to look beyond current government to look beyond current prevalence as the trigger the point for moving between tiers, is this making the same point that one should try and keep the lower prevalence areas low, rather than just allowing them to move up? yes, unfortunately — just allowing them to move up? yes, unfortunately the _ just allowing them to move up? yes, unfortunately the tier _ just allowing them to move up? 133 unfortunately the tier system was such, as i said already, many people were arguing their own areas should be in the lowest tier possible, that was the surest way to end up in a high tier. was the surest way to end up in a hiuh tier. , .,, was the surest way to end up in a hiahtier. , . high tier. over the page, please. we are still on the _ high tier. over the page, please. we are still on the wednesday. - high tier. over the page, please. we are still on the wednesday. and - are still on the wednesday. and about three lines down you have made about three lines down you have made a note, france and germany have acted, france i think took our circuit breaker idea and applied it. we sent them the papers. is that a recollection that you've now? i had oruanised recollection that you've now? i had organised meetings _ recollection that you've now? i i::c organised meetings between advisors from eight different countries, we meet sometimes every week and shared

information and advice. we often shared papers and they had asked us about the circuit breaker idea and we sent them the papers, i have no idea whether that is what triggered them to take action or not. just above we _ them to take action or not. just above we see — them to take action or not. just above we see an _ them to take action or not. just above we see an extract we looked at earlier, apparently the cabinet office are now cautious about putting things to sage, because we publish all. this happened at this time of increased tension. you said you weren't convinced that anything ever came of that concern. did you think at this time you, there were things you might have been asked about but weren't because of this caution? i been asked about but weren't because of this caution?— of this caution? i suspect, but i can't remember, _ of this caution? i suspect, but i can't remember, that _ of this caution? i suspect, but i can't remember, that i - of this caution? i suspect, but i can't remember, that i would i of this caution? i suspect, but i i can't remember, that i would have had a direct conversation with simon case and said that is not ok we have got to see things. i don't think

cabinet office ever did not bring something to us because they were worried about us, but there was a mood that it might happen. above that we see _ mood that it might happen. above that we see you _ mood that it might happen. above that we see you have _ mood that it might happen. above that we see you have referred - mood that it might happen. above that we see you have referred to l mood that it might happen. above that we see you have referred to the press and then said, we have a weak inde sighsive pm. is that something you stand by or was ate light night brain dump? it you stand by or was ate light night brain dump?— brain dump? it was a late-night moment of— brain dump? it was a late-night moment of frustration. - brain dump? it was a late-night moment of frustration. i - brain dump? it was a late-night moment of frustration. i think l brain dump? it was a late-night l moment of frustration. i think the prime minister was influenced a lot by the press. prime minister was influenced a lot by the mesa-— by the press. let's go over the nae, by the press. let's go over the page. please- _ by the press. let's go over the page, please. we _ by the press. let's go over the page, please. we are - by the press. let's go over the page, please. we are on - by the press. let's go over the page, please. we are on now. by the press. let's go over the | page, please. we are on now to by the press. let's go over the - page, please. we are on now to the thursday of that week, 29th october. and you make a reference immediately under the date to a call with the cabinet office i assume, and you say s i argued strongly for the prime minister to set out his aims. what

does he want to achieve? protect the nhs. something else. emergency care. all care. this takes us back to a point we raised earlier about scientists needing to understand exactly ly what the government was trying to achieve, other than just stopping the nhs being overwhelmed. that was in march, where we were talking about it this morning. it looks as though that concern arose again at this time?— again at this time? possibly even intensified. _ again at this time? possibly even intensified. what _ again at this time? possibly even intensified. what would - again at this time? possibly even intensified. what would you - again at this time? possibly even intensified. what would you have j intensified. what would you have like to be told that you weren't being told? : it. ill would have been useful if they said all we care about is nhs collapse, just work to only that. but that isn't all they cared abd. about. some days it was we can't stand the number of death.

so if that is not the target, what is the target? that you want all routine care running properly and cope with covid? or is it something else, which is we would like to manage the nhs as effectively as we can, but with the economy being in a stronger position with more things open? there are several different permutations that one would think of that would have been helpful to then ensure that we tailored the advice accordingly. ensure that we tailored the advice accordingly-— accordingly. you describe in your statement. _ accordingly. you describe in your statement. a _ accordingly. you describe in your statement, a feedback _ accordingly. you describe in your statement, a feedback session, l accordingly. you describe in your i statement, a feedback session, or, with some of scientists who worked on sage and committees and this feeling that they didn't have a clear understanding of government policy was one of the top issues that you heard and it is something that you heard and it is something that we have heard in evidence ourselves. is that a learning point for next time?— ourselves. is that a learning point for next time? yes, to lay that out clearl . i for next time? yes, to lay that out clearly- i want _ for next time? yes, to lay that out

clearly. i want to _ for next time? yes, to lay that out clearly. i want to offer _ for next time? yes, to lay that out clearly. i want to offer one - clearly. i want to offer one pragmatic observation that i have worked in global companies and many other things and everyone always says, i don't think the strategy is clear enough, wherever you are. we shouldn't dream that setting out the policy clearly is going to be something that satisfied this need, but i don't think it was clear enough at that point. we but i don't think it was clear enough at that point. we can go on two pages. — enough at that point. we can go on two pages. the _ enough at that point. we can go on two pages, the next _ enough at that point. we can go on two pages, the next one _ enough at that point. we can go on two pages, the next one is - enough at that point. we can go on two pages, the next one is a - enough at that point. we can go on| two pages, the next one is a blank. but it takes us into the friday of that week. and in fact, yes page 246. we can see towards the bottom, again, the same point, we have pushed all week that the key is for the prime minister to define his aims, but he still hasn't done that. and a similar point raised, a matter of continuing concern, that is fair? and then at the bottom of the page, we know there were a lengthy meeting on that friday, or possibly more than one meeting. we see pm meeting

at the bottom. and if we scroll on to next page, pm dashboard meeting. would that have been a separate meeting? a, would that have been a separate meetin: ? �* , i, meeting? a separate meeting, i think. meeting? a separate meeting, i think- were _ meeting? a separate meeting, i think. were these _ meeting? a separate meeting, i think. were these meetings - meeting? a separate meeting, i. think. were these meetings taking lace think. were these meetings taking place remotely _ think. were these meetings taking place remotely or— think. were these meetings taking place remotely or would _ think. were these meetings taking place remotely or would you - think. were these meetings taking place remotely or would you have l place remotely or would you have beenin place remotely or would you have been in downing street? thea;r place remotely or would you have been in downing street? they were a mix. i been in downing street? they were a mix- i can't — been in downing street? they were a mix. i can't remember _ been in downing street? they were a mix. i can't remember this _ been in downing street? they were a mix. i can't remember this one. - been in downing street? they were a mix. i can't remember this one. a . mix. i can't remember this one. a lot of the meetings were taking place in person. we lot of the meetings were taking place in person-— place in person. we now on the frida of place in person. we now on the friday of that _ place in person. we now on the friday of that week _ place in person. we now on the friday of that week and - place in person. we now on the friday of that week and we - place in person. we now on the | friday of that week and we know there were events over the weekend when this lockdown was announced. i think what we see in the next few pages is a lengthy debate about whether a national lockdown should or shouldn't be imposed. and obviously sat down that night and wrote quite a will the of notes at the end of that day. let's go over the end of that day. let's go over the page please to 248. you have

made an entry that simon case sent you a whatsapp to say national lockdown on monday, french style. we know the french had imposed a lockdown. you say, i wonder what that look like. do you think you were being told that that decision had been made?— were being told that that decision had been made? yes. would that have been had been made? ies would that have been during the had been made? ie3 would that have been during the meeting had been made? iez3 would that have been during the meeting or, that you were in? it been during the meeting or, that you were in? , . been during the meeting or, that you were in? , v, , were in? it must have been in another meeting _ were in? it must have been in another meeting that - were in? it must have been in another meeting that i - were in? it must have been in another meeting that i didn'tl were in? it must have been in - another meeting that i didn't know about. ., , ., another meeting that i didn't know about. ., ,. , v, about. you carry on describing a meetin: about. you carry on describing a meeting with — about. you carry on describing a meeting with the _ about. you carry on describing a meeting with the pm _ about. you carry on describing a meeting with the pm and - about. you carry on describing a meeting with the pm and we - about. you carry on describing a| meeting with the pm and we see about. you carry on describing a - meeting with the pm and we see you refer there to graphs on projections that suddenly got given to the cabinet office without me seeing them and they will become significant over the next day or so, will they not? and then, further down, prime minister says we need to act, french style national lockdown.

it appears a decision is being made and the notes suggest there may have been a certain amount of toing and froing. can you help us? it been a certain amount of toing and froing. can you help us?— been a certain amount of toing and froing. can you help us? it looks as if the decision _ froing. can you help us? it looks as if the decision probably _ froing. can you help us? it looks as if the decision probably had - froing. can you help us? it looks as if the decision probably had been . if the decision probably had been made in another meeting and there had been weeks of build up to what needed to happen. and this meeting sounds like it was an update on the the situation and the pm reiterated what simon had already told me was going to happen. if what simon had already told me was going to happen. ii are what simon had already told me was going to happen-— going to happen. if we go over the me. going to happen. if we go over the -a~e and going to happen. if we go over the page and we _ going to happen. if we go over the page and we are — going to happen. if we go over the page and we are still _ going to happen. if we go over the page and we are still on _ going to happen. if we go over the page and we are still on that - page and we are still on that friday, i think that is homeric logic. there is a discussion and the prime minister talks about a painting. he argues that letting it go may be the better economic route. further down the page, just off the bottom, so the case is weaker if we are just arguing about saving lives, they're all old anyway. on that

basis it would seem a decision hadn't been made at that point, or is that not right? that hadn't been made at that point, or is that not right?— is that not right? that is what it looks like- _ is that not right? that is what it looks like. were _ is that not right? that is what it looks like. were these - is that not right? that is what it looks like. were these records. looks like. were these records recording _ looks like. were these records recording the _ looks like. were these records recording the sort _ looks like. were these records recording the sort of _ looks like. were these records recording the sort of toing - looks like. were these records recording the sort of toing and froing, orthe, of the recording the sort of toing and froing, or the, of the arguments at the meeting? i froing, or the, of the arguments at the meeting?— froing, or the, of the arguments at the meeting? i think i was recording as far as i the meeting? i think i was recording as far as i can _ the meeting? i think i was recording as far as i can tell— the meeting? i think i was recording as far as i can tell what _ the meeting? i think i was recording as far as i can tell what happened i as far as i can tell what happened ove the over the course of the day, with things changing from meeting to meeting, depending on who was there and what happened in between. you weren't clear — and what happened in between. you weren't clear whether there was going about lbgtd?— weren't clear whether there was going about lbgtd? lockdown? no it looked like there _ going about lbgtd? lockdown? no it looked like there was, _ going about lbgtd? lockdown? no it looked like there was, but _ going about lbgtd? lockdown? no it looked like there was, but it - going about lbgtd? lockdown? no it looked like there was, but it was - looked like there was, but it was difficult to tell.— difficult to tell. over the the -a u e, difficult to tell. over the the page, someone _ difficult to tell. over the the page, someone has- difficult to tell. over the the page, someone has said, i difficult to tell. over the the i page, someone has said, these difficult to tell. over the the - page, someone has said, these are truly horrible decisions. dominic cummings said the only reason not to do it now was if you would never do it. prime minister said shall we tough it out and say there will be

deaths. and another says there needs to be lockdown, i don't see any world in which we don't act. going over the page, still on that friday. you say meeting ended with no decision and going around in circles. too many unknowns. we need to look in our windscreen, deaths will be unacceptable. although further down the page again, 28—day lockdown. we arejust further down the page again, 28—day lockdown. we are just looking at your notes, the notes convey a suggestion of a great deal of indecision on that day. does that... align with your memory? i indecision on that day. does that... align with your memory?— indecision on that day. does that... align with your memory? i think this was a time of... _ align with your memory? i think this was a time of... i _ align with your memory? i think this was a time of... i mean, _ align with your memory? i think this was a time of... i mean, this - align with your memory? i think this was a time of... i mean, this was i was a time of... i mean, this was almost a microcos. of what has been going on for the previous weeks,

with the incidence, prevalence and r changing a bit and people moving from one position to another. and the prime minister would take a certain position in one meeting and then perhaps another one later on. sometimes i think was also trying to test people's positions and find out whether they really held to what they were saying. but these meetings largely looked like they were meetings that probably chris whitty and i were there to provide information as requested, rather than as active participants in a policy discusses.— than as active participants in a policy discusses. that friday night there was a _ policy discusses. that friday night there was a leak _ policy discusses. that friday night there was a leak and _ policy discusses. that friday night there was a leak and the - policy discusses. that friday night there was a leak and the next i there was a leak and the next morning on the saturday, there were reports that a lockdown was going to be ordered. and there was then a hastily arranged press conference. if we go over to the next page, you record that in your notes, this is

now saturday 31st. frantic day, whole thing leaked into the media. everyone can see action is needed. some people are pushing hard against it. we have to do a press conference today. why not keep it quiet? get it right over the weekend? and then announce properly on monday. it is clear from the tone of this that you felt it obviously has been the case, bounced into making an announcement? or being part of an announcement being bounced into the press conference. the sequence was that a graph that had been to spym had been taken into no 10 we got rather blind sided, having been shown to the

prime minister and the no 10 team on friday and we said you shouldn't take too much notice of this graph and look at the six week medium term protections that were more reliable examples of what was happening — which was pretty grim. over night on friday, the policy group having made the decision to do a lockdown, th dedecision was leaked to the press. we come back to this slide point, the prime minister has latched op tho that and the one of the nhs collapsing as the reason for doing it. he was furious that he had pace based on a slide that i was having to row back on and you describe there being a requirement from no 10 that the slide be used in the press conference. you in a subsequent note

say you, it shouldn't be, but you were persuaded it should. this incident has been the subject of some debate. tell us in your own word what is the rest of that part of story was? we word what is the rest of that part of story was?— word what is the rest of that part of story was? we were called in to do the press _ of story was? we were called in to do the press conference, - of story was? we were called in to do the press conference, chris i do the press conference, chris whitty and i and we were in a room for three hours when the prime minister was making calls to backbenchers and the press to get people on the right side to the decision. we welcome back clear the night before is in slide was a reasonable worse case scenario and thatis reasonable worse case scenario and that is not a good thing to show in a press conference. studio: you are watching bbc news, you can continue to watch the covid inquiry on the bbc web—site or app. i want to bring you some breaking news, four men have been found guilty of murdering a woman after a

gunman opened fire at her home in liverpool. the woman was shot in august 2022. the four men were found guilty of murder by a jury at liverpool crown court. ian fitzgibbon was acquitted. police say mobile phone vote notes condemned the killers. the court heard of a feud between the boyfriend and the drug dealers in the si. ashley dale was alone at home when she was shot dead. ,., . ., i. ., ~ dead. the police, anyone in, make ourself dead. the police, anyone in, make yourself known. _ dead. the police, anyone in, make yourself known. minutes _ dead. the police, anyone in, make yourself known. minutes later i dead. the police, anyone in, make yourself known. minutes later the | yourself known. minutes later the olice yourself known. minutes later the police arrive _ yourself known. minutes later the police arrive and _ yourself known. minutes later the police arrive and found _ yourself known. minutes later the police arrive and found a - yourself known. minutes later the police arrive and found a house i police arrive and found a house peppered with bullet holes. back doofs peppered with bullet holes. back doors open- _ peppered with bullet holes. back door's open. eight _ peppered with bullet holes. back door's open. eight shots - peppered with bullet holes. back door's open. eight shots had i peppered with bullet holes. back. door's open. eight shots had been fired to ashley _ door's open. eight shots had been

fired to ashley dale. _ door's open. eight shots had been fired to ashley dale. others i door's open. eight shots had been fired to ashley dale. others fired l fired to ashley dale. others fired at her dog. police find the lights, shattered tiles and ashley collapsed in the backyard. a high powered scorpion sub machine gun was fired by a masked gunman, who left his dna on a bullet and a footprint on the door. the gun man was arrested, james witham. door. the gun man was arrested, james witham— door. the gun man was arrested, james witham. you're under arrest for murder- — james witham. you're under arrest for murder. you _ james witham. you're under arrest for murder. you need _ james witham. you're under arrest for murder. you need not - james witham. you're under arrest for murder. you need not say i for murder. you need not say anything. anything you do say maybe given evidence. iie anything. anything you do say maybe given evidence.— given evidence. he said he was t in: to given evidence. he said he was trying to send _ given evidence. he said he was trying to send a _ given evidence. he said he was trying to send a message i given evidence. he said he was trying to send a message to i given evidence. he said he was i trying to send a message to ashley's boyfriend and hit her by mistake. four other men stood trial accused of the murder and conspiring to kill ashley's boyfriend. the court heard of a long running row between him and the others over drug deals and money. on the night of the shooting,

her car tyres had been slashed. the court heard it was to stop anyone escaping. despite the death of his girlfriend, lee harrison has refused to give evidence against the men on trial. it was up to police to build the case. but they had a break through. on ashley's phone were messages and voice notes where she recorded herfears messages and voice notes where she recorded her fears for her life. i have never in my experience heard a victim's voice telling you what was happening, what is going on in their life that is paralleling what you are obtaining and looking at. this is within half an hour before james witham's entry to the house. it is chilling. witham's entry to the house. it is chillinu. ., a ., witham's entry to the house. it is chillinu. ., �* , ., ., chilling. for ashley's mother and step father _ chilling. for ashley's mother and step father it _ chilling. for ashley's mother and step father it meant _ chilling. for ashley's mother and step father it meant listening i chilling. for ashley's mother and step father it meant listening to | step father it meant listening to their daughter's voice in court.

harrowing, but necessary, because without_ harrowing, but necessary, because without it— harrowing, but necessary, because without it we wouldn't be at a fry. -- trial~ _ without it we wouldn't be at a fry. —— trial. because the culture around the people. — —— trial. because the culture around the people, the no—grass culture. during _ the people, the no—grass culture. during the — the people, the no—grass culture. during the trial of not seeing one ounce _ during the trial of not seeing one ounce of— during the trial of not seeing one ounce of remorse, _ during the trial of not seeing one ounce of remorse, not _ during the trial of not seeing one ounce of remorse, not one - during the trial of not seeing one ounce of remorse, not one of- during the trial of not seeing one i ounce of remorse, not one of them. not one _ ounce of remorse, not one of them. not one ounce — ounce of remorse, not one of them. not one ounce of— ounce of remorse, not one of them. not one ounce of remorse. - ounce of remorse, not one of them. not one ounce of remorse. not i ounce of remorse, not one of them. not one ounce of remorse. not onel not one ounce of remorse. not one tear. _ not one ounce of remorse. not one tear. nothing. — not one ounce of remorse. not one tear. nothing. i'm _ not one ounce of remorse. not one tear. nothing. i'm hoping _ not one ounce of remorse. not one tear. nothing. i'm hoping now- not one ounce of remorse. not one tear. nothing. i'm hoping now they| tear. nothing. i'm hoping now they realise _ tear. nothing. i'm hoping now they realise the — tear. nothing. i'm hoping now they realise the sheer, _ tear. nothing. i'm hoping now they realise the sheer, you _ tear. nothing. i'm hoping now they realise the sheer, you know, - tear. nothing. i'm hoping now they. realise the sheer, you know, serious nature _ realise the sheer, you know, serious nature of— realise the sheer, you know, serious nature of what — realise the sheer, you know, serious nature of what they _ realise the sheer, you know, serious nature of what they have _ realise the sheer, you know, serious nature of what they have done. i nature of what they have done. ashley— nature of what they have done. ashley dale _ nature of what they have done. ashley dale wasn't _ nature of what they have done. ashley dale wasn't the - nature of what they have done. ashley dale wasn't the only i nature of what they have done. i ashley dale wasn't the only victim. 24 hour— ashley dale wasn't the only victim. 24 hour lates, _ ashley dale wasn't the only victim. 24 hour lates, nine—year—old - ashley dale wasn't the only victim. 24 hour lates, nine—year—old olivia pratt-korbel— 24 hour lates, nine—year—old olivia pratt—korbel was _ 24 hour lates, nine—year—old olivia pratt—korbel was murdered. - 24 hour lates, nine—year—old olivia pratt—korbel was murdered. and i 24 hour lates, nine—year—old olivia i pratt—korbel was murdered. and eilie edwards' _ pratt—korbel was murdered. and eilie edwards' death— pratt—korbel was murdered. and eilie edwards' death send _ pratt—korbel was murdered. and eilie edwards' death send shock— pratt—korbel was murdered. and eilie edwards' death send shock waves i edwards' death send shock waves through— edwards' death send shock waves through the — edwards' death send shock waves through the city. _ edwards' death send shock waves through the city. all— edwards' death send shock waves through the city. all three - edwards' death send shock wavesj through the city. all three killings involved _ through the city. all three killings involved gang _ through the city. all three killings involved gang culture _ through the city. all three killings involved gang culture and - through the city. all three killings involved gang culture and drugs. i involved gang culture and drugs. police _ involved gang culture and drugs. police say— involved gang culture and drugs. police say this _ involved gang culture and drugs. police say this year _ involved gang culture and drugs. police say this year there - involved gang culture and drugs. police say this year there has i involved gang culture and drugs. l police say this year there has been a change _ police say this year there has been a change in — police say this year there has been a change in terms _ police say this year there has been a change in terms of— police say this year there has been a change in terms of guns - police say this year there has been a change in terms of guns being i a change in terms of guns being fired _ a change in terms of guns being fired a— a change in terms of guns being fired a drop— a change in terms of guns being fired a drop of— a change in terms of guns being fired a drop of two—

a change in terms of guns being fired a drop of two thirds. - a change in terms of guns being fired a drop of two thirds. but . a change in terms of guns being i fired a drop of two thirds. but they say the _ fired a drop of two thirds. but they say the battle _ fired a drop of two thirds. but they say the battle against _ fired a drop of two thirds. but they say the battle against gangs - fired a drop of two thirds. but they say the battle against gangs and l fired a drop of two thirds. but they. say the battle against gangs and the drugs _ say the battle against gangs and the drugs they— say the battle against gangs and the drugs they deal— say the battle against gangs and the drugs they deal in, _ say the battle against gangs and the drugs they deal in, goes _ say the battle against gangs and the drugs they deal in, goes on. - say the battle against gangs and the drugs they deal in, goes on. that. say the battle against gangs and the drugs they deal in, goes on.- drugs they deal in, goes on. that is the breaking _ drugs they deal in, goes on. that is the breaking new _ drugs they deal in, goes on. that is the breaking new that _ drugs they deal in, goes on. that is the breaking new that four - drugs they deal in, goes on. that is the breaking new that four men i drugs they deal in, goes on. that is. the breaking new that four men have been found guilty of murder after a woman was shot in her hope in liverpool. ashley dale was shot by a gunman in the early hours of 21st august last year. you're watching bbc news. now back to the covid inquiry in london and we are hearing from sir patrick vallance, the government's chief vine scientific adviser during the covid epidemic. here what is he has said. i thought the were here what is he has said. i thought they were fantastic. _ here what is he has said. i thought they were fantastic. i _ here what is he has said. i thought they were fantastic. i think - here what is he has said. i thought they were fantastic. i think we i here what is he has said. i thought they were fantastic. i think we put | they were fantastic. i think we put too much on them. and some of them we needed to i think give more breaks than we did and we should have implemented a payment system to

back fill teaching commitments, which we did but it was difficult to get it going. all that said, i think the mechanism to pull on world leading active academic researchers is the rigt one, rather than to build a big intragovernment infrastructure. i think that worked and we were very fortunate to have the level of input, skills, debate, that we had as a result of that. i'm not sure i would dramatically change that beyond things like make sure we get the diversity, right, the geographical diversity and make sure we provide both psychological and security support for people. thank ou ve security support for people. thank you very much- — security support for people. thank you very much. those _ security support for people. thank you very much. those are - security support for people. thank you very much. those are all i security support for people. thank you very much. those are all my l you very much. those are all my questions. you very much. those are all my questions-— you very much. those are all my questions. you very much. those are all my ruestions. ., «r , ., , . . questions. thank you very much. we will take a break— questions. thank you very much. we will take a break and _

questions. thank you very much. we will take a break and i _ questions. thank you very much. we will take a break and i shall- questions. thank you very much. we will take a break and i shall return i will take a break and i shall return at half— will take a break and i shall return at half past — will take a break and i shall return at half past 3. and i can undertake sir patrick. — at half past 3. and i can undertake sir patrick, we will definitely be finished — sir patrick, we will definitely be finished by 5 o'clock at the latest. i'm finished by 5 o'clock at the latest. i'm sorry— finished by 5 o'clock at the latest. i'm sorry it— finished by 5 o'clock at the latest. i'm sorry it is such a long day for you _ i'm sorry it is such a long day for ou. ., ., , ., , you. that was the covid inquiry in central london _ you. that was the covid inquiry in central london hearing _ you. that was the covid inquiry in central london hearing from i you. that was the covid inquiry in central london hearing from sir. central london hearing from sir patrick vallance, the government's former chief vine scientific adviser. there were talk of entries into his diary that were discussed into his diary that were discussed in previous sessions of the inquiry. you can follow lots of comments that are being made on the live page on our web—site. are being made on the live page on ourweb—site. or on are being made on the live page on our web—site. or on vallance, the government's former chief scientific adviser. there were talk of entries into his diary that were discussed into his diary that were discussed in previous sessions of the inquiry. you can follow lots of comments that are being made on the live page on our web—site. are being made on the live page on ourweb—site. or on are being made on the live page on our web—site. or on the app on your phone or tablet. the inquiry started pi looking at the economic advice that was being made to the government and sir patrick vallance said there was a lack of economic advice and #i250i78s v sometimes there was an imbalance between what there was an imbalance between what the science said and the economic

advice. it went on to talk about meetings with broader groups and he was asked about the pressure on him and sir chris whitty, being asked to put on advice to decision makers and he said it wouldn't have been practical to have a whole group of scientists passing on information to key people in government. let's take a listen to what he had to say. do you think that enough was done during february to understand what that meant and what an nhs overwhelm would look like, what the numbers involved with? i would look like, what the numbers involved with?— involved with? i think the number, there was a _ involved with? i think the number, there was a lot _ involved with? i think the number, there was a lot done _ involved with? i think the number, there was a lot done in _ involved with? i think the number, there was a lot done in terms i involved with? i think the number, there was a lot done in terms of i there was a lot done in terms of what needed, what the options were to reduce the spread. 50 quite early in february, work started on nonpharmaceutical interventions. neil ferguson drew up a lot of modelling around that. what the different options were. and came up

with a figure that others endorsed of needing to get the 75% reduction in contact to suppress this to the right level. there was a lot of work done on the modelling and a lot of work done exposing the options into cobra, including with the behavioural science input and there was a discussion which i think boris johnson puts in his statement, which he had with the cmo in february on lockdown options and what the implications of those would be. i think there was a lot of evidence that there were things that needed to happen in order to achieve this aim of sub pressing the curve. i'm not convinced there was a very effective operational response to that. sir effective operational response to that. ,, ., ., ~ ., effective operational response to that. ,, ., .,~ ., . ., that. sir patrick talked of friction with sir chris _ that. sir patrick talked of friction with sir chris whitty _ that. sir patrick talked of friction with sir chris whitty on - that. sir patrick talked of friction with sir chris whitty on when - that. sir patrick talked of friction with sir chris whitty on when to l with sir chris whitty on when to

lock down. i with sir chris whitty on when to lock down-— with sir chris whitty on when to lock down. ~' , ~ , , ., lock down. i think chris whitty is a ublic lock down. i think chris whitty is a public health _ lock down. i think chris whitty is a public health specialist _ lock down. i think chris whitty is a public health specialist and - lock down. i think chris whitty is a public health specialist and he - lock down. i think chris whitty is a i public health specialist and he was rightly in my opinion concerned about the adverse effects of the mpis. he was concerned there would be more than just the issue of the direct cause of death from the virus that there would be indirect causes of death due to effects on the nhs. that there would be indirect harms due to people isolating, mental health, loneliness, issues of health that come from that procedure. and that come from that procedure. and that there would be indirect long—term consequences due to the economic impacts creating poverty, which is a major driver of health. he was definitely of the view that the treatment and the result of that treatment needed to be considered together. and that pulling the

trigger to do things too early could lead to adverse consequences. and that i think is a totally appropriate worry from the chief medical officers and a legitimate public health concern. and i didn't have the same worry. i was more on the side of we need to move on this. but i think that is partly why the two of us found it useful to work together. 5ir two of us found it useful to work touether. ,, ., . ~ two of us found it useful to work touether. ,, ., ., ., . together. sir patrick vallance said althouah together. sir patrick vallance said although ministers _ together. sir patrick vallance said although ministers talked - together. sir patrick vallance said although ministers talked of- although ministers talked of following the scientific advice that mantra was not always followed. i mantra was not always followed. i think the way in which this was both heard and possibly meant in terms of slavishly following the science, obeying it at all times, is completely wrong. you can't. i can also agree there is no such thing as the science. science by its definition is a moving body of

knowledge that tries to overturn things by testing all the time. you sa when things by testing all the time. you say when it _ things by testing all the time. you say when it was _ things by testing all the time. you say when it was first used, you weren't opposed to it. was it then about the repetition of it, or perhaps the circumstances in which it was yood? used. when did it become negative?— it was yood? used. when did it become negative? pretty quickly, at first i thought _ become negative? pretty quickly, at first i thought good _ become negative? pretty quickly, at first i thought good they're - first i thought good they're listening to the science, but i think it became interpreted widely in the press and possibly inside government as well as a sort of direct following the science, a slavish following of it, which i agree these are difficult ministerial decisions, they are precisely what needs to be taken ministers to make those almost impossiblejudgment ministers to make those almost impossible judgment calls which the science can't make and shouldn't make. 5ir

science can't make and shouldn't make. ,, ., .~' science can't make and shouldn't make. ,, ., ., ., . ., make. sir patrick vallance also said the then prime _ make. sir patrick vallance also said the then prime minister— make. sir patrick vallance also said the then prime minister boris - the then prime minister boris johnson found it hard to concentrate and he had had the virus. i johnson found it hard to concentrate and he had had the virus.— and he had had the virus. i think i'm riaht and he had had the virus. i think i'm right in _ and he had had the virus. i think i'm right in saying _ and he had had the virus. i think i'm right in saying that - and he had had the virus. i think i'm right in saying that the - and he had had the virus. i think| i'm right in saying that the prime minister at the time gave up science when he was 15 and he would be the first toed admit it was not his forte. he did struggle with the concepts and needed to make them. a meet from science advisors from across europe and one, i won't say which country, said the leader oo across europe and one, i won't say which country, said the leader 00 of that country had a problems with exponential be the first to admit it was not his forte. he did struggle with the concepts and needed to make them. a meet from science advisors from across europe and one, i won't say which country, said the leader oo say which country, said the leader 00 of that country had a problems with exponential curbs and the entire phone call burst into laughter, because it was true in every country. i don't think there was a unique inability to grasp these concepts with the prime minister at the time, but it was

hard time work sometimes to make sure that he had understood what a particular piece of data was saying and i had learned from a number of meetings, including around climate, where there was certain things that would catch his eye and would work for him and other things that wouldn't work for him. there were ways of presenting the data to allow him to get better access. the inuui him to get better access. the inquiry should _ him to get better access. the inquiry should reconvene around half past. but the prime minister rishi sunak has been talking in london about the economy. it is ahead of the chancellor's autumn statement. here i was what he said. it the chancellor's autumn statement. here i was what he said.— here i was what he said. it takes olitical here i was what he said. it takes political courage _ here i was what he said. it takes political courage to _ here i was what he said. it takes political courage to take - here i was what he said. it takes political courage to take the - political courage to take the difficult but right decisions for the long—term. and the truth is keir starmer and rachel reeves try to block or oppose almost every major decision we took to get our debt falling. if they get the chance they will make the problem worse,

continuing the big government, big spending approach of the pandemic and promising to borrow a further £28 billion per year. and this makes the same economic mistake as last year's mini—budget, blowing tens of billions on unfunded spending is just as dangerous as blowing billions on unfunded tax cuts. it is taking the easy way out and the result is the same — higher inflation, financial insecurity and more debt for or children and grandchildren. you know i won't allow that to happen. i was willing to resign from the previous government over this. i was even willing to lose a leadership election over this. so you had better believe me when i say that the difference is real — i will do what is necessary to get our debt down and provide financial security.

the second decision we are taking us to cut tax and reward hard work. i want to cut taxes, i believe in cutting taxes. what clear expression could there be of my governing philosophy than the belief that people and not governments make the best decisions about their money. but doing that responsibly is hard. we must avoid doing anything that puts a risk to our progress and controlling inflation, and no matter how much we might want them to, history shows that tax cuts do not automatically pay for themselves. and i can't click my fingers and suddenly wish away all the reasons the taxes had to increase in the first place, partly because of covid and putin's war in ukraine, and partly because we want to support people to live in dignity and requirement with a decent pension and good health care, which will cost more as the population ages. but my argument has never been that

we shouldn't cut taxes. it's been that we could only