i thought that it was where i thought that it was convenient that one or two people where they are of patrick and i was not there, yes, but that is political process, ultimately ministers were in position they could have insisted we were there, and they did not always. neither would i have felt it was appropriate for me to insist there was an economic advisor they are, or someone who had understood diplomacy. this has to be a decision fundamentally for ministers, who do they want to take their advice from has to be for them at the end of the day. where there ever times when you assessed — where there ever times when you assessed that there was a degree of cherry— assessed that there was a degree of cherry picking of the science has been _ cherry picking of the science has been proffered by sage and yourself? that we _ been proffered by sage and yourself? that we were cherry picking or other people? that we were cherry picking or other --eole? , ., _ that we were cherry picking or other neale? , ., ,, ., that we were cherry picking or other n-eole? , ., ,, ., , people? obviously, other people cherry picking — people? obviously, other people cherry picking advice _ people? obviously, other people cherry picking advice you - people? obviously, other people cherry picking advice you were i cherry picking advice you were giving — cherry picking advice you were caivin. , ., ., , cherry picking advice you were giving. yes, no doubt about that. that was inevitable. _

giving. yes, no doubt about that. that was inevitable. i _ giving. yes, no doubt about that. that was inevitable. i want - giving. yes, no doubt about that. that was inevitable. i want to - giving. yes, no doubt about that. that was inevitable. i want to be | that was inevitable. i want to be clear about this. principal decision—makers in government, prime minister, the then secretary of state for health, duchy of lancaster, for example, nor in my view did that apply to the majority of political leaders, but there were some who chose their sites they wanted to hear, put it that way, and there were optical commentators whose view of the site started with what was my political position and then derive from that. in terms of decision makers in the decisions taken during covid in the uk, my view is, they were not intending to cherry pick, they may have done so by accident, it was not by design. you obviously spent a great deal of time in _ you obviously spent a great deal of time in numberten. you work you obviously spent a great deal of time in number ten. you work very closely— time in number ten. you work very closely with — time in number ten. you work very closely with government ministers and government advisers for an inordinate — and government advisers for an inordinate amount of time. a certain

degree _ inordinate amount of time. a certain degree of— inordinate amount of time. a certain degree of administrative confusion be expected in any government dealing — be expected in any government dealing with the crisis of this magnitude. but how efficiently did you assess the initiative system around — you assess the initiative system around the prime minister to be operated? i- operated? i thought that the civil operated? — i thought that the civil servants, including particularly the health and economics private secretaries did a very good job in difficult circumstances, if i'm honest. i think that the political system around the prime minister was more mixed. but i don't think that was really as much to the fore in the set of decisions as it was in some other areas. set of decisions as it was in some otherareas. it set of decisions as it was in some other areas. it was quite often chaotic, but actually i would be very doubtful if it wasn't chaotic

and multiple other governments, and in fact that is what our fellow advisers from other countries said in many other environments, that this was difficult for every country that has been faced by extraordinary circumstances. if i can take a step back, i think it is very dangerous for people in my kind ofjob to see who would i have as my fantasy prime minister at this point in time. the choices, if the opposition had won the election it would have been jeremy corbyn, if if borisjohnson are not allowed to continue it would have been liz truss, they would for different challenges and advantages at the just, it is the job of technical people to work with whoever is they are, that is their job, it is important not to personalise, in a sense, the situation between technical advisers and ministers. it is important to

work with whoever is there. so that there can be no doubt, the inquiry— so that there can be no doubt, the inquiry has — so that there can be no doubt, the inquiry has not asked you or seeking to ask— inquiry has not asked you or seeking to ask you _ inquiry has not asked you or seeking to ask you to — inquiry has not asked you or seeking to ask you to express your views on the physical— to ask you to express your views on the physical attributes or ability of any— the physical attributes or ability of any individual, my question was directed _ of any individual, my question was directed at— of any individual, my question was directed at decision—making and the processes— directed at decision—making and the processes by which these decisions were taken. —— views on the political— were taken. —— views on the political attributes. there is evidence, although ultimately it is formality— evidence, although ultimately it is formality to determine, there was a difficulty— formality to determine, there was a difficulty in — formality to determine, there was a difficulty in the prime minister and a difficulty in reaching clear, consistent positions. ample evidence relating _ consistent positions. ample evidence relating to— consistent positions. ample evidence relating to oscillation, or backing and feeling, whatever, did you observe — and feeling, whatever, did you observe that? because of cauchy you were there _ were there. i— were there. i think the way that mrjohnson were there. — i think the way that mrjohnson took

decisions was unique to him. if i may interact, that is a euphemism. what do you mean by that? he has— euphemism. what do you mean by that? he has quite _ euphemism. what do you mean by that? he has quite a distinct style. lots of other people have got distinct styles. i do want to take you invitation not to make commentaries on individual politicians. that is not my role. on individual politicians. that is not my role-— on individual politicians. that is notm role. ., ., . not my role. no. but you gave advice within the confines _ not my role. no. but you gave advice within the confines of _ not my role. no. but you gave advice within the confines of sage _ not my role. no. but you gave advice within the confines of sage and - not my role. no. but you gave advice within the confines of sage and your| within the confines of sage and your role, _ within the confines of sage and your role, on _ within the confines of sage and your role, on public health issues, and you expected the government to be able to— you expected the government to be able to respond efficiently, speedily. you have referred to the need _ speedily. you have referred to the need for— speedily. you have referred to the need for speed. it must have been apparent _ need for speed. it must have been apparent to you that the government encountered significant difficulties in being _ encountered significant difficulties in being able to reach collectively, through— in being able to reach collectively, through the prime minister or otherwise, decisions, that it was then— otherwise, decisions, that it was then that — otherwise, decisions, that it was then that they then stuck to and consistently abided by. this degree of oscillation and chaos is

apparent?— of oscillation and chaos is apparent? of oscillation and chaos is anarent? . . �* , apparent? that is correct. but it is apparent? that is correct. but it is a matter of— apparent? that is correct. but it is a matter of record _ apparent? that is correct. but it is a matter of record that _ apparent? that is correct. but it is a matter of record that many - apparent? that is correct. but it is| a matter of record that many other nations had similar problems, expressed in different ways to stop in this major international crisis. finally, on the subject of decision making — finally, on the subject of decision making. you have already confirmed that there _ making. you have already confirmed that there were verbal briefings in number— that there were verbal briefings in number ten, that there were verbal briefings in numberten, they were not that there were verbal briefings in number ten, they were not recorded, but in _ number ten, they were not recorded, but in the _ number ten, they were not recorded, but in the nature of these things, principal— but in the nature of these things, principal private secretaries, advisers. _ principal private secretaries, advisers, would keep notes. they would _ advisers, would keep notes. they would be — advisers, would keep notes. they would be readouts of all the beatings. do you assess that all the meetings _ beatings. do you assess that all the meetings that you had, all the engagements, verbal briefings, were adequately recorded? there were thousands of hours of meetings between — thousands of hours of meetings between yourself, sir patrick, and governments. and they're not all recorded — governments. and they're not all recorded. do you think, in

hindsight, that the lack of formality, the lack of transparency, may have _ formality, the lack of transparency, may have contributed to that degree of chaos, _ may have contributed to that degree of chaos, or— may have contributed to that degree of chaos, or perhaps to the oscillations which witnesses have described — oscillations which witnesses have described the prime minister suffered from?— described the prime minister suffered from? firstly, i did not aet suffered from? firstly, i did not net to suffered from? firstly, i did not get to see. _ suffered from? firstly, i did not get to see, rightly _ suffered from? firstly, i did not get to see, rightly did _ suffered from? firstly, i did not get to see, rightly did not - suffered from? firstly, i did not get to see, rightly did not get i suffered from? firstly, i did not| get to see, rightly did not get to see, ministerial minutes for many of the things i went to. one of the interesting things in this process has been reading minutes where my memory of the events is not exactly in accordance with the minutes. i'm quite sure they were done in good faith. inevitably. a lot of senior ministers include the prime minister came to a position informally, in conversation. for example, one of the times where we had the most conversation with the prime minister

in a small group, where he tended to be at its most focused, was in that briefing just before we did press conferences. that is not a formal meeting, that was just working things out, but it allowed him to test out ideas are not in public, which i think he valued, and i think helped the decision—making process. but it wasn't a formal meeting, it wasn't minuted. but the decision—making minutes meetings were from early on, my sense was, the record—keeping and the very first bit of the pandemic was less strong. but i wasn't the person who the minutes were aimed at and i didn't see a lot of them, that was my sense at the time. for legitimate reasons of people being stretched all over the place, but the fact is, i think, relatively clear. all right. can we now turn, please, to some _ all right. can we now turn, please, to some of— all right. can we now turn, please, to some of the early steps, the hourty— to some of the early steps, the

hourly information, that you received _ hourly information, that you received injanuary hourly information, that you received in january 2020? hourly information, that you received injanuary 2020? it hourly information, that you received in january 2020? it forms no part— received in january 2020? it forms no part of— received in january 2020? it forms no part of the inquiry's function with— no part of the inquiry's function with newcomer professor, to go through— with newcomer professor, to go through every single one of the thousands of meetings and documents, so i'm _ thousands of meetings and documents, so i'm going _ thousands of meetings and documents, so i'm going to ask you to try to keep— so i'm going to ask you to try to keep your— so i'm going to ask you to try to keep your answer at is appropriately hi-h keep your answer at is appropriately high a _ keep your answer at is appropriately high a level as possible. on the 5th ofjanuary. — high a level as possible. on the 5th ofjanuary, in an e—mail to professor— ofjanuary, in an e—mail to professor sirjonathan van damme, professor sir jonathan van damme, and professor sirjonathan van damme, and others, — professor sirjonathan van damme, and others, you refer to triggers, three _ and others, you refer to triggers, three triggers, which would mean we should _ three triggers, which would mean we should start taking a close interest in considering the risks to the united — in considering the risks to the united kingdom. could we have, 4784? if we united kingdom. could we have, 4784? if we go— united kingdom. could we have, 4784? if we go down to page three, we can

see that _ if we go down to page three, we can see that the — if we go down to page three, we can see that the genesis of the e—mail string _ see that the genesis of the e—mail string was — see that the genesis of the e—mail string was a report from the press, i string was a report from the press, ithink. _ string was a report from the press, ithink. but— string was a report from the press, i think, but of a report from an organisation for which the inquiry has heard — organisation for which the inquiry has heard that gave information about _ has heard that gave information about undiagnosed ammonia in china, if we go _ about undiagnosed ammonia in china, if we go back to one we can see yourself— if we go back to one we can see yourself and your colleagues talking about _ yourself and your colleagues talking about this _ yourself and your colleagues talking about this report. then you say this, _ about this report. then you say this, my— about this report. then you say this, my view is that any of three triggers— this, my view is that any of three triggers would mean we would start ticking _ triggers would mean we would start ticking close interest in considering risk to united kingdom. health _ considering risk to united kingdom. health care workers dying, evidence of person—to—person spread, for example — of person—to—person spread, for example families, geographical spread — example families, geographical spread. a couple of questions about those _ spread. a couple of questions about those triggers. in subsequent e—mail correspondence sirjonathan van tam refer to _ correspondence sirjonathan van tam refer to that — correspondence sirjonathan van tam refer to that first trigger its meaning not that health care workers would _ meaning not that health care workers would die, _ meaning not that health care workers would die, but there was transmission of the virus between heatth— transmission of the virus between health care workers. which is the

correct _ health care workers. which is the correct trigger?— correct trigger? death or transmission? _ correct trigger? death or transmission? i- correct trigger? death or transmission? i meant . correct trigger? death or - transmission? i meant mortality, i will explain why. but i thought the way that he moved it onto health care workers was probably sensible for the later stage, because it was clear the first will less relevant. i can explain why i chose those three triggers. just briefly. the first one, it is important, but i wanted to capture was a disease which had a high mortality if you have a very close contact even if it didn't spread widely in the population. examples might be ebola. those would not be captured by something that had very widespread community transmission, at least until quite late on in the situation. that was the reason i put that one in, in a sense separately, from a person—to—person spread. sir jonathan, i think very reasonably, said, health care workers are people

who come particularly closely to people who have got significant symptoms, and they are an important subset. he moves my triggers on. that was not unreasonable. all right. it is obvious from this point _ all right. it is obvious from this point on. — all right. it is obvious from this point on. a _ all right. it is obvious from this point on, a number of you, particularly you answer patrick and sage. _ particularly you answer patrick and sage. were — particularly you answer patrick and sage, were focusing on the issue of person—to—person transmission, how transmittable was the virus. also, on the _ transmittable was the virus. also, on the issue — transmittable was the virus. also, on the issue of asymptomatic transmission, because, as we infer from _ transmission, because, as we infer from other— transmission, because, as we infer from other evidence, you need to know— from other evidence, you need to know the — from other evidence, you need to know the degree of asymptomatic transmission to work out the body of the iceberg _ transmission to work out the body of the iceberg of which death and hospitalisation are only the tip. you need — hospitalisation are only the tip. you need to know what their body off the virus _ you need to know what their body off the virus is _ you need to know what their body off the virus is doing. also, of course, the virus is doing. also, of course, the degree — the virus is doing. also, of course, the degree to which cases were in

reality— the degree to which cases were in reality spreading beyond china. on 13th of— reality spreading beyond china. on 13th ofjanuary there was a nerve ta- 13th ofjanuary there was a nerve tag meeting in which it was noted that nerve — tag meeting in which it was noted that nerve tag has been stated there was no _ that nerve tag has been stated there was no human—to—human transmission, which _ was no human—to—human transmission, which implies— was no human—to—human transmission, which implies may be some evidence of limited _ which implies may be some evidence of limited human—to—human transmission which is not yet been made _ transmission which is not yet been made available. we should be cautious— made available. we should be cautious about making conclusions about— cautious about making conclusions about the — cautious about making conclusions about the absence of human—to—human transmission _ about the absence of human—to—human transmission. my question is this. in transmission. my question is this. in relation— transmission. my question is this. in relation to the continuing assessment of whether or not there was sustained human—to—human transmission, did sage and did you apply— transmission, did sage and did you apply and _ transmission, did sage and did you apply and appropriate precautionary approach. _ apply and appropriate precautionary approach, that is to say, to recognise _ approach, that is to say, to recognise that unless and until it has been — recognise that unless and until it has been positively excluded it is better— has been positively excluded it is better to — has been positively excluded it is better to assume and to work on the

basis _ better to assume and to work on the basis that— better to assume and to work on the basis that human—to—human transmission will be or is sustainable?— transmission will be or is sustainable? �* ., ,, ., sustainable? are you talking about human-to-human _ sustainable? are you talking about human-to-human transmission - sustainable? are you talking about human-to-human transmission in | human—to—human transmission in general, orasymptomatic? in general, or asymptomatic? in general. general, orasymptomatic? in general. this is 13th ofjanuary meeting. _ general. this is 13th ofjanuary meeting, before the issue of asymptomatic transmission becomes apparent _ apparent. by- apparent. by that stage we were putting a degree of interest and emphasis on this particular outbreak, even though we did not at this point have clear evidence of human—to—human transmission. but there was a general view that it was looking worse rather than better as time went by. just thinking it through, from the beginning ofjanuary to went by. just thinking it through, from the beginning of january to the end of february, we start from a situation where you have an outbreak, probability the into a major epidemic, relatively small, probability of pandemic, very small,

the further on in time, the less is this going to be an outbreak or disappear at all, that probability goes down, probability of major pandemic and epidemic goes up. it is a continual process that happens over that two—month period. on the 14th of january —— over that two—month period. on the 14th ofjanuary —— on over that two—month period. on the 14th of january —— on 14th of january sirjonathan van tam alerted you to a reuters report in which there was reference to limited human—to—human transmission of a new coronavirus. it is human-to-human transmission of a new coronavirus. , ., , ., , human-to-human transmission of a new coronavirus— coronavirus. it is obvious to sir jonathan. _ coronavirus. it is obvious to sir jonathan. an — coronavirus. it is obvious to sir jonathan, an obvious _ coronavirus. it is obvious to sir jonathan, an obvious from - coronavirus. it is obvious to sir jonathan, an obvious from that report. — jonathan, an obvious from that report, that there is human—to—human transmission _ report, that there is human—to—human transmission among families, but that it _ transmission among families, but that it has — transmission among families, but that it has not become sustainable in a wider— that it has not become sustainable in a wider setting. the trigger, going — in a wider setting. the trigger, going back to the triggers, one of the triggers, in addition to health care workers dying and geographical

spread, was evidence of person—to—person spread, for example in families _ person—to—person spread, for example in families. my question is, the very— in families. my question is, the very trigger that you had identified, or one of the triggers you had — identified, or one of the triggers you had identified as being of importance, did not require a sustained _ importance, did not require a sustained wider community transmission, it only requires transmission, it only requires transmission in a more limited setting. — transmission in a more limited setting, for example in families. was that— setting, for example in families. was that not already occurring, and was not _ was that not already occurring, and was not the — was that not already occurring, and was not the evidence that that was occurring _ was not the evidence that that was occurring already apparent by that date. _ occurring already apparent by that date. 14th — occurring already apparent by that date, 14th ofjanuary? | occurring already apparent by that date, 14th of january?— date, 14th ofjanuary? i think that b that date, 14th of january? i think that by that stage _ date, 14th of january? i think that by that stage we _ date, 14th of january? i think that by that stage we were _ date, 14th of january? i think that by that stage we were pretty - date, 14th of january? i think that| by that stage we were pretty clear that there was at least some person—to—person transmission in close settings. that is to see health care, and family settings. that is a long way from seeing this would become a community outbreak, let alone a pandemic. one of the things that bedevil some of the discussion of this as people think of this in a binary sense, it is either...

away from the covid—i9 inquiry for a few moments. breaking news, officers searching forfour breaking news, officers searching for four missing teenagers who have been missing since sunday morning have located the vehicle they were travelling in and have cordoned off an area near a village in snowdonia we are therefore boys are believed to have gone camping. they have been named. mountain rescue teams and the coastguard helicopter have been searching the area and we had a statement from welsh ambulance spokesperson in the past few saying that they were called at 10am in regards to an incident, they sent an operations manager and to emergency ambulances and response units to the scene, where they were supported by emergency medical retrieval services and also charity ambulances. let us get more on this.

we can see the police cordoned. what has been happening? i have been here for the last hour or so. i have been here for the last hour orso. reports i have been here for the last hour or so. reports of emergency vehicles coming to this area, about a mile away from where we think the activity is centred. we heard from the police that they have now found this vehicle, a ford fiesta, driven by one of a group of friends had been missing. mountain rescue groups have been out since yesterday searching car parks and nearby popular walking and camping spots to try and find out what has happened, because this is a complete mystery to the families of those who have gone missing. they left their homes in shropshire on the weekend, and were expected to return home yesterday morning. but soon —— signal to mobile phones was lost midday yesterday. we heard from one of the mothers of those who has gone

missing, he said the families are frantic. she was not aware he plans to go camping this weekend. we understand that this road behind as is closed. traffic being diverted. 28 ambulances are among the emergency vehicles that are focused at the scene. no further update about any of the four friends. the families of those involved are being kept up—to—date with any developments. can you tell us more about what we know about these four boys, who they are, what their plans were, that we know of? they were coming to north wales at the weekend. one of them is 17, an a—level student at college in shropshire. they had all been planning to do some travelling this

weekend. we do know that the weather was particularly bad on sunday in this area. it would not have been an ideal time for travelling or camping. we have yet to find out exactly what the friends were doing, and what happened to them subsequently. but the mother that we spoke to earlier said that she would have dissuaded her son from going camping, having been worried about winter conditions. we are still waiting for any update from emergency services about progress in their investigations as to what happened to these four friends. thank you for bringing as up—to—date. we have got a live page on bbc news front page, head there if you want to look at the timeline of what we do know about these four boys who went missing on sunday. further details therefore you. you can see pictures of who they are, where they were headed to, and now this statement from welsh ambulance service, giving some update on

timings. reports of an incident near a road earlier today. now, back to the covid inquiry. these were people who had been in china and travelled out. that is quite unimportant, nontrivial, distinction. but what we are now getting is a rippling out of people getting is a rippling out of people getting more and more concerned, remembering that this is just over two weeks only since this thing has been declared at all, and the amount of information is still quite minimalist, personally i don't look back on this and think, it was obvious that we should be calling sage on getting cobra involved on the 16th, that would have been difficult to sustain. nor was it obvious what they would have discussed. the facts they are which are notably clear do not need

further interpretation. i are notably clear do not need further interpretation.- further interpretation. i ask because in _ further interpretation. i ask because in his _ further interpretation. i ask because in his statement, i further interpretation. i ask i because in his statement, sir jonathan _ because in his statement, sir jonathan and tan says, the date he recalls _ jonathan and tan says, the date he recalls first — jonathan and tan says, the date he recalls first being serious about the threat this virus posed was 16th ofjanuary. — the threat this virus posed was 16th ofjanuary. by that date it was clear— ofjanuary. by that date it was clear this _ ofjanuary. by that date it was clear this was a novel coronavirus, it was— clear this was a novel coronavirus, it was fairly — clear this was a novel coronavirus, it was fairly clear that human—to—human transition was occurring — human—to—human transition was occurring. then he uses these words, opposite _ occurring. then he uses these words, opposite we _ occurring. then he uses these words, opposite we shall hear from the professor— opposite we shall hear from the professor himself. my view is that this would — professor himself. my view is that this would be a significant pandemic. not epidemic. he says, he raised _ pandemic. not epidemic. he says, he raised this— pandemic. not epidemic. he says, he raised this with you, to the best of this recollection, your response was to agreed _ this recollection, your response was to agreed the situation may well escatate. — to agreed the situation may well escalate, but for now we needed instead _ escalate, but for now we needed instead to — escalate, but for now we needed instead to wait and monitor developments. in hindsight, and of course _ developments. in hindsight, and of course this— developments. in hindsight, and of course this is a hindsight debate, should _ course this is a hindsight debate, should you —

course this is a hindsight debate, should you have raised a greater atarm _ should you have raised a greater atarm at — should you have raised a greater alarm at that stage than that piece of evidence from this witness statement would indicate? statement would indicate ? i statement would indicate? idon't _ statement would indicate? i don't see what i would have done it differently at this particular point. sirjonathan van tamme is instinctive in his decisions, very often right, he is an eminent epidemiologist and think in this area at high said to him —— but if i said to him what is the evidence he would have said, itjust feels like that to me. that is quite a narrow basis on which to make quite a big decisions. but i took his view that this was a serious issue, i don't recall him accessing this would become a pandemic, but i recall him being concerned about it, and rightly concerned about it. i don't see evidence that this is not the system working as it should at this

point, because it is not clear to me what an alternative path would have led to a better outcome on the 16th of january. the led to a better outcome on the 16th of janua . , ., , led to a better outcome on the 16th ofjanua . , .,, , ofjanuary. the inquiry has been treated to _ ofjanuary. the inquiry has been treated to debate _ ofjanuary. the inquiry has been treated to debate to _ ofjanuary. the inquiry has been treated to debate to the - ofjanuary. the inquiry has been i treated to debate to the difference between _ treated to debate to the difference between process and substantive outcome — between process and substantive outcome. you have already referred to the _ outcome. you have already referred to the precautionary principle. professor— to the precautionary principle. professor costello in his evidence said. _ professor costello in his evidence said. in— professor costello in his evidence said. in an — professor costello in his evidence said, in an emergency that is a need for faster— said, in an emergency that is a need for faster decision—making, emergencies need rapid action based on president and best practice. we would _ on president and best practice. we would suggest to you, instinct plays an important role in this. was the instinct— an important role in this. was the instinct of— an important role in this. was the instinct of sirjonathan not correct. _ instinct of sirjonathan not correct, and was your response, which _ correct, and was your response, which was — correct, and was your response, which was to wait and see what data should _ which was to wait and see what data should be _ which was to wait and see what data should be accumulated, in hindsight, the wrong _ should be accumulated, in hindsight, the wrong approach? i should be accumulated, in hindsight, the wrong approach?— the wrong approach? i don't think i can't see anything _ the wrong approach? i don't think i can't see anything obvious - the wrong approach? i don't think i can't see anything obvious that - can't see anything obvious that should have been done on the 16th of

january that would have changed even marginally, actually, the outcome subsequently. it is all very well saying, theoretically, you should start panicking. actually the question is, what should you do. at this point we are a large number of people who were now engaged with this, we are taking it seriously, it was being discussed quite widely, this was a short period before we asked for sage, which i almost never call for sage before. we were taking this very seriously indeed, but at this very seriously indeed, but at this point, unless you can point to something that it's obvious we could have done something different, i am not sure... ., . have done something different, i am not sure- - -— not sure... you are the (mo, with resect. not sure... you are the (mo, with respect- that _ not sure... you are the (mo, with respect. that is _ not sure... you are the (mo, with respect. that is the _ not sure... you are the (mo, with respect. that is the point - not sure... you are the (mo, with respect. that is the point i - not sure... you are the (mo, with respect. that is the point i am - respect. that is the point i am makinu . respect. that is the point i am making- that _ respect. that is the point i am making. that was _ respect. that is the point i am making. that was my - respect. that is the point i am l making. that was myjudgment, respect. that is the point i am - making. that was myjudgment, it is still myjudgment. making. that was my 'udgment, it is still myjudgment.— still my 'udgment. their triggers were still myjudgment. their triggers were designed _ still myjudgment. their triggers were designed to _ still myjudgment. their triggers were designed to identify - still myjudgment. their triggers were designed to identify an - were designed to identify an appropriate response of the part of government, they were notjust appropriate response of the part of government, they were not just their foresight— government, they were not just their foresight amusement. to government, they were not 'ust their foresight amusement._ foresight amusement. to be fair, sir chris said to — foresight amusement. to be fair, sir chris said to make _ foresight amusement. to be fair, sir chris said to make sure _ foresight amusement. to be fair, sir

chris said to make sure the - foresight amusement. to be fair, sir chris said to make sure the issue - chris said to make sure the issue was taken — chris said to make sure the issue was taken seriously. _ chris said to make sure the issue was taken seriously. he - chris said to make sure the issue was taken seriously. he has - chris said to make sure the issue was taken seriously. he has justl was taken seriously. he hasjust said. _ was taken seriously. he hasjust said. they— was taken seriously. he hasjust said. they were _ was taken seriously. he hasjust said, they were taking _ was taken seriously. he hasjust said, they were taking it- was taken seriously. he has just i said, they were taking it seriously. and my— said, they were taking it seriously. and my question to _ said, they were taking it seriously. and my question to you _ said, they were taking it seriously. and my question to you as - said, they were taking it seriously. and my question to you as this. i said, they were taking it seriously. and my question to you as this. you did plainly— and my question to you as this. you did plainly move on to call sage, and the — did plainly move on to call sage, and the chronology shows that sage was called at the relatively early stage _ was called at the relatively early stage in— was called at the relatively early stage in the process. but with your experience — stage in the process. but with your experience as the chief medical officer— experience as the chief medical officer what do you mean by wanting the government to take it seriously question— the government to take it seriously question what you call for sage, mcafee — question what you call for sage, mcafee is— question what you call for sage, mcafee is a platform which they may be debates, but what in practice epidemiologically that you have in mind _ epidemiologically that you have in mind for— epidemiologically that you have in mind for when these triggers were met? _ mind for when these triggers were met? . ., mind for when these triggers were met? , ., ., , mind for when these triggers were met? , . ., , ., met? there is a large bit of the apparatus _ met? there is a large bit of the apparatus of — met? there is a large bit of the apparatus of governments - met? there is a large bit of the | apparatus of governments which met? there is a large bit of the i apparatus of governments which is met? there is a large bit of the - apparatus of governments which is in apparatus of governments which is in a sense being ignored in that question, potentially, iwant a sense being ignored in that question, potentially, i want to highlight it. public health england, which is a large body, as opposed to my own office, whose job it is to

deal with this, and department of health and social care, both of which were by now taking this very seriously, this is part of the discussion that was being had in the appropriate bits of government, which is not at this point, in my view, numberten which is not at this point, in my view, number ten or the central system. but at this point the right bits of governments were taking this very seriously. that is the basis of which i am saying i think this was a reasonable level of response for, leaving a slice ofjonathan's gut feeling, as you show is still quite limited data. look at professor ferguson's analysis, it shows, he is basing it on sparse data. we need to be careful. the reason i am going to defend this position when i know it

would be easier free to concede, is as a result of this inquiry we start having a hear triggerfor as a result of this inquiry we start having a hear trigger for large numbers of things we professional judgment is wait and see, and that is the correctjudgment, that would not be in advance. thejudgment is when you are moving too slowly, as a judgment call, you have to be able to make at at particular points. there are various points along the path that she would come onto when i would in retrospect have made different decisions. all i am saying is this is not one of them. you have used the phrase just then, let us— you have used the phrase just then, let us wait— you have used the phrase just then, let us wait and see. did you see that? _ let us wait and see. did you see that? because at this stage, round about— that? because at this stage, round about itith— that? because at this stage, round about 16th ofjanuary, your primary consideration was, let us wait and see with _ consideration was, let us wait and see with the data shows. the reason i ask see with the data shows. the reason i ask you _ see with the data shows. the reason i ask you is. — see with the data shows. the reason i ask you is, obviously there are any number— i ask you is, obviously there are any number of things...

any numberof things... we— any numberof things... we are— any numberof things... we are going to any number of things... we are going to leave the covid inquiry there for the time being, professor sir chris whitty, chief medical officer has been giving advice for the best part of three hours, from the beginning of the pandemic you said all of the options were bad, some were a bit worse. now were bad, some were a bit worse. now we are going tojoin were bad, some were a bit worse. now we are going to join the bbc one o'clock news. today at 1:00pm, a huge search in north wales for four teenagers who've gone missing. they had last been seen in a ford fiesta. the vehicle has now been discovered. we'll have the latest from the scene. also on the programme this lunchtime: lancashire police are strongly criticised for the way they handled the disappearance of nicola bulley,

the mother of two who went missing in january. a report says police wrongly released sensitive personal information about her. we are in no doubt that releasing this information in the manner that the constabulary did was both avoidable and unnecessary. england's chief medical officer tells the covid inquiry the first lockdown in 2020 was, in hindsight, too late. and is it finally the end of the road for the hit tv show top gear? and coming up on bbc news, beth mead has been called up to the england squad for their nations league matches against the netherlands and scotland. it's the first time since the serious knee injury that ruled her out of the world cup. good afternoon. police in north wales

are searching for four teenagers who have gone missing.