this is bbc news. i'm shaun ley. the headlines at eight: dominic cummings gives explosive evidence to parliament, claiming the government's initial response to the pandemic was inadequate and complacent, with terrible consequences. he also criticised the delay to an inquiry into the pandemic. senior ministers, senior officials, senior advisers like me fell disastrously short of the standards that the public has a right to expect. when the public needed us most, the government failed. mr cummings accuses matt hancock of "criminal. disgraceful behaviour" over testing targets. i think that the secretary of state for health should have been fired for at least 15, 20 things, including lying to everybody, in multiple occasions.

the government rejected the claims about the health secretary, whilst borisjohnson also defended his record after cummings described him as unfit for thejob. we, with every step, tried to minimise loss of life, to save lives and protect the nhs, and we followed the best scientific advice that we can. we look at what lessons i have been learned. the aftermath of the hillsborough disaster. the families anger after three men are acquitted of altering police statements. police arrest five as they investigate the shooting of the black lives matter activist sasha johnson. our special reports on forced adoptions. we hear from those who've lived their whole lives in shadow of shame. what would you have wished for? to... to have stayed with my mum. to have been kept by the lady, the woman, that gave birth to me.

and amazon agrees to buy one of hollywood's most famous studios, mgm, for almost $8.5 billion. good evening, and welcome to the bbc news. once they were the closest of political allies, but today, dominic cummings has delivered the harshest of criticisms against his old boss, borisjohnson. in a withering seven—hour session in front of a commons committee, mr cummings, who left downing street last november, said thousands of people have lost their lives in the pandemic because of the failure of leadership in government. he admitted making mistakes himself,

but didn't spare those around him. dominic cummings described borisjohnson as unfit to lead the country. as for matt hancock, he accused the health secretary of lying and said he "should have been fired". and he described failures right from the start of the pandemic, saying "there was no lockdown plan". our first report is from our political editor, laura kuenssberg, on revelations that give us a glimpse into the heart of government during the pandemic. reality or revenge? delving back into troubled recent history. dominic cummings�*s day to give his version of events. a verdict of failure. and an apology for his part. senior ministers, senior officials, senior advisers like me, fell disastrously short of the standards that the public has a right to expect. when the public needed us most, the government failed. and i would like to say

to all the families of those who died, unnecessarily, how sorry i am for the mistakes made and my own mistakes at that. the government's public position had been it was well prepared, but he revealed how, in the second week of march last year, senior officials suddenly realised that just wasn't the case. someone said i have come through here to the primie minister's ofice to tell you all "i think we are absolutel i think this country is heading for disaster, i think we are going to kill thousands." he described the original expectation a peak in early summer, protecting the most vulnerable. but as flaws in the numbers emerged, how rapidly plans were sketched out on white boards to accelerate to lockdown. showing if nothing changed, the nhs would collapse and the poignant line, who do we not save? and why did it take him so long to ask the prime minister to change his mind? do you not recognise that that was a massive failure on your part,

as his chief adviser, that you took so long to come to him, with advice to change tack? yes, it was a huge, it was a huge failure of mine. and i bitterly regret i didn't hit the emergency panic button earlier than i did. but i was incredibly... ..frightened, i guess is the word, about the consequences of me kind of pulling a massive emergency string, and saying, the official plan is wrong and it will kill everyone and you have to change track, because what if i am wrong? number ten sometimes sounded on chaos. on one day, grappling with the potential of lockdow, with the potential of lockdowm, potential strikes in iraq and the number ten dog. we had this completely insane situation where part of the building was saying "are we going to bomb iraq?", part of building was arguing about whether we were going to do quarantine or not,

the prime minister has his girlfriend going crackers about something trivial. and a prime minister unwilling to take the disease seriously. in february the prime minister regarded this as just a scare story. if we have the prime minister chairing cobra meetings and he is telling everyone it is swine flu, "don't worry, i will get chris whitty to inject me live on tv with covid, so people realise it's noting to frightened of", that would not help serious planning. only halfway through. first call the prime| minister to answer. the prime minister had to defend the claims next door. this morning the prime minister's former closest adviser said, "when the public needed us most, the government failed." does the prime minister agree with that? the handling of this pandemic has been one of the most difficult things this country has had to do for a very long time. none of the decision have been easy. to go into a lockdown is a traumatic thing for a country.

mr cummings' real vitriol was saved for the health secretary. who may notjust be able to run away from a long list of accusations. i think that the secretary of state for health should have been fired for at least 15, 20 thing, including... 20 things, including... and putting people in care homes in danger. the government rhetoric was we put a shield around care home, a shield around care homes, it was complete nonsense. quite the opposite of putting a shield around them, we sent people with covid back to the care homes. the health secretary's team's rejected claims, but there were accusations that the prime minister wouldn't listen to mr cummings or the top scientists to bring back lockdown to save lives in the autumn. whose advice was he taking? he wasn't taking any advice, he was making his own decisions, he was going to ignore the advice. did you hear him say "let the bodies pile high in their thousands"? i heard that in the prime minister's study. then a direct blast at the man he helped put in downing street. fundamentally i regarded him

as unfit for the job and i was trying to create a structure round him to try and stop what i thought were extremely bad decisions. but after hours, for those who lost family, for those who have suffered, perhaps this most important verdict. tens of thousands of people died who didn't need to die. for the first time, someone who was involved in making the decisions during this crisis has come to that conclusion in public. a claim the government's always disputed or tried to ignore, but one day will have to answer in full. laura kuenssberg, bbc news, westminster. one controversial event was a division he made to make a trip to county durham. today, he again defended the trip, but said he should have been more open about the security reasons that prompted it. here's our deputy political editor vicki young. we'd all been told to stay at home, but dominic cummings didn't.

he in fact travelled to his parents' home in durham. before setting off, he was seen rushing out of downing street after discovering his wife had covid. weeks later, in the rose garden at downing street, he was forced to explain. i was worried that if my wife and i were both seriously ill, possibly hospitalised, there was nobody in london that we could reasonably ask to look after our child and expose themselves to covid. but today he revealed another version of events. my wife called saying, "there's a gang of people outside saying they're going to break into the house and kill everybody inside." so, it was actually repeated security threats which prompted the move to durham. but when the story erupted, mr cummings decided not to mention that. now, at this point i madejust a terrible, terrible, terrible mistake, which i'm extremely sorry about. so, i ended up giving the whole rose garden thing where what i said was true, but we left out a kind of crucial part of it all. and just the whole thing was a complete disaster,

and the truth is, it undermined public confidence in the whole thing. the most bizarre part of mr cummings�*s original story was the now infamous drive to barnard castle to test his eyesight after being ill with covid. if i was going to make up a story, i'd have come up with a hell of a lot better story than that one, right? you were testing your eyesight with your wife and child in the car with you? it didn't seem crazy at the time. obviously i wish i had never heard of barnard castle and i wish i'd never gone, and i wish the whole nightmare had never happened. after his evidence today, it's his colleague still in government who will be having nightmares. vicki young, bbc news, westminster. let's speak to our political correspondent, damian grammaticus. seven hours and an awful lot of questions and answers. did he leave us any clearer as to the critique, the overall critique that dominic cummings has of the way government

is conducted under the prime minister, at least until the point he left last november? i minister, at least untilthe point he left last november?- minister, at least untilthe point he left last november? i think he did t to he left last november? i think he did try to paint — he left last november? i think he did try to paint a _ he left last november? i think he did try to paint a pretty _ he left last november? i think he did try to paint a pretty clear - did try to paint a pretty clear picture. sort of broad strokes. there was the very direct attacks on the prime minister himself. you heard him there saying that he had reached the conclusion that the prime minister, who said was fundamentally unfit for the job. we had dominic cummings saying that by the end before he left downing street, he was trying to do things to push things through against his wishes. that's pretty extraordinary. he said that the prime minister at the outset had been against a lockdown, hadn't wanted to do that then, hatton wanted to do it late in then, hatton wanted to do it late in the year —— hadn't wanted. so, critical of borisjohnson and his

decision—making, his focus. critical too of anotherfigure, decision—making, his focus. critical too of another figure, the health secretary, matt hancock, on numerous accounts. he had criticisms of him on care homes. he heard in laura kuenssberg's report on protective equipment, so critical of individual figures but also the system itself. he said the system didn't have a plan for a lockdown. the system was slow to respond. that was part of what he tried to lay out as the reasons he felt in those crucial days, in february and march particularly, decisions he thought had been slow coming with the cost then of thousands of lives lost a. does the government offer any road bottle of what he's saying or is it arguing they should wait until there is the inquiry that the prime minister promised next spring —— any rebuttal? minister promised next spring -- any rebuttal? ~ , ,

rebuttal? absolutely. the hit character _ rebuttal? absolutely. the hit character -- _ rebuttal? absolutely. the hit character -- health - rebuttal? absolutely. the hitl character -- health secretary, character —— health secretary, people close to him say they reject that absolutely. all times this pandemic, he had worked incredibly hard to an unprecedented circumstances to protect the nhs and save lives. same message from the prime minister as well when he was questioned about it in parliament, and this of course that the prime minister, but health secretary had taken throughout, that they were acting on the best advice at the time in unprecedented circumstances and the prime minister said this was, there was no situation like this since the war. he called it a traumatic thing for the country to go into lockdown. none of the decisions had been easy. at every stage, we tried to minimise the loss of life, save lives and protect the nhs. so, what we will i think c is some of these criticisms becoming

the focus of questions as we will have tomorrow, labour trying to get the health secretary into parliament to answer an urgent question about his handling of the pandemic. damien dramatic has. — his handling of the pandemic. damien dramatic has, thanks _ his handling of the pandemic. damien dramatic has, thanks very _ his handling of the pandemic. damien dramatic has, thanks very much. -- l dramatic has, thanks very much. —— grammticas. wearing that his story is —— historian hat, how do you assess this? is -- historian hat, how do you assess this?— is -- historian hat, how do you assess this? , . assess this? unprecedented, ever in histo . assess this? unprecedented, ever in history- no — assess this? unprecedented, ever in history. no political— assess this? unprecedented, ever in history. no political aide, _ assess this? unprecedented, ever in history. no political aide, nor- history. no politicalaide, nor indeed, any cabinet minister has ever gone for a serving minister with the fury and the intensity of dominic cummings today, and indeed, in the previous weeks and months. imagine if somebody had gone for a total knee blair after the same way

—— tony blair. or over a whole series of government financial crises and foreign policy crises. it has never happened before. this is history in the making. we got very excited when lamont went for prime minister in 1993, saying he was in office, but not in power, and that was considered utterly, utterly devastating. well, this is to the power of 10,000 megawatts. sorry, on the basis of that, _ power of 10,000 megawatts. sorry, on the basis of that, he _ power of 10,000 megawatts. sorry, on the basis of that, he has _ power of 10,000 megawatts. sorry, on the basis of that, he has the _ the basis of that, he has the credibility of having been the prime minister's former chief adviser, but on the other hand, as a historian, can you rely on his evidence alone? well, we have to take very seriously. what he has said will

find the rest of his life and define the history of the next few years. he has said that government has been responsibly for the deaths of thousands, tens of thousands of people. imagine those families coming back if they suspect that thatis coming back if they suspect that that is true. he's accused people of gross incompetence, criminal, indeed, incompetence. the care home scenario, you cannot think of so grave in peace or in more accusations against government. churchill's decision to bomb, and the accusations of some of his teams, the ref commander... but that took place many years afterwards. this is utterly, utterly extraordinary. and i think the third

thing is, look, where were dominic cummings�*s friends and all of these accusations? we know who he dislikes, he dislikes borisjohnson, so he went for borisjohnson. he dislikes matt hancock, so he's gone for matt hancock. he dislikes the prime minister's fiance carrie symonds. he's gone for her. why has he not gone for those people who he likes who are his... he still likes? it's a very, very... we must interrogate the evidence that he said, which is so inflammatory. take it very seriously, but ask always the question, what has he said? why has he said it? and what has he not said? . �* , , , said? that's interesting. it will be interestin: said? that's interesting. it will be interesting to _ said? that's interesting. it will be

interesting to see _ said? that's interesting. it will be interesting to see michael - said? that's interesting. it will be interesting to see michael gove, l said? that's interesting. it will be . interesting to see michael gove, who were led to believe was involved with the process. dominic cummings�*s boss when he was in the cameron government. the connections we could explore, in terms of trying to take this out a little bit, comparing with other administrations, a lot of this criticism could be made of a lot of governments handling this pandemic. confused, chaotic, and consistent, sometimes not willing to listen to advisers when they should have. one might think of donald trump in that contest. can one isolate any of this and say this is down to borisjohnson or to this particular government? down to boris johnson or to this particular government?- down to boris johnson or to this particular government? well, i think dominic cummings's _ particular government? well, i think dominic cummings's evidence - particular government? well, i think dominic cummings's evidence is - dominic cummings's evidence is woefully indifferent to the way the government operates and of history, and of the way that other governments have handled the

epidemic. so, what about donald trump? what about president microns? what about angela merkel? what about modi? —— macron. ithink what about angela merkel? what about modi? —— macron. i think we need to have a comparative since and recognise what was it fair and reasonable to have expected a government that clearly did not have a road map for how to deal with the pandemic, despite many people saying that it should have done it. it didn't have that. were they human errors or was there deliberate lying and deceit and criminal negligence, as has been alleged. all of this needs to be looked at. we have never had such great allegations for some money so close who may be saw with

one eye but saul with that one i what was happening. maybe didn't fully understand what was happening or the context, but we have to now look very seriously at what he said, but also ask why did he say it and what has he not said. final question on this, in what has he not said. final question on this. in the _ what has he not said. final question on this, in the light _ what has he not said. final question on this, in the light the _ what has he not said. final question on this, in the light the fact - what has he not said. final question on this, in the light the fact of- on this, in the light the fact of the pandemic is ongoing, we are warned that there will be flare—ups of infections in the months and possibly years to come. bearing in mind what he has alleged today, do you think it is prudent to wait until spring next year to begin a proper inquiry into government handling of the pandemic? there's an ument handling of the pandemic? there's argument for— handling of the pandemic? there's argument for delay _ handling of the pandemic? there's argument for delay in _ handling of the pandemic? there's argument for delay in the - handling of the pandemic? there's argument for delay in the very - argument for delay in the very reason and for looking at it now so that as much as possible can be learned in a way that's balanced and

moderated and considered and not panicky, but you know, whether or not it's wise to delay, what's happened today is that the postmortem is beginning this evening. and it's unstoppable. the allegations are so serious that considerable time and energy and downing trait, whitehall and westminster will be devoted to looking at these allegations —— downing street. unfortunately, i think the focus of what we can learn will be lost to people fighting. not unreasonably to protect their own reputations, and what should be coming first, the good of the nation, might be lost in the process. this nation, might be lost in the process-_ nation, might be lost in the rocess. ~ , ., ~ , process. as ever, thank you very much for — process. as ever, thank you very much for being _ process. as ever, thank you very much for being with _ process. as ever, thank you very much for being with us _ process. as ever, thank you very much for being with us on - process. as ever, thank you very much for being with us on bbc . process. as ever, thank you very - much for being with us on bbc news. pleasure. and we'll find out how this story and many others are covered in tomorrow's front pages at 10:30pm and 11:30pm this

evening in the papers. if there is room for any others! our guestsjoining me tonight are the guardian's chief leader writer sonia sodha, and times radio presenter tom newton dunn. i think there take will be fascinating. with two people who know a lot how this will operate. and the latest government figures on coronavirus show 3,180 new infections and nine deaths in the latest 24—hour period. cases have been rising slowly over the past week, and the number of people who have now died is 127,748. in the vaccine roll—out, 186,147 people have received a first vaccine dose in the last 2a hours. in total, more than 38 million people have now had their firstjab. that's nearly 73% of the uk adult population. nearly 388,000 people

had their second dose in the past 2a hours. and it takes the overall number in that group to more than 23.5 million people — that's almost 45% of the adult population. the survivors and families of the victims of the hillsborough disaster have reacted with anger and disappointment after two retired police officers and a former solicitor accused of altering police statements were acquitted. 96 liverpool fans died as a result of the crush at the fa cup semifinal match at sheffield wednesday's ground on 15 april, 1989. judith moritz has the story. hillsborough is a double tragedy. the disaster itself, 96 lives lost when the football terraces became overcrowded at the sheffield wednesday ground. and its aftermath, as fans were unjustly blamed for their own deaths. the families of those who died have spent 32 years fighting forjustice.

today came the end of the legal road as the last trial collapse. it doesn't mean that there wasn't a cover—up, itjust means that the law as it is today is not fit for purpose. there needs to be recognition that the 96 were failed, and continue to be failed, and not only that, is it's setting a standard for everyone else who was getting shafted by the establishment. former police officers alan foster and donald denton, and retired police officer peter metcalf were accused of amending statements to mask police failings after the disaster. but the judge ruled thet mr metcalf and his co—defendants have no case to answer. this false accusation of cover—up has been whipped up continually over the years. the facts were investigated here yet again, by a judge and jury. there was no cover—up at hillsborough. though it is not disputed

that the statements were changed, the courts found it didn't amount to a crime. the judge accepted that the defendants didn't know the statements were going to be used for anything other than the 1989 public inquiry, which was not a court of law. this is the former headquarters of south yorkshire police. back in 1989, officers met here to organise the syp response to the disaster. the police statements ended up being used for three purposes — the public inquiry, the first set of inquests and the original criminal investigation into hillsborough. despite a string of inquiries, inquests and trials, the hillsborough families and survivors don't feel they have had accountability. as culture secretary, andy burnham backed their campaign in 2009. today, he called for a change in the law. i proposed a hillsborough bill when i was in parliament, to give families like margaret and others parity of legalfunding when they are at an inquest

where the state is involved. that is the very minimum we should be demanding. the recent hillsborough investigations are said to have been the longest and most expensive ever mounted in britain. the crown prosecution service has defended its decision to bring this prosecution, saying it was important for a jury to test the evidence, but the bereaved say it has been a farce. judith moritz, bbc news. police investigating the shooting of the black lives matter activist sasha johnson have arrested five men. msjohnson was shot in the head during a party in south london in the early hours of sunday morning, and remains in a critical condition in hospital. adina campbell gave us this update. five people are being held in police custody tonight on suspicion of attempted murder. the men, aged between 18 and 28, as well as a 17—year—old boy who's also been arrested on suspicion of possessing an offensive weapon

and supplying class—a drugs. one of the arrests involved a police chase. now, sasha johnson, who is a well—known antiracism campaigner who organised a black lives matter protest in oxford last year, she remains in a critical condition in hospital after undergoing successful surgery. vigils have been held in the last couple of days in oxford, where she's from, and also here in london, where she's being treated. as well as the five arrests, police are searching two properties in the peckham area of south london and say they're in the early stages of their investigation. eight people have been killed in a number of others injured in san jose, california. the attacker up and fired at a rail yard near the airport this morning. local time, officials say the suspect worked in a facility and some of the victims were employees at the site.

investigators say the three were aware that the emergency brakes on the car had been deactivated nearly a month ago to overcome a problem. prosecutors are carrying out an investigation. five families were involved. two children were among the dead. a five—year—old boy is the sole survivor and he remains in hospital with serious injuries. yesterday, we brought you the story of the hundreds of unmarried british women who were forced and shamed into handing over their new—born babies for adoption in the 1950—70s. they're now campaigning for an apology from borisjohnson. but it's notjust the birth mothers who say they were left traumatised.

many of the children who were adopted say they, too, have suffered. duncan kennedy reports. jan is one of the children at the heart of this story. i had an identity forced upon me. i feel like i just wasn't the person i was meant to be. she was born in 1960. her mother was 18 and unmarried, and was forced to give her up for adoption. jan says it has caused lifelong pain. i'm angry for the system allowing me to be given to those people. i'm angryfor... ..for the trauma and pain caused to my birth mother.

in the 50s, 60s and 70s, unmarried pregnant women faced intense pressure to give up their babies for adoption. i was 17 years old, 1963, when i found myself pregnant. pat felt that pressure and remembers the cruelty she faced in hospital. i remember one particular nurse who seems to enjoy being quite rough when she examined me, and i remember her saying to me, "well, how did you get like this if you don't like somebody doing this to you?" it was really quite abusive, they were quite abusive. that was horrid, that really hurt me. i was a human being, you know? why couldn't i be accepted for that. all i had done was, i was having a baby, made a mistake. around a quarter of a million unmarried mothers in britain were forced to give up their babies in the 30 years after the second world war.

the heartless attitudes towards them was reflected in documents from the time. in one, an official wrote "the baby is beautiful, unlike its mother." the women were seen as a baby supply chain, unworthy of dignity or respect. some birth mothers have cast doubt on the legality of the adoption consent forms they had to sign. that's reflected in this letter from an adoption hearing, which quotes the judge saying he was doubtful about the validity of thejp or magistrate's signature on the consent form. i was lucky. i had really good parents. many children born to unmarried mothers did end up in loving families. rachel langham was taken to live in canada as a baby. but she still says her birth mother suffered. i feel terrible empathy,

you know, and sorrow for her. it's terrible. but you certainly should apologise for any heinous things that you have done. tonight, following the bbc�*s reports on forced adoptions, mps from all sides havejoined calls for an official government apology to the birth mothers. there is a huge amount of support for this motion, and we expect there will be a great deal of support within government for an apology to be issued. every day these women have been told, "you gave your baby up for adoption. " they didn't, they were forced. the children of the birth mothers agree that it's now time to act. an apology is warranted. but of course it can't ever take away the pain and trauma that has been suffered. the government says it sympathises with the birth mothers, but has stopped short of an apology. those who have lived

through forced adoptions say an injustice has been done. duncan kennedy, bbc news. you can see a full documentary by duncan kennedy looking at this on the bbc news channel this weekend. breaking news, more than 150 people are missing drowned in northwest nigeria after an overloaded boat broke in half and sank. the riverboat was travelling to niger state in nigeria, when it went down. local official said local divers and emergency agencies were deployed to the scene to them rescue people. many of the passengers drowned when the boat sank. many of those on board are believed to be women and children. we'll bring you more on that as soon as we get it here on bbc news. but it is now 27 minutes

to nine. hello, this is bbc news with shaun ley. the headlines... accuse matt hancock of disgraceful behaviour. wejust had a quote from the health secretary saying instead of listening to the evidence, they been getting the vaccination roll—out going. the families anger after three minutes in acquitted. police arrest five as they investigate the shooting of the black lives matter activist sasha johnson.

and our special reports on forced adoptions — we hear from those who've lived their whole lives in shadow of shame. during prime minister's questions in the commons borisjohnson repeated what he's said many times before — that in dealing with the coronavirus pandemic his government has, at all times, followed the scientific advice. our health editor hugh pym looks now at what we learnt from dominic cummings about the scientific and health assessments that were available to the prime minister through the crisis. some will contest it, but today's drastic evidence shines new light on the government's handling of the biggest peacetime crisis in modern times. dominic cummings' account of the first covid wave in 2020 is highly critical of ministers and officials. british people back from wuhan in china were quarantined in late january, but until the end of february, he said, there was no attempt

to get on a war footing. some key players even took skiing holidays. all this as italian hospitals were being overrun with seriously ill covid patients. mr cummings argues there should have been a lockdown by early march. but big sporting events like the cheltenham racing festival went ahead. he said experts thought closing sports events would mean people went to pubs instead, but this was completely wrong. he said experts thought closing sports events would mean people now is the time for everyone to stop nonessential contact with others. by 16 march, he says there had been a big change in thinking, with the start of restrictions, though a full lockdown was delayed another week. but a medical expert on one of the main advisory groups says none of the options were clear—cut. really urgent action needed to be taken, but that was very difficult, ithink, for the politicians to balance all the different inputs they were getting from the scientist on one hand and from those

who really felt that this was going to be very damaging to the economy on the other. mr cummings slams the lack of preparation, including shortages of ppe. he alleges even with virus cases surging, there were no urgent plans to secure more supplies. by september, the second wave of the virus was developing. mr cummings says action should have been taken then. the testing system was coming close to being overwhelmed, and he claims the prime minister rejected the idea of a short circuit breaker lockdown in england. some experts agree that was a mistake. there was a lot of arguments in favour of taking early action in the autumn, in september, when we could see that cases were rising again and we didn't have vaccines. people had been able to travel, and we had reimported infection back into the country, people moving around. we should have done something earlier. the number of uk deaths is one of the highest of leading industrialised nations. mr cummings said mistakes had been made, and he was sorry

for his part in them. adrian hamer died with covid on boxing day aged 55. his widow, lisa, says today's developments provide no comfort. mistakes have been made. people need to be accountable for their actions. and they need to take accountability. they all need to take accountability and learn, because if this ever happens again, god help us. more chances to learn will come with a public inquiry next year. others will give their version of events. some may well differ from those of mr cummings. hugh pym, bbc news. mr cummings said that there was no plan for shielding and that covid patients were sent back into care homes after contracting covid. let's speak to nadra ahmed, spokesperson for the national care association. thank you very much for speaking to us. in some ways this must be difficult to listen to some of this evidence, given the consequences of

it. but to be fair, we new patients had been discharged into hospitals because you and your colleagues running care homes brought this up and express your anger and concern about what was happening. do you think we learned anything about the kind of decision—making process and mistakes that were made, from what you've heard? i mistakes that were made, from what you've heard?— you've heard? i think we have now. at the time — you've heard? i think we have now. at the time it _ you've heard? i think we have now. at the time it was _ you've heard? i think we have now. at the time it was really _ at the time it was really challenging, and actually hearing it straight from mr cummings's mouth actually brings it all back because we knew people were being discharged out of hospital into care settings to protect the nhs — which was right, we knew we needed to do that. but at the same time, what it was doing was exposing our sector, having been told it wasn't going to be a problem to the virus entering at our services. so we were lied to,

really, from that point, the actually the virus was there, it was live. the tests were either not being done or not being done appropriately or in a timely fashion to enable us to be secure. i’ll to enable us to be secure. i'll uuote to enable us to be secure. i'll quote you _ to enable us to be secure. i'll quote you if— to enable us to be secure. i'll quote you if i may, because there are people who may not have followed this in detail because there was quite a lot to follow. this subatomic cummings told mps today. when the promised or came back after being ill with covid, he asked what was happening with all the people and care homes? matt hancock said people would be tested before they went back — what the hell happened to? mr cummings said he and the pm categorically marched people would be tested before going there care homes. "we sent people with covid back to the care homes." all that is very interesting, but i wonder if it

helps you understand the process that led to that? because in a sense of preventing something similar happening, clearly not the same because we know about thauvin, but what other future potential infections might come in the future years —— cove covid? infections might come in the future years -- cove covid?— infections might come in the future years -- cove covid? lessons must be learned. years -- cove covid? lessons must be learned- this — years -- cove covid? lessons must be learned. this is _ years -- cove covid? lessons must be learned. this is a _ years -- cove covid? lessons must be learned. this is a prevention, - years -- cove covid? lessons must be learned. this is a prevention, and - learned. this is a prevention, and at that point, what we thought we were doing was preventing this becoming a big issue for the nhs and overwhelming it. what we now know is that actually, this came into the care settings overwhelmingly because there was no prevention, no plan to support the social care sector. there was no ppe, it was all being diverted. those are lessons we must learn. if we are going to be preparing, we need to prepare social care as much is the nhs because we are the backbone of the nhs. if social care fails, so will the nhs.

and i think that's been recognised ijy and i think that's been recognised by nhs leaders. sadly, it isn't recognised by the very department thatis recognised by the very department that is there to look after us — so someone needs to champion the cause of social care in a way that protects the vulnerable people we look after, as well. we protects the vulnerable people we look after, as well.— protects the vulnerable people we look after, as well. we could have an interesting _ look after, as well. we could have an interesting discussion - look after, as well. we could have an interesting discussion and - look after, as well. we could have an interesting discussion and i - look after, as well. we could have i an interesting discussion and i hope we will on another occasion about the social care plan and the government's policy at that it has a plan for social care —— promise. the department of health has now called the department health of social care, but in practical terms, joining up those bits, is there stuff we can do now before we get to a stage of a national care service, or whatever the government comes up with that would help to improve things? because there are lots of little individual things, and people will know from their own experiences like the wrong pills being assigned because information doesn't come from the hospital, and there's not the support services there for them

so they end up back in hospital — all these things that are quite distressing but aren't necessarily a big grand plan? i distressing but aren't necessarily a big grand plan?— big grand plan? i think if we look at, big grand plan? i think if we look at. following _ big grand plan? i think if we look at, following the _ big grand plan? i think if we look at, following the person - big grand plan? i think if we look at, following the person rather i big grand plan? i think if we look. at, following the person rather than the plan — so if we want to look at a service, let's build it around the individual who is receiving that care, and that should then be whether it's in a social care setting or health care setting that the care should be available in both, and that's how we will be able to integrate a model that delivers services for the individual that will work towards the plan. and i think that's the challenge we have. with a workforce, we know the parity of esteem isn't there. we aren't looking at a workforce that covers health and social care, we're looking at a health workforce and a social care workforce. and what we know is we've got 110,000 vacancies in social care which can't be filled for a number of reasons. and part of

that would really come together, if we got the health and social care economy in a way that people thought working in the whole sector would working in the whole sector would work for them and they would get paid the same, there would be parity of esteem. i think the recognition of esteem. i think the recognition of social care and the image of social care means to be re—recognized. without that, we won't get anywhere. fine re-recognized. without that, we won't get anywhere.— re-recognized. without that, we won't get anywhere. one final brief ruestion - won't get anywhere. one final brief question - do _ won't get anywhere. one final brief question - do you _ won't get anywhere. one final brief question - do you think _ won't get anywhere. one final brief question - do you think we - won't get anywhere. one final brief question - do you think we shouldl question — do you think we should wait till next spring to begin the inquiry into the pandemic casilla i think the inquiry has already started by default, we've been talking about it today and the formal inquiry should happen as soon as it can. lip formal inquiry should happen as soon as it can. , ,., formal inquiry should happen as soon asitcan. , , as it can. up so sorry: the government, _ as it can. up so sorry: the government, good - as it can. up so sorry: the government, good to - as it can. up so sorry: the i government, good to speak as it can. up so sorry: the - government, good to speak to you judges have delivered a verdict in

the case against royal dutch sale brewing democrat ruling that they must do more to tackle climate change. they were sued by friends of the earth for undermining targets set by paris agreement. the decision is only binding in the netherlands but could influence judges is only binding in the netherlands but could influencejudges in other cases elsewhere. shell says it will appeal. in hog and gave us this out democrat update on the outcome of the case. —— anna hall again. the the case. -- anna hall again. the --eole the case. -- anna hall again. the people versus _ the case. —— anna hall again. tue: people versus shell. the case. —— anna hall again. tte: people versus shell. six the case. —— anna hall again. "tte: people versus shell. six of the case. —— anna hall again. t'te: people versus shell. six of climate groups plus more than 17,000 dutch citizens who brought this case against shell. and the result has been unprecedented. they call it a ground—breaking case which started in 2019. they accuse shell of violating human rights by continuing

to invest billions in fossilfuels, they say should go further and faster. the hague agreed, the corporation had a responsibility to cut its carbon footprint and orders shell to reduce its emissions 45% by 2030, compared to the 2019 levels. this case matters notjust here but around the world, because climate activists will be seeing this as their new frontier, and their battle to protect the planet. and also organisations will now realise that judges have the power to force them to change their policies. this really is a ground—breaking, historic case we are witnessing here in the hague, and the activists are clearly delighted. shell have always said they are making efforts to reduce their carbon footprint, and they will continue to do so. we've

had a statement from shall in which they said, "urgent action is needed on climate change which is why we have accelerated our efforts to become a net zero emissions company by 2050." just after 11pm on bbc news, we will hearfrom an just after 11pm on bbc news, we will hear from an environmental lawyer from the us on the impact of that case. marks and spencer has reported an annual loss of more than 201 million pounds after what its ceo described as a year like no other. the 137—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 1.3%. 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. builders are being reduced to dust limited to £5 builders are being reduced to dust limited to e5 of cement dust fivelb. for the first time since the belarusian authorities forced a plane flying through its airspace to land in minsk, the president, alexander lukashenko, has spoken. he was addressing the belarusian parliament to give his view on why a ryanair flight on its way to lithuania was ordered to land by a militaryjet. he says he didn't know the dissident journalist roman protasevich was on board until it landed.

he says he took appropriate measures to protect the country. translation: as we predicted, i our ill-wishers at home and abroad have changed their methods of attacking the state. they have crossed many red lines and crossed boundaries of common sense and human morality. speaking to the bbc earlier, the lithuanian prime minister, ingrida simonyte, said mr lukashenko's statements couldn't be taken seriously. it's so complicated for anyone who believes in rule—of—law institutions and western democracy, to believe in anything mr lukashenko is saying. i think they will invent whatever legend they need to try and shelter their own doings. —— their wrongdoings. our moscow correspondent sarah rainsford sent us

this update from minsk. this was alexander lukashenko very much going on the offensive and defending his own actions, and the actions of belarus in what happened with that ryanair flight. he essentially presented belarus as saving the day. he talked about acting to save lives, he claimed there was a real security threat to the plane. "what else was i supposed to do," alexander lukashenko said today. but in the same breath, he also referred to roman protasevich and his girlfriend who were both detained, of course, when that flight was diverted to minsk. he talked about them as "agents of the west", claiming they were backed by the west to damage, to harm belarus. and he painted the west essentially as at war with belarus — a "hybrid war", he called it, putting unprecedented pressure on his country. he also seemed to have an appeal in there to russia, to vladimir putin for continuing, in fact even increasing its support and cooperation, because he said the west was using belarus

as a training ground, a testing ground for what it plans to do in russia. so this was really the leader of belarus presenting this country as beleaguered, as under attack and saying, "ok, you're sanctioning us. we'll weather that storm, it's not a problem because we have a big brother, a big ally in russia, and we'll stand strong." in a speech at the scottish parliament, nicola sturgeon has set out her plans for the first 100 days of her new government, following the recent national election. the first minister told fellow msps the "most important priority" was to lead the country safely out of the pandemic. but she also raised the prospect of much closer co—operation with the greens — including positions in government — if talks go well. it is not inconceivable that a cooperation agreement could lead in future to a green minister or ministers being part

of this government. the key point for today is that we are both agreeing to come out of our comfort zones to find new ways of working for the common good, to change the dynamic of our politics for the better, and give meaning to the founding principles of our parliament. our scotland correspondent lorna gordon is in holyrood, and sent this a little earlier. the snp are just short of a majority here at the scottish parliament. they've governed as a minority at ministration before with the informal support of the pro—independence scottish greens. —— minority administration. but nicola sturgeon said today that for the first time, they've entered into structured talks with the scottish green party, with a view to reaching what she's calling a formal cooperation agreement. now weeks of talks still lie ahead while the two parties look at areas where they can find common ground — but remember, both parties are in favour of a second

independence referendum, which the first minister would like to hold once the covid crisis is over. now, nicola sturgeon has said this is all potentially ground—breaking and, that if talks are successful, it could potentially mean ministerialjobs for green msps. she also said she wasn't being driven by parliamentary arithmetic — but if it did happen, it would serve to highlight that a majority of msps here are in favour of another referendum. the health secretary matt hancock spoke to reporters outside his home this evening. i haven't seen this performance today in full. and in set up with d—link to get the vaccine roll—out up and running and saving lives, i'll be giving a statement to the house of commons tomorrow, and i'll have more to save there. ~., tomorrow, and i'll have more to save there. ., ,, tomorrow, and i'll have more to save there. ., . ,, ., there. matt hancock returning home this evening- —

amazon has agreed to buy the historic mgm studios for $8.45 billion — that's around £5.97 billion. the sale will give the tech giant's prime streaming service access to a huge back catalogue of content, including the james bond franchise and legally blonde, as well as 17,000 television shows such as the handmaid's tale tv series. i'm joined now by ajay chowdhury, editor of the james bond international fan club. thanks very much for being with us. i guess it's always good news from a fan's point of view if there is new investment potentially coming. but i wonder what you think the motivation might be for amazon to do this. because it's wanted to make films of its own for quite some time but hasn't had much luck doing that. t hasn't had much luck doing that. i guess for amazon, they've got the facility to get the content out to various people. and mgm, the studio that owns half the james bond franchise, has a huge depth of a library of films and tv content. of

course the jewel in that corporate crown is the james bond series. no time to die is determined to be released in cinema this autumn. the last film starring daniel craig will be released in cinema no matter what. i think a deep—pocketed studio is always needed by film—makers. there's an old adage — how do you become a millionaire in the movie business? you start as a billionaire. sojeff bezos will be that deep—pocketed saviour. but the bond films have been handmade, hand curated. each film is made on a film by film basis. their bespoke entertainment, and no time to diet will probably be that critical and commercial high that we've seen. amazon is getting a franchise that is undervalued and probably underexploited. there will be all

sorts of pressure to merchandise and corporatized it, and i'm sure that will be done in due course, tastefully and suitable to the james bond we all know and love.- tastefully and suitable to the james bond we all know and love. that's an interestin: bond we all know and love. that's an interesting question, _ bond we all know and love. that's an interesting question, because - bond we all know and love. that's an interesting question, because there. interesting question, because there is this pressure because there are other franchises and streaming services, obviously the marble franchises have been very successful. i was intrigued by something that was said in the comments confirming the sale, it was amazon talking about the desire to reimagine content. as a film fan, there are some fans you get nervous about hearing about reimagining franchises, because they are member rather bad colourisation the black and white films, or trying to replace the effects in a film which sometimes changes the film. you might be a bit nervous about that. we would be, but the key thing is

movie fans have changed, it's just over 100 years old and it's gone through all sorts of innovations. but the key thing to remember this is who owns james bond is different to who controls it. the current producers of the series, the family still owns it. i think they care very much about it. 60 years on, we're still talking about a beloved franchise. i don't think marvel will get that done that claimant i think it is a question of no prime to diet. , ' �* .,, it is a question of no prime to diet. " it is a question of no prime to diet. ' �* ~ it is a question of no prime to diet. " ,, �*, diet. jeff bezos may think he's -la in: a diet. jeff bezos may think he's playing a god _ diet. jeff bezos may think he's playing a god figure. - diet. jeff bezos may think he's playing a god figure. thank . diet. jeff bezos may think he's| playing a god figure. thank you diet. jeff bezos may think he's - playing a god figure. thank you very much forjoining us. time now for a look at the weather with a man who's always shaken and never stirred.

hello there. by by finally wielding areas of high pressure building and for the end of may, that'll... and also temperatures will be on the rise as we head into the bank holiday weekend. had pretty heavy showers across northern and eastern areas through the day, that will fade away overnight. most places will be dry, and legacy of cloud across scotland in northern england, some missed patches around too. temperatures at 4-7 c. we patches around too. temperatures at 4—7 c. we start tomorrow morning off with a good deal of sunshine around, and he clouded missed in northern areas will melt away, just the chance of the odd shower developing across central and eastern areas, most places will be dry, it will be much warmer, 18—19 c in the central belt, we could reach 20 celsius somewhere in the southeast. but it will be turning cloudier and wetter out west thanks to a weather front which will bring some down whether. but as we head into the bank holiday weekend, it'll turn warmer particularly in the south with highs

into the low 20s.

this is bbc news. shakespearian betrayal or moment of truth? borisjohnson's former aide says the prime minister grossly mishandled the early days of the pandemic. and dominic cummings apologises for the deaths of thousands who he says died needlessly from covid. mr cummings was also critical of the nation's health secretary, matt hancock. but this wasn't just political score—settling. we're talking about real people's lives, and very real deaths. donald trump has dismissed reports of a grand jury investigation signjose sign jose �*s on joses signjose �*s onjoses maersk call that a horrific day for the city. donald trump has dismissed reports of a grand jury investigation into his businesses, as a �*witch hunt�*, but prosecutors in manhattan clearly think they have something on the former president.