has described borisjohnson as unfit for the job. in a parliamentary public hearing, dominic cummings said tens of thousands of people died needlessly from coronavirus, because of disastrous failings by the government. britain has been one of the countries worst hit by the pandemic. eight people have been killed and others wounded after a gunman opened fire in a railyard in san jose, california. the gunman, who worked at the railfacility, also died. there have been 230 mass shootings so far this year across the united states. ajudge in australia has dismissed what could've been a landmark case, brought by eight teenagers and a nun trying to stop the expansion of australia's coal production. they argued the federal government had a "duty of care" in protecting future generations from climate change. now it's time for a look back

at the day in parliament. hello again, and welcome to wednesday in parliament. as dominic cummings delivers his verdict on borisjohnson. part of the problem was fundamentally, i regarded him as unfit for the job. he doesn't rate matt hancock much, either. i said repeatedly to the prime minister that he should be fired. plenty of ammunition for the labour leader at prime minister's questions, where borisjohnson fights back. he continues to play these pointless political games, whilst we get on with delivering on the people's priorities. also in this programme: a cycling minister speaks out about a new form of transport. i know how frightening it is, actually, just on the road i to be approached by one of these e—scooters. -

but first: dominic cummings' explosive evidence to mps on the government's handling of the pandemic. the prime minister's former adviser told them tens of thousands of people had died needlessly, borisjohnson was unfit to be prime minister, and matt hancock should have been sacked as health secretary for repeatedly lying. he spent seven hours in front of the health and the science and technology committees. and he began with an apology. the truth is that senior ministers, senior officials, senior advisers like me fell disastrously short of the standards that the public has a right to expect of its government in a crisis like this. when the public needed us most, the government failed. and i'd like to say to all the families of those who died unnecessarily, how sorry i am for the mistakes that were made, and for my own mistakes, at that. he was asked about the early days of the pandemic which, by february of last year,

was occupying 90% of his time. the government itself in number ten was not operating on a warfooting in february in any way, shape or form. lots of key people were literally skiing in the middle of february. it wasn't until the last week of february that there was really any sort of sense of urgency, i would say, in terms of the number ten cabinet office. would you say that you were operating on a war footing in february? as i said before, i think in the first ten days or so of february, no. there were all sorts of things going on — there was the h52 nightmare, there was the reshuffle going on, and that happened on the 12th, then the pm went away on holiday for two weeks. he gave the impression that at that stage, boris johnson wasn't taking the threat of covid as seriously

as he should have. the basic thought was that — in february, the prime minister regarded this as just a scare story. he described it as the "new swine flu." did you tell him it wasn't? certainly. but the view of various officials inside number ten was, if we have the prime minister chairing cobra meetings and he just tells everyone, "it's swine flu, don't worry about it, i'll get chris whitty on live tv to inject me with coronavirus so everyone realised it's nothing to be frightened of" — that would not help actually serious planning. by 12 march, household quarantine for those with symptoms was being discussed, along with a us request tojoin a bombing attack in iraq. that day, the times had run a huge story about the prime minister and his girlfriend, and their dog. and the prime minister's girlfriend was going completely crackers about this story, demanding that the press office deal with that. so we had this, sort of,

completely insane situation in which part of the building was saying, "are we going to bomb iraq"? part of the building was arguing about whether or not we were going to do quarantine, or not to quarantine. the prime minister has his girlfriend going crackers about something completely trivial. the questioning moved on to the work of the department of health, and the health secretary, matt hancock, focusing on issues like the supply of protective equipment and test and trace. all we're really hearing here is incompetence, chaos — so how would you rate the performance of the department of health, the secretary of state? outstanding, good, requires improvement, or inadequate? and why? i think that there was some brilliant — like in much of the government system, there was many brilliant people at relatively junior and middle levels who were terribly let down by senior leadership.

i think that the secretary of state for health should have been fired for at least 15—20 things, including lying to everybody on multiple occasions, in meeting after meeting in the cabinet room and publicly. rosie? oh dear! there was more. i think there's no doubt at all that many senior people performed far, far disastrously below the standards which the country has a right to expect. i think that the secretary of state for health is certainly one of those people. i said repeatedly to the prime minister that he should be fired — so did the cabinet secretary, so did many other senior people. i think i heard you correctly in that you are accusing - the health secretary of having lied. - did i hear that correctly? yes. that's obviously a serious charge — can you providel the committee with the evidence behind that assertion? _ yes! imean... there are numerous examples,

i mean, in the summer, he said everybody who needed treatment got the treatment that they required. he knew that was a lie because he'd been briefed by the chief scientific adviser and chief medical officer himself about the first peak, and we were told explicitly that people did not get the treatment they deserved. many people were left to die in horrific circumstances. he later offered even more detail. i blame myself for many, many, many things in this whole crisis. but one thing i can say completely honestly is that on this, i said repeatedly, from february, march, "if we don't fire the secretary of state and if we don't get the testing into someone else�*s hands, we are going to kill people and it'll be a catastrophe." he discussed things with sir mark sedwill, then the uk's top civil servant. the cabinet secretary said to the prime minister, because remember in april, we had this terrible pledge which was terribly distorting the whole system.

we also had constant repeated lying about ppe. the cabinet secretary said to the prime minister in almost the first meeting when he came back, "prime minister, the british system is not set up to deal with a secretary of state who repeatedly lies in meetings. we can't operate like that." you have made that point, mr cummings... but my point is, we couldn't get to grips with the test and trace until we got it out of dh's hands into a separate agency. 0k. those are very serious allegations said under parliamentary privilege, and we've got mr hancock coming here in two weeks' time to respond to those. but, as greg clarke said, we'd be grateful for any evidence that you have to back up those assertions before mr hancock comes to this committee. in a statement, a spokesperson for matt hancock�* said, "we absolutely reject mr cummings' claims about the health secretary." well, he was no less critical

about the prime minister, suggesting that he had come to regret the first lockdown. last month, sources told the bbc that borisjohnson had said he would rather see "bodies pile high" than take the country into a third lockdown. did you hear him say "let the bodies pile high- in their thousands," or, "it's only killing - 80—year—olds"? there's been a few different versions of these stories knocking around. there was a version of it in the sunday times which was not accurate. but the version that the bbc reported was accurate. and you heard that? i heard that in the prime minister's study. dominic cummings left downing street late last year after a power struggle in number ten. by 31 october, our relations were essentially already finished. the fact that his girlfriend also wanted rid of me was relevant, but not the heart of the problem. the heart of the problem was fundamentally, i regarded him as unfit for the job,

and i was trying to create a structure around him to try and stop what i thought were extremely bad decisions and push other things through against his wishes. and he had the view that he was prime minister, and i should just be doing as he wanted me to — and that's obviously not sustainable for very long. during the first lockdown, dominic cummings travelled to the north east of england and, while there, drove 30 miles to "test his eyesight" after a bout of covid. it didn't seem crazy... it seems a bit crazy now — that you were testing your eyesight with your wife and child in the car with you. it didn't seem crazy at the time. it seemed just like, "ok, let's get in the car, drive up and down the road. if i feel bad, come home." i can completely understand why people think the whole thing was weird. and honestly, i wish i never heard of barnard castle and i wish i'd never gone. i wish the whole nightmare had never happened.

hopefully, people that don't agree can understand. as i say, i can only apologise for the whole debacle. well, dominic cummings was still going strong when prime minister's questions began two—and—a—half hours after he'd started giving evidence. his appearance had already generated plenty of material for the labour leader, sir keir starmer, to explore. one year ago almost to the day, he described his former adviser as, in his words, "in every respect acting responsibly, legally, and with integrity." this morning, that same adviser has said that senior ministers fell, his words, "disastrously short of the standards the public has a right to expect of its government," and that lives were lost as a result. does the prime minister except that central allegation, and that his inaction led to needless deaths? prime minister. no, mrspeaker. and, of course, all those matters will be reviewed in the course of the public inquiry that i have announced. i noticed that he's fixated, as ever, on the rear—view mirror, mr speaker, whilst

we on this side of the house are getting on with ourjob of rolling out the vaccines, making sure that we protect the people of this country — and that, i think, has been the decisive development on which i think people are rightly focusing. keir starmer moved onto dominic cummings' excoriating criticism of matt hancock. including an allegation that the health secretary misled other ministers and officials on a number of occasions. now i don't expect the prime minister to respond to that, but can he comfirm from this morning's evidence... can the prime minister — can he confirm, did the cabinet secretary advise him, the prime minister, that he, the cabinet secretary, had "lost faith in the health secretary's honesty"? prime minister. the answer to that is no, mr speaker. and i'm afraid i haven't had the benefit of seeing the evidence that he's bringing

to the house. but i must say that what the people of this country want us all to do is to get on with the delicate business now of trying to reopen our economy and restore people's freedoms, get back to our way of life by rolling out the vaccine. i would've thought that that was a much more probable —— in much more proper enquiry for the — —— in much more proper enquiry for the right honourable gentleman today. another central allegation briefed overnight is that the prime minister delayed the circuit breaker over the autumn half term because "covid was only killing 80—year—olds". can i remind the prime minister that over 83,000 people over 80 lost their lives to this virus? and that his decision to delay for a0 days, from the sage guidance, on 21 september until 31 october, will be seen as one of the single biggest failings of the last year?

now having been told of the evidence, does the prime minister accept that he used the words "covid was only killing 80—year—olds", or words to those affect? prime minister. mr speaker, we saw what happened during the pandemic — and particularly, he talks about the september lockdown and my approach to it, and the very, very difficult decision that the country faced. and, of course, this will be a matter for the inquiry to go into, but we have an objective test, mr speaker, in the sense that there was a circuit breaker of the kind he describes in wales. it did not work, and i'm afraid, mrspeaker, i'm absolutely confident that we took the decisions in the best interest of the british people. in the light of the drip of very serious allegations and the failure of the prime minister to provide even basic answers, and continuing

mistakes affecting millions of people, does the prime minister now recognise he must bring forward the timing of the public inquiry into covid, and that it should start this summer, and as soon as possible? prime minister. no, mr speaker, as i've said before, i won't concentrate valuable official time on that now whilst we're still battling a pandemic. and i thought actually that was what the house had agreed on. and mr speaker, he continues to play these pointless political games whilst we get on with delivering on the people's priorities. the snp�*s westminster leader said what dominic cummings had said was extraordinary, but not surprising. when people were dying, - the united kingdom government was considering chickenpox parties and joking about . injecting the prime minister with covid live on tv. - we had a circus act when we| needed serious government. isn't it the case that, - what the country needed leadership most, the prime - minister was missing in action? thousands have paid the - ultimate price for his failure.

when will the prime minister finally accept responsibility. for the failures of his government? - mr speaker, as i've said repeatedly in this house, i take full responsibility for everything that the government did, and will continue to do so. one of the reasons why we've set up an independent public inquiry is i believe the people of this country do deserve to have daylight shone on all the issues he raised. borisjohnson. you're watching wednesday in parliament with me, david cornock. still to come: the new plan for rail. to wales now, where the first minister has been challenged over his government's plans to ease covid restrictions. unlike in england, there's no equivalent date tojune the 21st, when restrictions are due to end. mark drakeford was answering questions for the first time since the senedd elections. what is the first minister's view on the regulations

that the events sectors in particular will have to deal with going forward, when we know other parts of the united kingdom have a date ofjune the 21st? i appreciate that date might move, first minister. move, so are you able to offer us any view of the way the welsh government see things panning out in the late summer and early autumn with the restrictions the event sector and the hospitality sector have to operate here in wales? it is a very important point that the member raises about hospitality and events sector, and i wish i could give them a more definite answer than i'm able to. we've moved to level two restrictions. the cabinet will be considering this week and next whether or not it is sufficiently safe in wales to move to level one restrictions, and that would further liberalise the ability of hospitality and events sectors to get back to business. of course, that is what we want to happen. the people of wales have voted

this month by a margin of morej than 221 for parties that stood on a platform of greater - powers for the senedd. westminster's reaction to this mandate so far has been - notjust to ignore it, - but to seek to reverse it. they have the plan for wales, itjust doesn't involve us. - the senedd bypassed _ on the replacement to eu funds, transport for wales rebranded as great british railways, - wales to get a freeportl whether we like it or not and maybe even a tunnel in the celtic sea floated i without consultation and built presumably like the m4 reliefj road without our consent. if you add to this list. the internal market bill, the australia trade deal and a uk government. hub seemingly conceived i as some imperial outpost, doesn't westminster's. strategy increasingly look like abolition by stealth? i have to agree with the leader of plaid cymru that the charge sheet against the present uk government is a long

and serious one. the so—called plan for wales, a plan made for wales without wales. not a single conversation with the government of wales in its production. not so much as an invitation to a single conversation with the secretary of state before it was published or even an invitation to its launch. i must say, it was deliberate, it was provocative and it was intended to be so. mark drakeford. during media interviews at the start of the day, the transport secretary, grant shapps, had advised people against watching the dominic cummings hearing. he recommended tuning in, instead, to the transport committee. luckily, on wednesday in parliament, you can have both. the committee's investigating government plans to revamp the railways. it's setting up a new public body — great british railways, or gbr — to oversee rail travel. there is one big fundamental point here which is of crucial importance before any

of the detail, and that is the setting up of a specialist body to deliver the government's railway strategy, by which i mean two questions. what sort of railway does the government want, and how big is the bag of money to pay for it? and that is fundamental. that specialist delivery is really important. i make no apology for repeating this, but the government and everyone needs to see gbr in the same way as kate bingham's vaccines task force, where the government set up a specialist body led by an expert, gave it a clear purpose, and here comes the critical bit — stood back and let it get on with it. one of the marked points, though, is that we're seeing a move from the private side of things more towards the public sector. this at a time when rail numbers have collapsed, and yet the private sector from privatisation has doubled the numbers on the railways in terms of passengers. so, isn't this the wrong

time to shift and tilt towards the public sector, even if it delivers the integration that you may crave? it's not helped that the way this has been presented, not least by the secretary of state with feeble jokes about br sandwiches and all the rest of it, have led the media to believe this is some kind of nationalisation. actually, it's anything but. it's quite the reverse because at the moment, we have got the most controlling form of national control we have ever had. the report acknowledges itself but much of the railway�*s every day life is governed and micromanaged by the dft, and we are wanting to move away from that so it's anything but nationalisation. the committee also heard from the chair of network rail, which will become part of gbr. sir peter, of all these _ reforms, which ones are keeping you awake at night in terms of deliverability on time, i on budget, and also, actually.

being put in place and working? none of this, i think, is impossible. sir peter harked back to changes made during his time at transport for london. the railway�*s years behind that. asking people to exchange their money for cardboard tickets is victorian. and if you think about that, sure, it might be difficult, but it doesn't keep me awake at night because we've seen it happening virtually everywhere else. we've learnt in the pandemic to do all our purchasing without cash, and yet on the railway, some half of tickets are sold over the counter. it's mad. finally, mps questioned the transport secretary. what, in your mind, are the key measures of success for gbr to have been successful? the simplest and most - direct one once we've gone through all these changes, which i should point- out is a lot more than- publishing the white paper, eventually we will need

legislation as well, - but is that the publicl would see their trains running more on—time. when i became secretary of state, as a frustrated i commuter, i simply said ijust want trains to run on time - and i want every emphasis, . every single person in the rail network to be focused on that agenda. - grant shapps. staying with transport — and trials of rented e—scooters are taking place across england, as part of a government push to make local transport greener. but while the schemes offer a legal route to use the vehicles, the illegal use of privately—owned scooters is still causing safety concerns, especially in the house of lords. there are 50 trial areas, and therefore, only 7608 e—scooters legally in use on our roads across the uk. but local authorities have reported over 800 incidents, including serious injuries to a three—year—old child walking on the pavement.

does the noble lady, the minister, that this is an unacceptable level of risk? and will she and her colleagues urgently look again at the trials taking place with the intention of speeding up the introduction of proper regulation and penalties across the whole of the uk? i do think 300 injuries is too many. one injury is too many. to that end, i know that the metropolitan police have impounded nearly 1000 e—scooters in the two years to april of this year. i fear the government has lost the race now because i'm told| by cycling groups there's going to be a million - e—scooters, illegal, of course, on the roads by the end - of this year. wouldn't it be best -

to make them the same as e—bicycles and concentrate enforcement on not _ going on the pavement and not speeding? - i think all of what he says is true. e—scooters are different from e—bikes in the sense that you have to make some effort to propel e—bikes, whereas they are self propelling, e—scooters. how can we be confident that the illegal riding of scooters on pavements will be prevented when the illegal riding on bicycles flourishes? how about introducing compulsory training on courtesy and respect before anybody is let loose on an e—scooter, and indeed, a bicycle? well, my lords, my noble friend raises a very important problem on this and as a humble pedal biker, i know how frightening it is on the road to

be approached by one of these e—scooters. actually, riding on the pavement can result in a fixed penalty notice of £50, but to his point, i will recommend that everybody who rides a cycle wherever they ride it gets the proper training that they need. lady williams. time for us to scoot, too. thank you for watching. i hope you canjoin me at the same time tomorrow for the week in parliament — the only programme that features the commons, the lords, and the uk's other parliaments. until then, from me, david cornock, bye for now.

hello, it feels like it while since i've been able to say this. it feels like a while since i've been able to say this, but on thursday, most parts of the country will be dry. it's been one of those months, hasn't it? notjust dry, it should feel a little bit warmer, and that's after quite a chilly start. even though temperatures in single figures for most, rural parts of southern england, wales, northern ireland could drop down to 1—2 celsius at first light. so, there could be a touch of frost around. dry and sunny here. a bit more in the way of low cloud and mistiness across parts of scotland and eastern england, but that will break up. although it will stay grey in shetland through the day. sunshine turning hazy across western areas later. maybe a few spots of rain in west cornwall, fermanagh, and an isolated shower down eastern england and scotland. but the vast majority dry, and temperatures in the mid—to—high teens. into the evening and overnight,

we'll see the return of some wet weather, particularly in the west. a lot of low cloud with that. quite a murky start to friday morning, but notice the temperatures — double figures for some. coolest where we've got the clearest skies towards the east of the country. and it's here where high pressure is building in as we go into friday. and what that does — stops that weather front moving much further eastwards and it will decay in situ. damp and drizzly, murky across western areas to begin with. brightening up a touch, but there'll still be some rain and drizzle around into the afternoon. eastern areas favoured for the cloud breaking up, some sunshine, particularly in the north east of scotland, away from some coasts, that is. and temperatures are down a little bit on thursday, but if you get some sunshine, it should still feel pleasant. but the temperatures will be on the rise further as we go into the weekend, and more sunshine developing. we will start saturday fairly cloudy, especially in the west. still one or two light drizzly showers. isolated shower further east, most will be dry, increasing amounts of sunshine through eastern areas. and by this stage, a few more spots getting to 20 degrees. parts of southern england and western and northern scotland are best favoured for that. into sunday, though, after some morning mist and fog patches, bluer skies for most. it will be a sunny day, little bit of fairweather cloud

and some hazy sunshine out towards the north and the west. but by this stage, could be hitting 22 degrees in parts of scotland, maybe up to 22—23 in the south east of england. but with the sunshine out, the warmth, you may be tempted towards the coast, but our recent chilly spell has had an impact on sea surface temperatures. be brave — temperatures for some only around 8—9 degrees. as we go into bank holiday monday, well, high pressure and the warmth and sunshine lasts in the south. a chance of a return of rain in scotland and northern ireland. bye for now.

welcome to bbc news, i'm lewis vaughanjones. our top stories. a blistering attack on british prime minister borisjohnson�*s handling of the coronavirus pandemic by his former chief adviser. fundamentally, i regarded him as unfit for thejob, and i was trying to create a structure around him to try and stop what i thought were extremely bad decisions. at least eight people are killed in a shooting at a rail yard in sanjose, california president biden tells us intelligence agencies to step up their investigation into the origins of covid—i9, as claims persist that it may have leaked from a chinese lab. a judge in australia dismisses what could have been a landmark case, trying to stop the expansion of australia's coal production.