copy? i can check exactly what i - said to him in february. in terms of what was written down. if said to him in february. in terms of what was written down.— what was written down. if you had it, will you — what was written down. if you had it, will you share _ what was written down. if you had it, will you share it _ what was written down. if you had it, will you share it with _ what was written down. if you had it, will you share it with the -

it, will you share it with the committee?— it, will you share it with the| committee?_ you it, will you share it with the - committee?_ you were committee? yes, i will. you were sittin: committee? yes, i will. you were sitting outside — committee? yes, i will. you were sitting outside the _ committee? yes, i will. you were sitting outside the office, - committee? yes, i will. you were sitting outside the office, you - committee? yes, i will. you were l sitting outside the office, you send at least one note, did you use text and what's up with thoughts on the pandemic? have you kept copies of those during that period? irlat pandemic? have you kept copies of those during that period?— those during that period? not all, but our lord- _ those during that period? not all, but our lord. can _ those during that period? not all, but our lord. can you _ those during that period? not all, but our lord. can you share - those during that period? not all, but our lord. can you share thosej but our lord. can you share those that are relevant _ but our lord. can you share those that are relevant to _ but our lord. can you share those that are relevant to what - but our lord. can you share those that are relevant to what the - that are relevant to what the response to covid—19 was during that period? response to covid-19 was during that eriod? , . ., response to covid-19 was during that period?_ finally _ response to covid-19 was during that period?_ finally on - response to covid-19 was during that period?_ finally on some i period? yes, i can. finally on some ofthe period? yes, i can. finally on some of the meetings, _ period? yes, i can. finally on some of the meetings, cobra _ period? yes, i can. finally on some of the meetings, cobra is _ period? yes, i can. finally on some of the meetings, cobra is the - of the meetings, cobra is the principal emergency response apparatus of the government, it met on the 24th of january, before the who had raised the international alert, it met another four times who had raised the international alert, it met anotherfour times in the five weeks before the month of march. did you go to those meetings? i'm not sure if i attended the corporate meetings. i don't think i

did. what i did was i sent, as i said before, i heart a person to run data for number ten. did said before, i heart a person to run data for number ten.— said before, i heart a person to run data for number ten. did you choose not to no data for number ten. did you choose not to go or — data for number ten. did you choose not to go or where _ data for number ten. did you choose not to go or where you _ data for number ten. did you choose not to go or where you stopped - data for number ten. did you choosej not to go or where you stopped from going? it not to go or where you stopped from troin ? ., , not to go or where you stopped from troin? , going? it was about dividing up --eole's going? it was about dividing up people's time. _ going? it was about dividing up people's time. i _ going? it was about dividing up people's time, i sent _ going? it was about dividing up people's time, i sent the - going? it was about dividing up people's time, i sent the data i people's time, i sent the data scientist and the prime minister's personal secretary who dealt with the nhs and the whole covid—19 thing. mainly speaking, in february, those two attended corporate meetings. did those two attended corporate meetinus. , ,, those two attended corporate meetings-— those two attended corporate meetinus. , ., ., , ., meetings. did you attend any cobra meetin: in meetings. did you attend any cobra meeting in february? _ meetings. did you attend any cobra meeting in february? did _ meetings. did you attend any cobra meeting in february? did you - meetings. did you attend any cobra | meeting in february? did you advise the prime minister that he should go to the meetings? ida. the prime minister that he should go to the meetings?— to the meetings? no, i did not. given that _ to the meetings? no, i did not. given that this _ to the meetings? no, i did not. given that this is _ to the meetings? no, i did not. given that this is the _ to the meetings? no, i did not. given that this is the principal l given that this is the principal body that brings all of the security people, the health security people the intelligence people together, why did you not go and why did you

not advise the prime minister to go? i did not go because it was a better use of his time for an warner to attend those meetings. i had meetings one to one with the chief scientific adviser about specific things. lots of cobra meetings are going through parliament slides and are not massively useful. you going through parliament slides and are not massively useful.— are not massively useful. you are sa in: it are not massively useful. you are saying it was _ are not massively useful. you are saying it was not _ are not massively useful. you are saying it was not worth _ are not massively useful. you are saying it was not worth your - are not massively useful. you are l saying it was not worth your time? know that it was not worth my time but what was the best use of everybody�*s time, the best use was to have ben warner was a scientist so he attended the sage meetings on behalf of number ten for which there has been some criticism, but i think it was the right thing that i told him to do that. he and imran attended the covid—19 meetings. i was briefed 121 by patrick and chris where i could take into a lot of

other questions. bear in mind some of the huge problems we had throughout were things leaping and creating chaos in the media. leaking from cobra? — creating chaos in the media. leaking from cobra? leaping _ creating chaos in the media. leaking from cobra? leaping from _ creating chaos in the media. leaking from cobra? leaping from cobra - creating chaos in the media. leaking from cobra? leaping from cobra and racticall from cobra? leaping from cobra and practically everywhere. _ from cobra? leaping from cobra and practically everywhere. i _ from cobra? leaping from cobra and practically everywhere. i was - from cobra? leaping from cobra and practically everywhere. i was having| practically everywhere. i was having conversations i did not want to see in the media. conversations i did not want to see in the media-— in the media. you are saying that the most secure _ in the media. you are saying that the most secure meeting - in the media. you are saying that the most secure meeting in - the most secure meeting in whitehall, named after a room, where you have to leave your telephone outside, it is swept for bugs, that meeting was so insecure that you could not speak candidly, you were concerned about leaks. look could not speak candidly, you were concerned about leaks.— concerned about leaks. look at the record, concerned about leaks. look at the record. the — concerned about leaks. look at the record, the meetings, _ concerned about leaks. look at the record, the meetings, the - concerned about leaks. look at the record, the meetings, the excess i record, the meetings, the excess committee which was a secret

committee which was a secret committee for brexit, which operates out of the cobra rooms at my request, where it continually. had cobra which _ request, where it continually. had cobra which was _ request, where it continually. ihe�*lc cobra which was nominally the focal room of the response, but you did not go and the prime minister did not go and the prime minister did not go and you said in one of your tweets this week that if we had had competent people in charge, we could have avoided lockdown one. but you and the prime minister did not consider yourself to be relevant to that meeting. was there another meeting? were you not the most competent relevant people? land? i was having meetings but i was having meetings with people like patrick by myself or with two or three other people in a farm where they would not leak. lots of cobra meetings are formulaic. in terms of the prime minister, the basic thought was in

february, the prime minister regarded this as a scare story. he described it as the new swine flu. did you tell certainly. various of facials inside number ten, their view was if we have the prime minister sharing covid—19 meetings and he tells everyone a test swine flu, i am going to get injected live on tv with coronavirus, it has nothing to be frightened of, that would not help serious planning. irate be frightened of, that would not help serious planning.— be frightened of, that would not help serious planning. we talk about --eole in help serious planning. we talk about people in number— help serious planning. we talk about people in number ten, _ help serious planning. we talk about people in number ten, you _ help serious planning. we talk about people in number ten, you have - people in number ten, you have described the dysfunctionality of cobra, you are notjust a person and number ten, you are the chief adviser. ~ , , . ., ., , ., adviser. with respect, that was not m title. adviser. with respect, that was not my title- my _ adviser. with respect, that was not my title. my title _ adviser. with respect, that was not my title. my title was _ adviser. with respect, that was not my title. my title was assistant - adviser. with respect, that was not my title. my title was assistant to i my title. my title was assistant to the prime minister. you my title. my title was assistant to the prime minister.—

the prime minister. you did not consider yourself _ the prime minister. you did not consider yourself to _ the prime minister. you did not consider yourself to be - the prime minister. you did not consider yourself to be the - the prime minister. you did not| consider yourself to be the most senior person at number ten? i am not the most _ senior person at number ten? i am not the most senior _ senior person at number ten? i am not the most senior person, the cabinet secretary is the most senior person. cabinet secretary is the most senior erson. ., ., ., person. you did not have the authority _ person. you did not have the authority to _ person. you did not have the authority to be _ person. you did not have the authority to be able - person. you did not have the authority to be able to... - person. you did not have the | authority to be able to... you talked about a red team that is challenging the consensus. when you mooted that the corporate meetings were not useful meetings, they do not have the authority in downing street to be able to point this out and call for change? —— the cobra meetings. mr; and call for change? -- the cobra meetings-— and call for change? -- the cobra meetinus. g ., ., , meetings. my authority in downing street is limited. _ meetings. my authority in downing street is limited. at _ meetings. my authority in downing street is limited. at the _ meetings. my authority in downing street is limited. at the beginning | street is limited. at the beginning of january, street is limited. at the beginning ofjanuary, i try street is limited. at the beginning of january, i try to have a street is limited. at the beginning ofjanuary, i try to have a huge office reorganisation. you will know yourselves, the whole number ten building is hopeless in terms of a working environment. i tried in

january to get everybody to move to create a whole new office system so that we could be more effective, and i lost the argument. there are all sorts of things i try to do it for orfor worse, sorts of things i try to do it for orforworse, i did know sorts of things i try to do it for orfor worse, i did know when the argument on that. or for worse, i did know when the argument on that.— or for worse, i did know when the argument on that. finally, in terms of this background, _ argument on that. finally, in terms of this background, you _ argument on that. finally, in terms of this background, you talked - argument on that. finally, in terms. of this background, you talked about cobra, what about sage? it met frequently after the 22nd of january, did you attend routinely the meetings of sage? i attended, not routinely. _ the meetings of sage? i attended, not routinely. i _ the meetings of sage? i attended, not routinely, i attended _ the meetings of sage? i attended, not routinely, i attended some - the meetings of sage? i attended, not routinely, i attended some of i not routinely, i attended some of them, i sent ben warner to attend all of them and he did. did them, i sent ben warner to attend all of them and he did.— them, i sent ben warner to attend all of them and he did. did you have the riaht all of them and he did. did you have the right to — all of them and he did. did you have the right to attend? _ all of them and he did. did you have the right to attend? you _ all of them and he did. did you have the right to attend? you delegatedi the right to attend? you delegated but could you have gone yourself? in a sense, it is the opposite problem

of cobra. lots of meetings are power points. the two meetings are technical and i am not a technical person. i could not understand a lot of photos that were being discussed. reading your blogs, we would say you had understanding of technical terms and discussions. that had understanding of technical terms and discussions.— and discussions. that is not a good description — and discussions. that is not a good description of _ and discussions. that is not a good description of me. _ and discussions. that is not a good description of me. i _ and discussions. that is not a good description of me. i sent _ and discussions. that is not a good description of me. i sent an - and discussions. that is not a good | description of me. i sent an warner because, and i involved outside is from the academic world and business later on because i could not understand a lot of the that were being discussed and i thought it was better to have a phd assessed there who could look at their documents and understand what was being said. —— phd physicist. i listen lots of conversations, in february and

march, but a lot of it was over my head. �* , ., ., march, but a lot of it was over my head. �* i. ., ., ., head. but you write a lot about the dancers of head. but you write a lot about the dangers of people _ head. but you write a lot about the dangers of people going _ head. but you write a lot about the dangers of people going on - dangers of people going on tramlines, and experts talking to each other, insiders talking to each other, the fact that you consider yourselves an outsider on that, was it not more important from your own writings and perspective to be there to make sure that they were not going to make sure that they were not oinr ., , to make sure that they were not romr ., , , , , going that is exactly why i sent the -h sicist going that is exactly why i sent the physicist and _ going that is exactly why i sent the physicist and attended _ going that is exactly why i sent the physicist and attended some - going that is exactly why i sent the physicist and attended some of- going that is exactly why i sent the i physicist and attended some of the meetings myself. that is why i brought an outsider to the process later on. irate brought an outsider to the process later on. ~ ., ., ., ., ,, ., later on. we are going to talk about herd immunity. _ later on. we are going to talk about herd immunity, whether— later on. we are going to talk about herd immunity, whether that - later on. we are going to talk about herd immunity, whether that was i later on. we are going to talk about herd immunity, whether that was a | herd immunity, whether that was a policy. i mentioned your blog and that you have been thinking for some

time about specifically virus escapes and the consequences of pandemics, why did you change your 2019 blog between april and may to coronavirus? abs, 2019 blog between april and may to coronavirus?— coronavirus? a lot of funny things have been — coronavirus? a lot of funny things have been written _ coronavirus? a lot of funny things have been written about - coronavirus? a lot of funny things have been written about this, - coronavirus? a lot of funny things i have been written about this, media story saying i changed what i wrote, but those stories are false. not a letter of what i wrote was ever changed. in 2019i wrote a blog that said here is a huge problem, experiments being done all over the world, here is this big piece in the bulletin of atomic scientists explaining it, so i wrote a blog and i quoted a big chunk of the bulletin of atomic scientists and i wrote underneath, here is what i think about it and it should be taken more seriously in whitehall. not a single letter was changed, what happened in

may, sometime in the summer, not particularly important, after the first wave, i was extremely confident and turned out to be completely wrong that the whole question about our laboratory leak would be a massive issue because i thought donald trump was going to make it a issue againstjoe biden, because they had funded... i went back and look at the bulletin of atomic scientists piece that i had originally quoted and said people should read this, and in that piece, it has a section on wuhan itself and the facilities there. and i thought, i have remembered, have forgotten the whole thing, it was a year before, i went back to the original

piece and pasted a bigger section that i date originally on my blog. because once donald trump goes on about it, everyone is going to be asking about it and i wanted people to realise, this is not some weird thing that has just popped up, there were alarm bells a year ago. just to stress, not a single word of what i wrote was changed, all i did was paste over, more from the bulletin of atomic science. you paste over, more from the bulletin of atomic science.— paste over, more from the bulletin of atomic science. you changed it by addin: of atomic science. you changed it by adding things _ of atomic science. you changed it by adding things that _ of atomic science. you changed it by adding things that you _ of atomic science. you changed it by adding things that you so _ of atomic science. you changed it by adding things that you so aware - of atomic science. you changed it by adding things that you so aware of i adding things that you so aware of current interest? correct. the time that you did it. do ou correct. the time that you did it. do you remember? _ correct. the time that you did it. do you remember? between - correct. the time that you did it. | do you remember? between april correct. the time that you did it. - do you remember? between april and may 2020. mars do you remember? between april and ma 2020. . , ., y may 2020. was reasonably shortly after i'd may 2020. was reasonably shortly after i'd come _ may 2020. was reasonably shortly after i'd come back— may 2020. was reasonably shortly after i'd come back to _ may 2020. was reasonably shortly after i'd come back to work - may 2020. was reasonably shortly after i'd come back to work after i after i'd come back to work after being not well. i came back on the 12th or 13th of april, over the next

few weeks, we were discussing the issue, there were meetings in number ten. ~ ., , issue, there were meetings in number ten. . . , . issue, there were meetings in number ten. . . . , issue, there were meetings in number ten. ~ . ., , , ., issue, there were meetings in number ten. . . . , , ., , ten. was that an intense period? did ou have ten. was that an intense period? did you have the — ten. was that an intense period? did you have the leisure _ ten. was that an intense period? did you have the leisure to _ ten. was that an intense period? did you have the leisure to be _ ten. was that an intense period? did you have the leisure to be changing, | you have the leisure to be changing, adding to your blog of the previous year? i adding to your blog of the previous ear? ., ., , ., , ., year? i thought wrongly it was going to become an _ year? i thought wrongly it was going to become an issue _ year? i thought wrongly it was going to become an issue and _ year? i thought wrongly it was going to become an issue and i _ year? i thought wrongly it was going to become an issue and i knew - to become an issue and i knew everyone would start giggling the whole thing and i wanted people to realise that people had been hitting the panic button a year earlier. i thought it would be useful. if you look back at everything i have written over the last ten years, i have written over and over again about problems like pandemics, natural, engineered, crises, the number ten system, it never occurred to me given that there were thousands of words about it, that people would get so hit up about the whole thing. ijust people would get so hit up about the whole thing. i just thought people would get so hit up about the whole thing. ijust thought it people would get so hit up about the whole thing. i just thought it was very useful to people realise. as you see in the news recently, all

sorts of things are