far—right nationalist israeli politician naftali bennett says he'll work with all his might towards forming a new unity government, something that would end benjamin netanyahu's 12 years as prime minister. mr bennett threw his support behind yair lapid, who is trying to form a government. police in the indian capital delhi have arrested more than 350 suspected fraudsters for selling fake medical supplies to vulnerable covid patients. having opened hundreds of investigations delhi police found that many families fell victim to conmen offering counterfeit drugs and oxygen on social media. the japanese tennis star — naomi osaka — has been warned she could be disqualified from the french open and has been fined 15,000 dollars — for refusing to attend press conferences at the tournament. now on bbc news,

dateline london. hello, i'm shaun ley. welcome to the programme which brings together leading uk columnists, bbc specialists,

with me in the studio, presenter and bbc foreign correspondents, clive myrie. good to have you all with us. and you at home, thank you very much for watching. now, have thousands of people died in the uk during the covid pandemic because of things the british government did ordidn�*t do? dominic cummings thinks the answer is yes. since he was, until six months ago, prime minister boris johnson's closest adviser. his extraordinary seven—hour testimony before parliamentarians on wednesday has the potential to be highly damaging, not least to his former boss. borisjohnson is, according to dominic cummings, unfit to lead the country. steve richards, there was huge build—up to this testimony. did it deliver in terms of an informed critique about how government functioned at one of the toughest times civilian governments have experienced? yes, i think it did. you say there was a huge build—up. you and i waited for many of these political dramas,

and they were anti—climactic when they happened, so i assumed this was going to be one of those. it really wasn't, notjust because it went on for so long, i watched, like you did, the whole lot. but as you say, here was boris johnson's chosen senior adviser, who was on the inside during all of these key moments making a series of extraordinary assertions. now, some say with some credence, that here is a subjective, unreliable narrator, but that would only be true if what we all know and experience was with at odds with what he was saying. but we know they locked down late in the first lockdown, when football matches and rock concerts were taking place. we know was a dispute in autumn last year about whether to lockdown. there were remarkable moments, like when he said, this hasn't been reported much, when borisjohnson went on,

as he put it, cummings, for a two—week holiday in february 2020, they were almost relieved that he wasn't going to the cobra meetings, the emergency meetings, because they thought he would be almost unsafe for the country if he did attend. now, these things are astonishing, and even if they don't have an impact on voters, to be honest, they should do. if voters want to turn away, they have got every right to do so, but they are remarkable insights, albeit from a subjective perspective, into the chaos behind the scenes of the british government tackling what is unquestionably the biggest challenge since 1916. one of the specific allegations that was made against the government was over the decision to allow hospital patients who had been treated for covid to return to care homes, apparently having been tested first, but, of course,

it turned out many of them hadn't been tested, and the consequence was a lot of people dying in care homes. you work in this sector, you understand a lot, you talk to a lot of people in this sector. can you help us with this? what did people think was going to happen, and is it fair of the government to say, "actually, everything was moving, the testing facilities were not there, and we did the best we could do in the circumstances." hindsight is a really wonderful thing, and i don't think it's fair of the government to take the stand that they did everything that they could. i live in an area of the uk, in sussex, where from brighton to hove to hastings to kent, dozens of care homes were experiencing what they didn't plan for, what they didn't have the guidance about. the government actually changed its mind about five times since january 2020 up toward april with different guidance. that was confusing for the hospitals, that was

confusing for the care homes. i know for a fact because the care standards specifically says when you are leaving the hospital, you should have a discharge plan, therefore, if you go from hospital to home, it should be carefully planned by the hospital, and what we had was a panic reaction. a reaction that was almost without leadership in terms of the government response to that. people were actually sent back into these care homes without the testing, without the proper plan from the care homes. i think when the promised report into all this fiasco comes around in the future — 2022, i don't know why it will take so long, because dominic cummings has already revealed a lot of what went on — i think it will prove that a lot of mistakes were made because people just didn't know what they were doing in government. i think dominic cummings has got his finger on something really substantial. just didn't know — this is interesting, clive. you spent a lot of time visiting hospitals over

the last year, reporting of the experiences on the front line. it's fair to say a lot of people in the medical profession just didn't know because they were dealing with an unknown illness. in that context, when the government says, "we acted on the scientific advice," they clearly did, but even the scientists weren't sure, and therefore, are we trying to load too much criticism onto government of handling something when it was kind of blindsided by the experience, as governments were elsewhere in the world? i mean, everyone was blindsided. l this was a particularly difficult situation that| i think it took a long time - for policymakers, governments, others in the community, and in wider society, - to fully understand. i know going into hospitals and filming back in april, i march, april, may of last year, anecdotally, certainly, - people were saying, "look, i if you end up in the hospital, you are going to get covid. it is the place where this thing is going to breed."j therefore, if you are sending people into hospitals -

and you haven't tested them, you are going to get... - if you are sending people into care homes, rather, | from hospitals, having been in hospitals, you are going i to set a wildfire running. and as you say, you know, it is notjust england, - wales and scotland where this was a problem. _ the united states, the first case of a covid victim - in the united states _ was in a care home in seattle. that is where the first big outbreak took place. - we know that people in france, the relatives of people in care l homes who have died as a result of covid, they are _ going to court. they started legal action backl in march to try to get answers. half of all the covid deaths - in germany were in care homes. this isn'tjust a problem that britain had to deal with. - it seems to have been a blind spot for policymakers - around the world. i think it will be one i of the most significant chapters of the inquiry, j as bernard pointed out, of the inquiry when it - eventually comes sometime next year.

i think the fascination for the public, also, i is the fact that we talking the most vulnerable - members of our society, apart from children. - people who perhaps have - dementia, who are old and are frail, left potentially- at the mercy of this killer. i think that has sort - of raised the stakes in terms of the debate about this, - particularly after what dominic cummings said in his testimony. before that commons committee. the broader political questions beyond just the pandemic. there is a lot of criticism from dominic cummings — some have dismissed a lot of it as personal enmity, as kind of revenge, bitterness for the way he left government. a couple of interesting aspects, one i guess you can criticise him for saying he was trying to control things, he says he was trying to change the structure around borisjohnson to try and stop what i thought were extremely bad decisions. one might wonder if that is really the role of an adviser. but he then quotes

the prime minister, he says, "you are right, i am more frightened of you, dominic cummings, having the power to stop the chaos than i am of the chaos. chaos isn't that bad, chaos means that everyone has to look to me to see who is in charge." i wonder, assuming that that is a correct representation of what borisjohnson said to him, what that tells us, or might tell us, about the conduct of government — and what your views are on that? yes, and again, you could say, well, dominic cummings was out to get borisjohnson, and again, i would argue that that would be a perfectly valid thing to say if it was at odds with what we know. but all the evidence suggests he's a chaotic figure, borisjohnson. as a journalist, as a broadcaster, i used to do programmes with him sometimes, there was an air of chaos around. but does that matter? yes, it does matter in terms of clarity of policymaking,

delivering policy, of being not only decisive, but it's about making the right calls based on the evidence in front of you, which could be complex, detailed, dull, technocratic. and, you know, what we see suggests that that isn't. borisjohnson is a great vote winner, let's be absolutely clear about that, but that side of it chimes with what dominic cummings said. and his appointments in cabinet are fairly mediocre, unthreatening figures wholly dependent on his patronage. it reinforces the sense that rather than allowing others, big figures to have space to impose order and control, he would prefer the chaos around him so he retains a degree of control. i think it really matters in terms of

the conduct of government. in britain, we have a cabinet—based system in theory, although cummings made clear the cabinet was virtually wholly bypassed. but a kind of presidential culture, where prime ministers wield considerable power, especially in an emergency, and so it does matter when his most senior adviser says he prefers chaos to order so he has a kind of space to rule. bernard, last thought on this? yes, i do agree with what steve is saying, because i think the adviser should never become the news. and what happened throughout this pandemic is what i would call political domination by one individual. and the sad incident of this pandemic, where so many thousands of people have lost their lives, becomes a political, sort of, kicking ball, and hopefully when the report and the inquiry comes around, a lot of what he is saying, i repeat again, will not be news any more.

thank you all very much. joe biden wanted to mark the first anniversary of the killing of george floyd — a black american murdered by a white american police officer — by signing into law a wide—ranging reform of the police. in washington, though, the most powerful political force is inertia. tuesday's commemorations came and went with the george floyd justice in policing act stranded in the senate. clive, you're just back from the united states, just a matter of days ago. you've been looking at this whole question of what, if anything, has changed since george floyd was murdered. what is your impression of biden's america in its first few months, in terms of how it's reacted to what has gone on, and reacted to that year of protest that has followed? to be honest with you, it - is notjust biden's america — it's macron's france, | it'sjohnson's britain. there is a real sense that societies have actually i moved backwards 12 months on since george floyd -

was murdered. it's interesting to sort of see this, i went to france - and i went to the united states to look at this, the sort - of trauma of a year ago. the world has managed to move on, and it always does _ after something cataclysmic, as with what happened - with george floyd. overtime, the urgency of that. moment just seems to dissipate. frankly, that seems to have been what i've experiencedl as having happened, certainly in france and in _ the united states. and you even get a backlash. you get a sense of why - are we penalising the whole of the police force in britain, america, france, _ germany, wherever, - for a few rotten apples? and that seems to be - the attitude i've discovered from the democracies| of the west as a result of what happened. you've got people who are saying that, actually, - there isn't systemic racism in a lot of these societies, |

you know, while lots of people are willing to claim that - that was the case within - the white heat of the moment of george floyd dying. that white heat has gotten . cooler and cooler and cooler. we had a commission. here that suggested that inequalities in pay, - jobs, you know, the lack of black representation at the highest levels i of business, higher| incarceration rates, stop and search rates — - which are the same in america and the uk and france — nothing to do with - systemic racism. it's somehow something to do with something else, - backgrounds, society in general, nothing l to do with race. and it's been fascinating seeing the energy and l the electric sense of change, that many people felt had i to come, watching that slowly ebb away over 12 months - to the point where society has actually seemed, to me, - to be going backwards. and it's a really weird i thing to watch, actually. really weird. bernard, to pick up

on clive�*s analogy there — whether it is or isn't a few rotten apples, no—one seems to be still asking the question, what causes the apples to rot? i wouldn't call it a few rotten apples. clive has seen this during his work around different countries. i think it's more systematic, it's widespread, it's long—standing. you have to ask yourself, why have black lives matter become so popular in such a short time after what has been going going on for hundreds of years? it tells me there is some systematic practices that have been going on in these countries — in france, in britain, in the united kingdom — and we are talking about police actions now, and joe biden says he wants to be able to make that change in terms of policing, but look what has happened in the last week or so in the us congress.

the proposal being put forward has been stalled. so that tells you people, as clive said, are not really ready to actually move forward. it becomes news, something that everybody wants to be part of in terms of human empathy, but then people just go back to what they are used to. i think this is systematic of why many people, for example, we talked about the covid a while ago, why many people of asian, african, caribbean backgrounds are refusing to take the injections, because they see the injections as part of the old thing to do with black lives, policing, systematic structures of society, and we have a serious problem, but it demands serious solutions, and we are not getting it at all. clive is right, you know, it goes on in public news for a short time, and then it goes back to the old comfort zone. steve, if black people see a systemic problem, white people see no systemic problem. if we are looking in the states, how on earth does

a white president or a black vice president overcome that in a political system where culture wars are almost starting to define the political parties themselves? well, they have got limited room for manoeuvre, but they have got some room. i don't overestimate the long—term potency of a tragedy. as clive suggests, i hadn't realised how things had gone back in such a short period of time, but to be honest, depressed but not totally surprised. but i wouldn't also underestimate the power of the political altar. it is different that joe biden is president, speaking and responding to these kinds of events compared, say, to donald trump. i mean, it's a statement of the obvious, but that is a big difference. but in terms of power, i mean, you know, i was talking earlier about britain having a sort

of presidential culture in terms of domestic policy, quite often a prime minister has more control, albeit in a much smaller power, britain, than a president does in domestic policy in the united states. but i think he will use the altar to try and change the mood. he has already done so on several occasions. now, i'm not saying that makes a practical difference in the short—term, it doesn't, but i wouldn't understate that element which has changed in the united states. but to go back to my original point, these are appalling tragedies. if you look back, there are protests, there are ritualistic protests, they still go on, footballers in britain still take the knee and so on. but then, as clive has observed, it fades. it needs political will to bring about change, in the end. but i think the difference between biden and trump is profound, and that is

a new element to the equation, a positive one. clive, one of the most memorable rows during the democratic presidential primaries was when kamala harris took onjoe biden over his previous record on race, talked about how the young congressman had been, in her view, too willing to compromise with some of the old racists who then used to operate in the senate and in the house of representatives, and in his own state of delaware, how he had been willing to support bussing, the hugely controversial policy of taking people from areas where there was white resistance to schooling them, even if they lived in those areas, moving them miles and miles to go to a school where the authorities could get them into that school. is he making good use, enough use, of kamala harris in the circumstances, given that this is such a sensitive question? yes, it's a good question, and he did deploy her, . as it were, to sort of deal with the situation - on the border, with migrants flooding in from mexico - and from south america.

it could be argued that perhaps he isn't deploying her- as well as perhaps he could, and effectively enough - in regards to the george floyd policing bill. - but i think there is a sense i that because joe biden knows those good old boys, - he understands the mentality of some in the south, - he understands the mentality of a frame of reference in america that is built| around a certain degree of white supremacy. - and he has apologised for those links to those, you know, - senators from the south who may have old—fashioned views, - he has apologised for that. but there is a sense i that if anyone can build a consensus, it's him. it's precisely what steve was suggesting, that. the rhetoric from the top - is what is important, and that, hopefully in the longer—term, could bring some kind - of change. in the short term, it's difficult, it's rocky. i but if there is a sense, an overarching sense, i

that we cannot as a nation, that is the united states, l continue the way we have i in terms of the way we talk about race, then perhaps that can filter down to those - activists who got out - on the streets, many of them white, it has to be said, in the united kingdom, | in france, in germany, - in australia, in cape town, south africa, all over| the world, in canada. if there is leadership i from the top, than that mentality can seep down, i and it's those future leaders and those future progressives who perhaps will be able - to make things actually change. 0pportunity at the end of the programme when we get time to talk about things that perhaps the three of you think we haven't talked enough about or hasn't been enough reporting of. do you want to kick us off on this, bernard? what is the story that you have kind of spotted that you think perhaps we could do well to pay a bit more attention to or might have bigger consequences than the immediate story? one of the good things that has come out of the news this week is from germany,

where they have decided to pay overi billion euros compensation to the herero and nama people in what is now known as namibia. for people who don't know, germany was once in charge of south—west africa, where they committed some of the most atrocious crimes against those people, you know, incarceration, all kinds of atrocities. of course, for a long time, germany refused to see this as genocide, and i think it was around 2015 when they decided, yes, and of course, now that they have made this 1 billion euro compensation, they don't want to call it that, they don't want to call it reparations, or anything of that nature, because according to them, they don't want to set a precedent. it is a step in the right direction, and i think a lot of countries around the world, in the caribbean, and africa, and asia, will say "germany, you've payed back the dues, america, you've payed back the japanese.

now it's time for the namibians, we want our reparations," despite the fact that germany does not want to be seen as that. but i think it's a very positive step in the right direction. it's interesting, clive, putting in the context of britain and other colonial countries. germany has a record of apologising for terrible things it's done in the past. maybe other countries — france, britain — don't necessarily have that. president macron in rwanda saying you know, we should've listened to the warnings. this isn't an apology, by the way, he said very specifically. absolutely, because that brings legaljeopardy, i and that brings having. to hand out, you know, reparations, whatever, so you try as a societyl or as a government to frame your apology or your level i of culpability in a way that will not leave you open i to having to fork out. millions and millions. and it's tricky finding i the right form of words, to be honest with you, -

but president chirac apologised for some of france's. past colonial misdeeds in north africa, - which was interesting. yes, it's a difficult... it's a difficult way - of dealing with the past, using an apology or suggesting that you are culpable. - it is tricky, and some nations find it harder than most. - steve, what has caught your eye? well, probably, viewers will think, "oh, no, not this again." go on, go on. the british government's brexit minister was in the house of lords this week and, again, blamed the european union for what is happening in northern ireland with the so—called protocol, which we haven't got time to discuss. now, the protocol is a consequence precisely of lord david frost and borisjohnson's negotiation. but i think the other

interesting twist, as we have been talking a little bit aboutjoe biden, joe biden is watching this closely. i don't think he will buy a thing if this all goes badly wrong, the border between great britain and northern ireland, that it was the european union's fault. borisjohnson aches for a trade deal with the united states, as part of the post—brexit situation and wants a close relationship withjoe biden. sir david frost's machismo, if it does lead to trouble, i think could have consequences which borisjohnson wouldn't welcome in terms of his relationship withjoe biden. so, it is still going on, its subterranean, but it remains multilayered and its twists and turns. finally, clive? yes, bitcoin. i don't understandl it cryptocurrencies, i do not understand it. but i am finding it really, | really fascinating because the police in the west midlands in england, they were called i to an industrial estatej

on a tip—off that there was a cannabis producing operation going on. - loads of electricity being used. because the electricity had been spiked up. . they raid this place, - and they find it is actually a bunch of computers - with cables everywhere, mining for bitcoin around the world. now, it's not illegal in thisi country to mine for bitcoin. it'sjust been made illegal in china. - but it is obviously illegall to nick off with electricity that you are not paying for. ijust find this a fascinating twist on the whole idea - of this currency that lives in computers and you digj for it around the world, - and it also actually has raised questions about the economic and environmental cost - of money itself, you know, i mining the metals, you know, forging the metals, paper- in making currency and so on. fascinating, fascinating society issue that - we've come across here. it is indeed. i guess if they get fines,

they could always just pay the fine with bitcoin with any luck. that's it for dateline london this week. back same time next week. bye—bye. hello, it's quiet on the weather front. clear skies across much of the country and more sunshine to come for bank holiday monday. in fact, the temperatures could be a degree or so higher. but not everywhere is going to start off sunny. in fact, if you look at the satellite picture from sunday, you can see a lot of cloud in the north sea — that is called haar and sea fret, and quite often it hugs the coastline during spring and summer months. that means the morning could be overcast anywhere from aberdeenshire all along

the north sea coast, down to east anglia and the south—east. some inland areas could have a slow start as well. but by late morning or into the afternoon, it should be sunny almost everywhere, except the aberdeenshire coastline, where it could be only 1a degrees. deep inland, it will be hitting the mid 20s on monday. on tuesday, another beautiful sunny day on the way, highs of 26 degrees. by wednesday, we could see one or two showers.

this is bbc news — welcome if you're watching here in the uk or around the globe. i'm reged ahmad. our top stories... could it be bye—bye, bibi? israel's prime minister remains defiant — despite opposition claims they have the numbers to kick him out of office. it's been described as "a crime against humanity" — the conmen offering fake oxygen and fake drugs to the desperate in india who are battling covid. south africa is increasing its coronavirus restrictions — as it tries to fight a new surge in infections. aiming high — the climber from hong kong who's become the fastest woman to climb everest.