was it your wife's 12th april, was it your wife's birthday. ht 12th april, was it your wife's birthda . a, , was it easter sunday? i think so. of course... {131 was it easter sunday? i think so. of course... , ., , ., course... of course you realise that the peeple — course... of course you realise that the people because _ course... of course you realise that the people because my _ course... of course you realise that the people because my confidencel course... of course you realise that. the people because my confidence in the people because my confidence in the crisis collapsed. the the people because my confidence in the crisis collapsed.— the crisis collapsed. the whole handfina the crisis collapsed. the whole handling of _ the crisis collapsed. the whole handling of the _ the crisis collapsed. the whole handling of the situation - the crisis collapsed. the whole handling of the situation was l handling of the situation was certainly a disaster. many other things are also going haywire at the time. do you accept that your behaviour, whether a breach of the rules or not, because the measurable offence and additional painted the bereaved? i had to move my family out of the house and bring my family out of the house and bring my family out of the house which i discussed with the

police, the deputy prime minister and the cabinet secretary. in terms of moving my family out of the house because of security reasons it was agreed by everybody to be agreed to be reasonable. he agreed by everybody to be agreed to be reasonable.— be reasonable. he spoke a great lenath be reasonable. he spoke a great length about _ be reasonable. he spoke a great length about the _ be reasonable. he spoke a great length about the drive _ be reasonable. he spoke a great length about the drive to - be reasonable. he spoke a great| length about the drive to barnard castle at the press conference. do you acknowledge are caused immeasurable offence to the bereaved who were unable to see their own loved ones die? the who were unable to see their own loved ones die?— who were unable to see their own loved ones die? the way we handled it was a car— loved ones die? the way we handled it was a car crash _ loved ones die? the way we handled it was a car crash and _ loved ones die? the way we handled it was a car crash and a _ loved ones die? the way we handled it was a car crash and a disaster - it was a car crash and a disaster and did cause a lot of people pain. i'm not concerned with the handling. the aftermath of that amount —— of that event. do you accept that that apparent breach of the rules caused enormous offence in pain to the people in this country whose loved ones had died? 1saute people in this country whose loved ones had died?— people in this country whose loved ones had died? we are talking about two different — ones had died? we are talking about two different things. _ ones had died? we are talking about two different things. the _ ones had died? we are talking about two different things. the handling i two different things. the handling of it was a disaster and caused huge pain to a lot of people and i very

much regrets and have already apologised for how badly we handled the whole thing. in terms of my actual actions in going north and then coming back down i acted entirely reasonably and legally and did not break any rules. in entirely reasonably and legally and did not break any rules.— did not break any rules. in july of 2020 had agreed _ did not break any rules. in july of 2020 had agreed to _ did not break any rules. in july of 2020 had agreed to leave - did not break any rules. in july of 2020 had agreed to leave on - did not break any rules. in july of l 2020 had agreed to leave on friday the 18th of december. he had agreed to leave with mrjohnson to give a day of government in december. i wouldn't say agreed but i told them at the end ofjuly that was my intention. ba; at the end ofjuly that was my intentien-_ at the end ofjuly that was my intention. �* , ,, , , , ., intention. by september it you described your _ intention. by september it you described your relationships i intention. by september it you l described your relationships with him as knackered. yes. on the 13th of november, with the country on a cusp of a devastating second wave, you left work for the weekend, you never returned, did you? on the 13th of november. did you leave downing

street and never return?— street and never return? correct. and she left — street and never return? correct. and she left downing _ street and never return? correct. and she left downing street - street and never return? correct. | and she left downing street under the control of a man who you described yourself as unfit for office. yes. thank you. mrcummings, i'm going mr cummings, i'm going to ask you a veryshort— mr cummings, i'm going to ask you a very short numberof mr cummings, i'm going to ask you a very short number of questions on behalf_ very short number of questions on behalf of— very short number of questions on behalf of members of the bereaved families _ behalf of members of the bereaved families forjustice uk. i am going to pick— families forjustice uk. i am going to pick up— families forjustice uk. i am going to pick up really where mr keith left off — to pick up really where mr keith left off. could we have 22658, page six, please?

this is a whatsapp. the numberten the number ten whatsapp group. i'm sure youhe _ the number ten whatsapp group. i'm sure you're familiar with it. it reads —

apologies for the language here, this is a live stream. was that connected to public confidence in the regulations? no. i think that confidence in the regulations? no. i thinkthat this— confidence in the regulations? no. i think that this was _ confidence in the regulations? no. i think that this was a _ confidence in the regulations? no. i think that this was a reference - confidence in the regulations? ila. i think that this was a reference not to a public dashboard, but to a kind of internal government dashboard, so at that point we had a health dashboard that will be presented to the pm and other senior people. what i was suggesting was that added to that dashboard should be an information on enforcement so we could get a much clearer picture of the true situation. 50 could get a much clearer picture of the true situation.— the true situation. so to present data which _ the true situation. so to present data which would _ the true situation. so to present data which would enhance - the true situation. so to present| data which would enhance public confidence in the regulations. no, so we could _ confidence in the regulations. iifr, so we could understand what was happening on the issue of enforcement around the cabinet room table and get a grip on the

situation, which frankly was just being badly handled. so situation, which frankly was 'ust being badly handledi situation, which frankly was 'ust being badly handled. so you then go on to refer to _ being badly handled. so you then go on to refer to potemkin _ being badly handled. so you then go on to refer to potemkin loss. - being badly handled. so you then go on to refer to potemkin loss. just i on to refer to potemkin loss. just to make — on to refer to potemkin loss. just to make it— on to refer to potemkin loss. just to make it clear, potemkin laws, they— to make it clear, potemkin laws, they are — to make it clear, potemkin laws, they are saying that there are effectively deceptive regulations. they are — effectively deceptive regulations. they are there to convey something, but they— they are there to convey something, but they don't actually do anything, that is_ but they don't actually do anything, that is what you're trying to convey. _ that is what you're trying to convey, isn't it?— that is what you're trying to convey, isn't it? sort of. the reason for— convey, isn't it? sort of. the reason for this _ convey, isn't it? sort of. the reason for this was - convey, isn't it? sort of. the reason for this was is - convey, isn't it? sort of. the reason for this was is at i convey, isn't it? sort of. the reason for this was is at the | convey, isn't it? sort of. the i reason for this was is at the time there was a fundamental problem which was that on the one hand we were being told that compliance to various rules was not being followed at the level that we needed it to be. this was then generating in whitehall are constant

sort of ratchet to say let's tighten up sort of ratchet to say let's tighten up these rules in various ways to try to get compliance higher. but this was fundamentally misconceived and lots of ways because the new rules that were being constantly suggested were aiming at... would have no effect on the people that were not complying. to see what i mean? there was a sort of potemkin processor people say, well, compliance is bad, let's impose more laws, but these laws are not being enforced. br; laws, but these laws are not being enforced. �* , , laws, but these laws are not being enforced. j , ,, laws, but these laws are not being enforced. j , i. ., enforced. by this point, you are -auttin enforced. by this point, you are putting forward _ enforced. by this point, you are putting forward the _ enforced. by this point, you are putting forward the view - enforced. by this point, you are putting forward the view that i enforced. by this point, you are l putting forward the view that the regulations that were in place were not being _ regulations that were in place were not being of age or they were unenforceable or they were deceptive. unenforceable or they were deceptive-— unenforceable or they were decetive. ., . ., ., deceptive. correct, and it was a bad combination — deceptive. correct, and it was a bad combination to _ deceptive. correct, and it was a bad combination to have _ deceptive. correct, and it was a bad combination to have this _ deceptive. correct, and it was a bad combination to have this rows i deceptive. correct, and it was a bad combination to have this rows not i combination to have this rows not being enforced and not faced a problem squarely, but then keep demanding more rules and more rules and more rules. just demanding more rules and more rules and more rules.— and more rules. just finally on this oint, and more rules. just finally on this point. when _ and more rules. just finally on this point. when did — and more rules. just finally on this point, when did you _ and more rules. just finally on this point, when did you reach - and more rules. just finally on this point, when did you reach that i and more rules. just finally on this l point, when did you reach that view, was that— point, when did you reach that view, was that before or after your trip to durham?—

was that before or after your trip to durham? ~ ,. ,, to durham? 0h... we were discussing discussin: to durham? 0h... we were discussing discussing these _ to durham? 0h... we were discussing discussing these enforcement - to durham? 0h... we were discussing discussing these enforcement issues i discussing these enforcement issues since april and there was a constant problem in number ten to try to figure out what was actually being enforced and what the police were doing and the central question of how the police would interpret their role in enforcing things because sometimes they massively overreacted on certain things and arrested people when they shouldn't have done, etc, etc. i people when they shouldn't have done, etc, etc.— done, etc, etc. i won't take this oint done, etc, etc. i won't take this point any _ done, etc, etc. i won't take this point any further, _ done, etc, etc. i won't take this point any further, but _ done, etc, etc. i won't take this point any further, but you i done, etc, etc. i won't take this point any further, but you have | point any further, but you have known — point any further, but you have known dates for about six months when _ known dates for about six months when you — known dates for about six months when you were chief adviser for the pm? ., ., , ., , when you were chief adviser for the pm?., ., ,, when you were chief adviser for the pm? ., ., , pm? for many months this problem was debated and there _ pm? for many months this problem was debated and there are _ pm? for many months this problem was debated and there are multiple - debated and there are multiple meetings with the home secretary and home office about this question of enforcement compliance and this problem of constantly increasing the number of laws, but people not complying and this undermining the whole regime.

complying and this undermining the whole regime-— complying and this undermining the whole regime. 93325, please. this is another whatsapp, _ whole regime. 93325, please. this is another whatsapp, short _ whole regime. 93325, please. this is another whatsapp, short points. i another whatsapp, short points. going _ another whatsapp, short points. going back to the 14th of april. this raises— going back to the 14th of april. this raises a point about transmission in hospitals. the first page sets out who is on the whatsapp group. it seems to be people _ the whatsapp group. it seems to be people in_ the whatsapp group. it seems to be people in your office and the department of health. yes. i think that the _ department of health. yes. i think that the owner of the cell phone, described — that the owner of the cell phone, described as matt hancock, perhaps you can _ described as matt hancock, perhaps you can help us with that as we go along _ you can help us with that as we go along the — you can help us with that as we go along. the message page, too, short message, _ along. the message page, too, short message, and it is —— it says.

first of all, i right right that that— first of all, i right right that that is— first of all, i right right that that is mr hancock? the first of all, i right right that that is mr hancock? the inquiry has these whatsapp — that is mr hancock? the inquiry has these whatsapp from _ that is mr hancock? the inquiry has these whatsapp from somewhere. | that is mr hancock? the inquiry has i these whatsapp from somewhere. that is my understanding and i will be corrected — is my understanding and i will be corrected if i'm wrong about that. what _ corrected if i'm wrong about that. what caused you to send this message at this late stage at this point, three weeks after lockdown? this was the day after i return to work on the 13th and i had a lot of people say to me that they were obviously extremely worried about the situation in hospitals and care homes. that there still weren't enough test to go around at this point. i think some officials have pointed out to me that in some countries there were segregating their

patients to protect people who didn't have covid and i was suggesting why aren't we doing this particularly given how few tests we had. i particularly given how few tests we had. ., �* ., ., particularly given how few tests we had. .,�* ., ., . ., had. i don't want to close down your answers but — had. i don't want to close down your answers but perhaps _ had. i don't want to close down your answers but perhaps we _ had. i don't want to close down your answers but perhaps we could i had. i don't want to close down your answers but perhaps we could do i had. i don't want to close down your answers but perhaps we could do it| had. i don't want to close down your| answers but perhaps we could do it a bit shorter? — answers but perhaps we could do it a bit shorter? sure. he had been to durham _ bit shorter? sure. he had been to durham and — bit shorter? sure. he had been to durham and barnard castle and this was your— durham and barnard castle and this was your second day back at work. you are _ was your second day back at work. you are raising the fact that there doesn't _ you are raising the fact that there doesn't seem to be segregation in hospitals — doesn't seem to be segregation in hospitals. why was it on that day is something — hospitals. why was it on that day is something that occurred to you? | something that occurred to you? i can't remember now, to be honest. on any day around this time i will deal with about 800 —— about 100 issues. when he reassured with the answer, welcome _ when he reassured with the answer, welcome back, we are doing this with the hospitals and the nightingale. a duty think because this was such a major— duty think because this was such a major issue — duty think because this was such a major issue that you should investigate further. i major issue that you should investigate further.- investigate further. i did investigate _ investigate further. i did investigate further. i did investigate further. i. investigate further. i did i investigate further. i spoke to chris whitty and patrick about it.

they reiterated their concern about this and testing and care homes, too. ~ ., , ., this and testing and care homes, too. ~ ., , too. where are you satisfied with that response? _ too. where are you satisfied with that response? did _ too. where are you satisfied with that response? did you - too. where are you satisfied with that response? did you think- too. where are you satisfied with| that response? did you think that too. where are you satisfied with i that response? did you think that mr hancock— that response? did you think that mr hancock and team where doing what they should be doing in terms of segregation in hospitals? no, they should be doing in terms of segregation in hospitals? no, as you can see from — segregation in hospitals? no, as you can see from the _ segregation in hospitals? no, as you can see from the stream _ segregation in hospitals? no, as you can see from the stream of - segregation in hospitals? no, as you| can see from the stream of messages in general, at this time in april everyone around the cabinet table knew that we had to probe and keep asking repeated questions. final oint on asking repeated questions. final point on this. — asking repeated questions. final point on this, the _ asking repeated questions. final point on this, the context of this is really— point on this, the context of this is really the 19th of march, isn't it? you — is really the 19th of march, isn't it? you would know that the 19th of march _ it? you would know that the 19th of march that — it? you would know that the 19th of march that the decision was taken to move _ march that the decision was taken to move 30,000 patients out of hospitals, many of them into care homes _ hospitals, many of them into care homes yes _ hospitals, many of them into care homes. yes. but here we are three or four weeks— homes. yes. but here we are three or four weeks later and you are still raising _ four weeks later and you are still raising points about segregation in

hospitals? correct. does that tell us something about the response? yes, us something about the response? yes. i_ us something about the response? yes. i mean — us something about the response? yes, i mean i think that and lots of the other messages which the council has beenjoined regarding messages between me and other people in number ten in april, officials were literally shouting at me the subject. private. office officials were rightly raising concerns about their care home staff. an excellent official, alexander burns, raised this issue repeatedly. and rightly. thank you mr weatherby. mr freeman, ithink— thank you mr weatherby. mr freeman, i think you're _ thank you mr weatherby. mr freeman, i think you're going _ thank you mr weatherby. mr freeman, i think you're going next? _ thank you mr weatherby. mr freeman, i think you're going next? i— thank you mr weatherby. mr freeman, i think you're going next? i act- thank you mr weatherby. mr freeman, i think you're going next?— i think you're going next? i act for four national— i think you're going next? i act for four national disabled _ i think you're going next? i act for. four national disabled organisations and want to ask you about two documents which were copied into your letter that you go to the inquiry. if we go back to img

4048313, and the first documents at the bottom of page three, it is this green of the whiteboard that you were asked about. this is number ten on the evening of friday the 13th of march. just under .4 on the whiteboard, and the lockdown, lockdown on the left—hand side as you look at it, it says equals, ao, stays home. there are words in brackets just stays home. there are words in bracketsjust under stays home. there are words in brackets just under that. coach, stays home. there are words in bracketsjust under that. coach, who looks after the people who can't survive alone? ?. you see that? yes. we have heard what you said to mr keith about the vulnerable and at—risk groups that they were effectively no plans or any plans to even get a plan, but can you explain

what conclusions were reached at the meeting on the 13th of march, that is the whiteboard that was used across meetings over the weekend, over who was going to look after those people, or simply hide they were going to be supported? this was obviousl a were going to be supported? this was obviously a kind _ were going to be supported? this was obviously a kind of— were going to be supported? this was obviously a kind of stream _ were going to be supported? this was obviously a kind of stream of- obviously a kind of stream of consciousness scribbling on the friday nights, at about eight o'clock or something. i wrote that down because itjust seemed like such an obvious question and we have not had a satisfactory answer in number ten. this whiteboard was partly intended to help develop the idea of what plan b looked like, but also as a kind of eight memoir to remind me and other people in subsequent meetings to look through a lot of the measures on this whiteboard, who is in charge of this, he is doing that, so we could check it off. this is partly so i could say to private secretaries,

could say to private secretaries, could you check on this, could you check on that and make sure that everybody was covering these things. there was a meeting on the 19th about it, and extremely bad meeting. can we then follow that through with the second document i wanted to take you through. that is pasted on the same letter, same reference, and it is at page 24. it is part of the correspondence that you had with the mathematician timothy gowers. page 24, at the top.

there was a follow—on e—mail where professor gower asked you to send on the details of that advice. he said, no need to go into it, overtaken by events, new measures will come in. can you explain now to the chair the

advice that it would kill more that it would save, but we will review consistently and try to time when it would save more of these groups then it kills? what was that advice? chris whitty and others from the department of health had addressed this question and essentially what they were saying was that if you have a load of people, some of them are very seriously disabled, will have other health problems of all different kinds, vulnerable in different kinds, vulnerable in different ways, then if you tell them to go into severe isolation, then that itself, of course will protect them against covid, but will be extremely damaging for a fraction of that vulnerable population. this was part of the whole question that we alluded to earlier on about the question of timing. in terms of plan

a. question of timing. in terms of plan a, the original plan a come the logic was or what time it like that subic would be here by september, and also timing it is relevant for these relevant groups. if you do it now, say 1st of march hypothetically, then you would be saving very few of them from covid because covid was not very prevalent. whereas if you timed it for eight weeks later, say, as people were thinking about at the time, they would be much more protected from covid. what chris whitty but my point was, and other people's point, there was this question about balancing the trade off on time. if you go earlier, you say fewer people covid because there's less coated —— less covid around, pacheco more people by putting them into isolation in many ways. if you go in nature, you save more people from covid. does that

make sense?— more people from covid. does that make sense? ., ., , .,, make sense? endocrinology, as we can see on the e-mail _ make sense? endocrinology, as we can see on the e-mail below. _ make sense? endocrinology, as we can see on the e-mail below. matters i see on the e—mail below. matters then get overtaken and you work towards plan b, as you can see on the page there. towards plan b, as you can see on the page there-— the page there. also it is crucial to bear in _ the page there. also it is crucial to bear in mind _ the page there. also it is crucial to bear in mind that _ the page there. also it is crucial to bear in mind that one - the page there. also it is crucial to bear in mind that one of i the page there. also it is crucial to bear in mind that one of the l to bear in mind that one of the nightmare things we discovered at this time was was not only was not a plan for shielding, but many people in the cabinet office didn't want to have a plan for shielding. our brilliant official called gemma allen on the digital side, she worked with oliver lewis, and they said to the cabinet office this is all bull sheds and we will build a system for shielding. they figured out a way to do it. but it was basically cobbled together in 72 hours or something. and from scratch? ., ,. ., . ~ hours or something. and from scratch? ., ,. .. ~ ~ scratch? from scratch. mrjacobs. mr cummings. — scratch? from scratch. mrjacobs. mr cummings. if— scratch? from scratch. mrjacobs. mr cummings. if you _ scratch? from scratch. mrjacobs. mr cummings, if you could _ scratch? from scratch. mrjacobs. mr cummings, if you could keep - scratch? from scratch. mrjacobs. mr

cummings, if you could keep your. cummings, if you could keep your answers— cummings, if you could keep your answers a — cummings, if you could keep your answers a little _ cummings, if you could keep your answers a little bit _ cummings, if you could keep your answers a little bit shorter. - cummings, if you could keep your answers a little bit shorter. and . cummings, if you could keep your answers a little bit shorter. and ifj answers a little bit shorter. and if you could — answers a little bit shorter. and if you could not _ answers a little bit shorter. and if you could not turn _ answers a little bit shorter. and if you could not turn away _ answers a little bit shorter. and if you could not turn away from i answers a little bit shorter. and if you could not turn away from the | you could not turn away from the microphone _ you could not turn away from the microphone l'ni _ you could not turn away from the microphone-— you could not turn away from the microphone._ sorry i you could not turn away from the microphone._ sorry for| microphone. i'm sorry. sorry for askin: microphone. i'm sorry. sorry for asking questions _ microphone. i'm sorry. sorry for asking questions over— microphone. i'm sorry. sorry for asking questions over your i microphone. i'm sorry. sorry for i asking questions over your shoulder. on page 85 of your statement, i have a couple of questions from the tuc. you say a lot of richer people had a happy time in spring — summer staying at home with family working buyers. lots of pure people had to go to work or lose money. there was resistance to thinking about how to compensate people for staying at home when they were told they had to. in relation to your observation that lots of pure people had to go to work or lose money, are you referring to the many in the lower paid occupations who continue to

attend work through 2020, transport workers, those working in supermarkets and food processing plants and so on? exactly, yes. and are you referring to people on low income have to self—isolate, may be income have to self—isolate, may be in a financially precarious position? exactly. you make the observation that there was resistance to thinking about how to compensate people for staying home when they were told they had to. yes. firstly perhaps a simple point. why was it important to compensate people for staying home when they had to? i people for staying home when they had to? ., ., , ., had to? i thought there was a reasonable _ had to? i thought there was a reasonable argument, - had to? i thought there was a reasonable argument, just i had to? i thought there was a reasonable argument, just in| had to? i thought there was a i reasonable argument, just in moral terms, that we should compensate people for staying home. there was a practical question that if i think about my own position, if i have very little money and i was told she had to stay at home, but in doing that i wouldn't have the cash to

look after my own family, then obviously i am going to ignore a lot of rules and i am going to work and try to keep getting paid. that was the fundamental problem than that refers to. it the fundamental problem than that refers to. , . . , the fundamental problem than that refersto. , . . , , , refers to. it is a fairly simple louic refers to. it is a fairly simple logic that — refers to. it is a fairly simple logic that if _ refers to. it is a fairly simple logic that if self _ refers to. it is a fairly simple logic that if self isolation i refers to. it is a fairly simple | logic that if self isolation isn't effective in low income groups, then that will put an upward pressure on the r rate. correct. why was there resistance in providing financial support? it resistance in providing financial su- ort? . , resistance in providing financial su . oft? ., , , resistance in providing financial su - ort? ., , , ., ., resistance in providing financial sun-ort? , ., ., , support? it was 'ust normal treasury official support? it wasjust normal treasury official short-term _ support? it wasjust normal treasury official short-term thinking, - support? it wasjust normal treasury official short-term thinking, that i official short—term thinking, that was my impression at the time. do ou was my impression at the time. do you recall to patrick vallance and others trying to impress on ministers in meetings that this is your financial support for self isolation was an important one? i do, and i think patrick raised with me directly. do, and i think patrick raised with me directly-—

do, and i think patrick raised with me directl . ., ., ., ,. me directly. could we have on screen 273901, me directly. could we have on screen 273901. page — me directly. could we have on screen 273901, page 164? — me directly. could we have on screen 273901, page 164? this _ me directly. could we have on screen 273901, page 164? this is _ me directly. could we have on screen 273901, page 164? this is an - me directly. could we have on screen 273901, page 1611? this is an entry i 273901, page 164? this is an entry from sir patrick vallance's diary, or daily notes, which he may have seen put to mr kane this morning. this is on the 7th of september 2020. chancellor blocking all notion of paying to get people to isolate, despite all the evidence that this would be needed. is it consistent with your recollection that the plan —— the chancellor was blocking all notions of getting people to isolate? ., , , isolate? the treasury institutionally - isolate? the treasury institutionally was i isolate? the treasury i institutionally was opposed. isolate? the treasury - institutionally was opposed. i isolate? the treasury _ institutionally was opposed. i don't remember exactly what the chancellor's personal view on it walls, but there were certainly treasury officials who are very hostile to the idea. did treasury officials who are very hostile to the idea.— treasury officials who are very hostile to the idea. did you share the view that _ hostile to the idea. did you share the view that it _ hostile to the idea. did you share the view that it threw _ hostile to the idea. did you share the view that it threw in - hostile to the idea. did you share the view that it threw in the i hostile to the idea. did you share the view that it threw in the face | the view that it threw in the face of evidence that it was needed? i did. i didn't have an extremely strong position about it, but one of the things i try to do was looking at countries that were doing much

better than us and it seemed to me that in places like singapore and korea who got their act together better, they had systems like this. for example they had fewjobs for people who had to stay at home under isolation. they had infrastructure to support people who had to stay at home. i thought at the very least that that should be seriously thought about.— that that should be seriously thou~ht about. . ., , ., thought about. was it understood or reflected upon _ thought about. was it understood or reflected upon that _ thought about. was it understood or reflected upon that the _ thought about. was it understood or reflected upon that the difficulty i reflected upon that the difficulty for those on low incomes who are self isolating also intersected with issues of disproportionate impact of the pandemic on another minority ethnic groups? i the pandemic on another minority ethnic groups?— ethnic groups? i think it was discussed. _ ethnic groups? i think it was discussed, but _ ethnic groups? i think it was discussed, but this - ethnic groups? i think it was discussed, but this issue, i ethnic groups? i think it was i discussed, but this issue, like ethnic groups? i think it was - discussed, but this issue, like many issues, similar to the nightmare of child abuse and things like, and care homes, i think this issue was generally neglected in the chaos. does this fall into the category

that you described earlier as an issue appallingly neglected? yes. where ministers _ issue appallingly neglected? 1's; where ministers advised, issue appallingly neglected? 1s; where ministers advised, to your recollection, that financial support for self isolation would not only generally those on lower income work, but also help lessen the disproportionate impact on some minority ethnic groups? yes. minority ethnic groups? yes, different people _ minority ethnic groups? yes, different people made i minority ethnic groups? 1s: different people made different versions of that argument and similar arguments.— versions of that argument and similar arguments. versions of that argument and similar ara uments. . . , ., similar arguments. help us with your imression similar arguments. help us with your impression as _ similar arguments. help us with your impression as to _ similar arguments. help us with your impression as to why _ similar arguments. help us with your impression as to why it _ similar arguments. help us with your impression as to why it is _ similar arguments. help us with your impression as to why it is then i similar arguments. help us with your impression as to why it is then that l impression as to why it is then that there seems to have been simply no interest in addressing its?— interest in addressing its? there was interest _ interest in addressing its? there was interest in _ interest in addressing its? there was interest in addressing i interest in addressing its? there was interest in addressing it. i was interest in addressing it. different parts of the system addressed it. people in the private office addressed it, and other parts office addressed it, and other parts of the system, like patrick and other officials from elsewhere. there was resistance from the treasury. i there was resistance from the treasu . , ., , there was resistance from the treasury-_

treasury. i will rephrase my question- — treasury. i will rephrase my question. clearly _ treasury. i will rephrase my question. clearly people i treasury. i will rephrase my. question. clearly people were raising it, why was apparent interest from ministers on addressing it? i interest from ministers on addressing it?— interest from ministers on addressing it? interest from ministers on addressin: it? ., �* ~ ., addressing it? i don't know. if it did know at _ addressing it? i don't know. if it did know at the _ addressing it? i don't know. if it did know at the time, _ addressing it? i don't know. if it| did know at the time, forgotten. does that complete the questioning? thank— does that complete the questioning? thank you _ does that complete the questioning? thank you very — does that complete the questioning? thank you very much, _ does that complete the questioning? thank you very much, mr— does that complete the questioning? thank you very much, mr cummings. sorry— thank you very much, mr cummings. sorry it _ thank you very much, mr cummings. sorry it has _ thank you very much, mr cummings. sorry it has been _ thank you very much, mr cummings. sorry it has been such— thank you very much, mr cummings. sorry it has been such a _ thank you very much, mr cummings. sorry it has been such a long - thank you very much, mr cummings. sorry it has been such a long day. i sorry it has been such a long day. we shall— sorry it has been such a long day. we shall resume _ sorry it has been such a long day. we shall resume at _ sorry it has been such a long day. we shall resume at ten _ sorry it has been such a long day. we shall resume at ten o'clock. we shall resume at ten o'clock tomorrow_ we shall resume at ten o'clock tomorrow morning. _ we shall resume at ten o'clock tomorrow morning. [- we shall resume at ten o'clock tomorrow morning. i apologise again for my terrible _ tomorrow morning. i apologise again for my terrible language. _ tomorrow morning. i apologise again for my terrible language. this - tomorrow morning. i apologise again for my terrible language. this is - for my terrible language. this is bbc news energy _ for my terrible language. this is bbc news energy had _ for my terrible language. this is bbc news energy had been - for my terrible language. this is - bbc news energy had been watching a live stream of the uk covid inquiry. dominic cummings is you heard they're apologising for some of the language he used both in text messages and those being read out today. he was previously boris johnson's top advisor and we will speak shortly to our correspondent at the inquiry. first, let's recap a little over what we have heard.

during his evidence, dominic cummings was shown a message from 2020 in which he told the then prime minister, borisjohnson, that the nhs was in danger of imploding like a zombie apocalypse film. he told the inquiry he was referring to the crisis coming much faster than they had been told and he was alluding to the fact that there were nhs graphs showing how bad things could become, but he added that the official system for dealing with this in the cabinet office did not seem to understand the gravity of the situation. mr cummings also told the inquiry that mrjohnson was annoyed by the revelation that the lockdown had to happen, as the advice had been that it was both impossible and wouldn't work. mr cameron said he feared the prime minister would go back on that decision. mr cummins was also asked why he did not called mrjohnson back from his holiday in february 2022 chair cobra meeting and he said it was because he

thought would be counter—productive. i did not regard, neither did other people, we did not think that asking the pm to come back and talk to cobra or whitehall in general at that point would have been productive. i thought it would have been counter—productive because i thought it would have said to everybody what he thought at the time, this is another swine flu, it is another rubbish media hoax, nothing would happen. the real danger is the economy going into a slump. i thought if he came back and said that to cobra or any other part of the government it would be counter—productive rather than helpful. 50 counter-productive rather than helful. . helpful. so are you saying you did actively consider _ helpful. so are you saying you did actively consider the _ helpful. so are you saying you did actively consider the possibility i helpful. so are you saying you did actively consider the possibility of asking him to come back and talk to cobra or whitehall? yes, it was discussed what he was away. itruiith discussed what he was away. with who? i discussed _ discussed what he was away. with who? i discussed it _ discussed what he was away. ti who? i discussed it with imran discussed what he was away. ii�*u who? i discussed it with imran and martin and others in a pretend. is

martin and others in a pretend. is there any record are noted that debates? i don't know. are you surprised to hear that there is no notes, as far as we can tell, of asking the prime minister to come back and take charge of the crisis? no, i'm not surprised. there were conversations. people sitting next to each other at work. asi as i say, i was sitting right next to martin and i didn't have to put it this was conversations we had around the office at that time. let's go live to our correspondent at the inquiry. we've heard a response to some of the evidence today representing bereaved families, talking about feeling like should be punished in the stomach after reading some of the evidence and hearing evidence of the inquiry today. has it been covering it this afternoon? i today. has it been covering it this afternoon?—

afternoon? i think you've got to think of the _ afternoon? i think you've got to think of the evidence _