but, i understanding your question, but, i will try and put it this way. up to and including the week of the 9th, the assumption was, you are suggesting there was some great debate. the point is there wasn't. there was an assumption across government, across the cabinet office department of health and sage, that lockdown was impossible in a western country, any way we didn't have the all of tinges that you needed in place to actual will do it, you didn't have test and trace and what not you would need to have afterwards, that vaccines were almost definitely not going to have any impact at least in 2020 and possibly never, so the whole point was, that up to and including the week of the 9th, the debate you keep referring to, there wasn't a debate, that was the whole problem, there wasn't a debate about the fundamental assumptions underlying plan a, there wasn't a debate until me and others started to i saying

hang on a second, if you actually fall law the logic of what plan a is it will be a catastrophe —— follow. and we have to ask these questions and consider an alternative plan b, but before that, there was no debate about this, it was just assumed. there was a debate at the scientific level, between mitigation and suppression, but it may be than that debate and the merits of mitigation versus suppression simply didn't reach your level in government. you weren't aware the scientists were debating the pros and cons of mitigation. {iii debating the pros and cons of mitigation-— mitigation. of course it was discussed — mitigation. of course it was discussed bier _ mitigation. of course it was discussed bier people, - mitigation. of course it was discussed bier people, but| mitigation. of course it was i discussed bier people, but as mitigation. of course it was - discussed bier people, but as you see in all of the sage and dh documents, the assumption was that it was simply completely impractical and everyone was still on the mind—set of, a flu pandemic, so of course there were debates, in one said going on and there were

scientist, etcs, etc, but the core of what we were presented with in number ten was, there was unanimity too between the cabinet office, department of health and sage, behind the propositions that the real danger as a second wave in the winter, and therefore, you have to manage a single strategy so this herd immunity by september, that was the core argument that we were presented with, and that was never a problem, really... the first time i saw that being tested was on 1th march when demis hassabis said i think this is mad and you should lockdown now. that kicked off various discussions. find lockdown now. that kicked off various discussions.— various discussions. and the consequence _ various discussions. and the consequence of _ various discussions. and the consequence of the - various discussions. and the consequence of the absence j various discussions. and the i consequence of the absence of debate, the failure to consider any alternative, the failure to consider strategic options, other than

mitigation, and squashed the sombrero, was that there was a woeful absence of plan, any sort of written document for dealing with controlling borders, protecting care homes, shielding. quarantine. it is homes, shielding. quarantine. it is worse than — homes, shielding. quarantine. it is worse than that, _ homes, shielding. quarantine. it 3 worse than that, and doubly ironic, if you actually, if plan a had ended up if you actually, if plan a had ended up what would have been plan b, we controlled it and you had test and trace infrastructure, there would be a stronger argument for saying a lot of the shielding stuff we don't need... ,, ., ~ , of the shielding stuff we don't need... ,,., ~ , , need... slow, mr cummings, please slow down- — need... slow, mr cummings, please slow down. you _ need... slow, mr cummings, please slow down. you are _ need... slow, mr cummings, please slow down. you are making - need... slow, mr cummings, please slow down. you are making it - slow down. you are making it extremely difficult to record your evidence. ~ ., , extremely difficult to record your evidence._ and - extremely difficult to record your evidence._ and to - extremely difficult to record your evidence._ and to be l extremely difficult to record your i evidence._ and to be fair, evidence. apologies. and to be fair, sor , to evidence. apologies. and to be fair, sorry. to finish _ evidence. apologies. and to be fair, sorry, to finish that _ evidence. apologies. and to be fair, sorry, to finish that point. _ evidence. apologies. and to be fair, sorry, to finish that point. the - sorry, to finish that point. the situation is _ sorry, to finish that point. the situation is worse _ sorry, to finish that point. tie: situation is worse than sorry, to finish that point. tte: situation is worse than what sorry, to finish that point. tt2 situation is worse than what you are describing, because if you are not

going to control the virus, if you are not going to have test and trace, if you are going to have single peak herd immunity by september, it actually makes the lack of a plan for shielding, in care homes and everything else even more crackers. do you see my point? yes. yes. and to be fair you tested mr hancock on 2rd january about —— 23rd january about the whereabouts about pandemic plans, you asked what extent have you investigated for ebola or flu. extent have you investigated for ebola orflu. you were reassured it was prepped and refreshed. it became obvious and it is orb from your statement you appreciated there were no plans, of the type that you described, by the middle of march, so 16th march, a week before the

national lockdown, had number ten still been provided or had it been provided in any way with departmental plan, cabinet office plans, from line departments, dealing with these various aspects of a corona viral pandemic? essentially no. dribs and drabs came, in you can see from various evidence from texts and e—mail, after talking to hancock i pushed on some of these things through february, imran did as well from private office. but we gradually became aware through the course of february, that essentially what hancock told me, on the 25th, sorry correction on the date by the way, the inquiry and i have wrongly changed the date from the 25th to 23rd, if that text message so my statement is wrong, so it should be 25th but we will correct that afterwards. but during the course of 25th, sorry, the course of february

we realised gradually as we pushed and probed and asked question for these plans they fundamentally didn't exist, and on the 16th, i think, you probably are referring to a shocking e—mail in number ten that says, essentially, the civil contingency secretary say it says these plans are not held centrally at all. so it turned out to our horror that the system we had been told erepeatedly in number ten, world leading, best prepared in the world, etc, it then turned out that this supposedly brilliant system had not even seen these documents at that time, because they were not held centrally, which was, when that e—mail was circulated, people thought it was almost like a spoof. in fact we do have of course your text message to matt than conand his

reply, your very own letter and statement and a screen shot and it shows the 23rd january, says in terms... to what extent have you investigated terms. .. to what extent have you investigate— investigated the reason for that i was total by _ investigated the reason for that i was total by the _ investigated the reason for that i was total by the inquiry _ investigated the reason for that i was total by the inquiry i - investigated the reason for that i was total by the inquiry i got - investigated the reason for that i was total by the inquiry i got the | was total by the inquiry i got the date wrong and i should change it. but i actually checkrd it and it should be the 25th. don't trouble yourself, your own screen shot provides the date of the 23rd january 2020. so... there were a number of cobra meetings at the end ofjanuary, and the beginning of february. i want to ask you about an important cobra meeting on the 5th february, 5 6215. page1 important cobra meeting on the 5th february, 5 6215. page 1 sets out the ministers who attended. page two the ministers who attended. page two the officials and those who dialled in, and we can see there on behalf

of number ten in, and we can see there on behalf of numberten imran in, and we can see there on behalf of number ten imran shafi attended. page three. attendees in terms of the chief medical officers. page five, paragraph two, the cmo provides an update to cobra, providing information about the number of individuals who had died and how long they had been in hospital before they died, this is all to do of course with cases abroad, particular china, the two most high risk groups appear to be the elderly and those with preexisting illness, if you could scroll back out, page six, between paragraphs nine and 11, there is a debate about planning for a reasonable worse case scenario. and the director of the civil

contingency sec star yacht sets it out for the reasonable worst case scenario, there is a debate about communications strategy, an emergency bill, and work with local resilience forums are. on this day or the day after, you sent a text to a whatsapp group, the number ten action whatsapp grew saying the chief scientist told me todayit saying the chief scientist told me today it is probably out of control now and will sweep world. were you aware of the tenure of the debate and what was being discussed in cobra in february?— and what was being discussed in cobra in february? probably, i don't remember. — cobra in february? probably, i don't remember. all— cobra in february? probably, i don't remember, all of _ cobra in february? probably, i don't remember, all of these _ cobra in february? probably, i don't remember, all of these meetings i cobra in february? probably, i don't i remember, all of these meetings blur into one another. had remember, all of these meetings blur into one another.— into one another. had you seen this minute of the _ into one another. had you seen this minute of the 5th _ into one another. had you seen this minute of the 5th february - into one another. had you seen this minute of the 5th february cobra, l minute of the 5th february cobra, you would immediately have understood that the thinking

expressed in this meeting was not that which you had been told, which was to the effect that the virus was probably out of control, now and would sweep the world. did that not concern you?— would sweep the world. did that not concern you? yes. what did you do around the — concern you? yes. what did you do around the 5th _ concern you? t'23 what did you do around the 5th and concern you? t2; what did you do around the 5th and 6th of february, to say this cobb rab appears to be proceeding on an incomplete, inaccurate basis, it isn't reflecting what i understand to be the reality which the virus is probably out of control, and will sweep the world.— probably out of control, and will sweep the world. so... whip i can't remember. — sweep the world. so... whip i can't remember, obviously _ sweep the world. so. .. whip i can't remember, obviously now- sweep the world. so... whip i can't remember, obviously now it - sweep the world. so... whip i can't remember, obviously now it is - sweep the world. so... whip i can't| remember, obviously now it is three years ago, i can't remember the exact days and what not, but years ago, i can't remember the exact days and whatnot, but around this time, i spoke to patrick before obviously that text was sent, i spoke to patrick again, i probably

spoke to patrick again, i probably spoke to patrick again, i probably spoke to him each day, 5th, 6th, 7th. we had a conversation about this and the briefing of the pm. patrick and i agreed we thought the pm had not been sufficiently briefed on a lot of this, on these questions, so we were concerned about it, and we agreed i would fix up about it, and we agreed i would fix up for there to be a meeting, as soon as possible, with the pm in his office and that meeting happened on, it will be in the documents, i can't remember when but shortly after, after this. remember when but shortly after, afterthis. i remember when but shortly after, after this. i think patrick said to me, something like, you know, this needs to happen straightaway, it is possible that was the friday, and i think i organised it for the monday, but my recollection of the dates could be off. but my recollection of the dates could be off-— but my recollection of the dates could be off. ., , ., but my recollection of the dates could be off. . , ., ., could be off. there was a meeting on 10th february- _ could be off. there was a meeting on 10th february. is _ could be off. there was a meeting on 10th february. is that _ could be off. there was a meeting on 10th february. is that the _ could be off. there was a meeting on 10th february. is that the monday. i 10th february. is that the monday. 1045-11-15- — 10th february. is that the monday. 1045-11.15. that _ 10th february. is that the monday. 1045-11.15. that could _ 10th february. is that the monday. 1045-11.15. that could possibly - 10th february. is that the monday. 1045-11.15. that could possibly be | 10th february. is that the monday. | 1045-11.15. that could possibly be a 10a5—11.15. that could possibly be a monday, or maybe a tuesday. so that would fit with what you have said.

there was another cobra meeting on 18th february. 5 6227, paged 1—3. give us the attendees and page five, gives us a sense of what was being discussed. repatriation of british nationals. and then over the page, legislation a debate about the drawing up of a bill to be employed in a reasonable worst case scenario and over the page, page seven, planning for a reasonable worse case scenario, nest phase. the secretariat said there was work to be done to create a plan of activity for the transmission to its estimated peak.

was there an understanding in number ten that a debate about repatriation and the drawing up of appropriate legislation and the drawing up of plans to deal with a reasonable worse case scenario did not really reflect what needed to be done, in response to the information that was then available?— then available? certainly by some of us in number _ then available? certainly by some of us in number ten _ then available? certainly by some of us in number ten that _ then available? certainly by some of us in number ten that the _ then available? certainly by some of us in number ten that the time - then available? certainly by some of| us in number ten that the time there was, yes, but remember a lot of the senior people in the central whitehall were off on holiday at this time. ~ . this time. the prime minister, the evidence shows, _ this time. the prime minister, the evidence shows, received - this time. the prime minister, the evidence shows, received a - this time. the prime minister, the evidence shows, received a note l this time. the prime minister, the | evidence shows, received a note in his box on 30th january, round about the same time, about coronavirus virus. he expressed the view on 3 ist january he wanted to spent more time discussing issues with ministers and then he received is an update on 3rd february from the

secretariat, there was then an e—mail with an update on the 8th february, and the meeting on the 10th february to which you have referred. we will look at the diary for that, 136739, that is the diary for that, 136739, that is the diary for the pm between 10th february and friday 14th february. on the 10th february, so you are right it is a monday, 10.45—11.15 coronavirus update. before he went to sheave any, which he did on the 14th february, he received a note in his box, 136743, page four. coronavirus, international response. containment of the virus in china is a key part to help stop the spread

of the outbreak to the united kingdom. if what you were told by the chief scientist was right, the chief scientific adviser, mister cumming, that it was a probable inevitability to the virus sweeping the world, then any debate about whether or not the virus could be contained in china was out of date. why was the prime minister not told? evidence is now emerging that this virus is out of control and will likely sweep the world and debate about international repatriation and drafting of legislation and doctrinally identification of

reasonable worst—case scenarios is