tella's more about the detail of

what was happening in the cabinet and the disagreements there. he talks and the disagreements there. he: talks about how and the disagreements there. he talks about how boris johnson wasn't talks about how borisjohnson wasn't really in charge, key decisions were being taken by dominic cummings. you may say it's not a massive surprise, he was the chancellor in the early 2020 and resigned in february 2020 after a very public row with dominic cummings. it may not come as a prize he was critical of borisjohnson�*s chief adviser. it paints a picture, you and i have spoken about it, this picture of ks and dysfunctionality in number ten. we will get more of this. he talked about how the cabinet was less experienced than previous governments. we will be hearing about his time as chancellor in the run—up, the early part of the pandemic, but he was a health secretary following matt hancock in

the spring of 2021. matt hancock resigned following a scandal when he broke his own social distancing rules as part of an affair with an adviser. the two baits to the evidence, it will be interesting. he was talking about the chaos inside number ten. was talking about the chaos inside numberten. he was talking about the chaos inside number ten. he described it as dysfunctional at one point. he did, it's a word — dysfunctional at one point. he did, it's a word we've _ dysfunctional at one point. he did, it's a word we've heard _ dysfunctional at one point. he did, it's a word we've heard time - dysfunctional at one point. he did, it's a word we've heard time and l it's a word we've heard time and time again. this afternoon we should get to dominic raab, the deputy prime minister in the middle of 2021 borisjohnson was hospitalised. he was in fact officially running the country, so no doubt we will hear about how that exactly work. dominic raab subsequently resigned late on after the pandemic, amid accusations

of bullying. it will be put to him this toxic culture we've heard time and time again, exactly what it meant. : ., . ~' and time again, exactly what it meant. : ., ., ~ ., meant. and also talking about the im act on meant. and also talking about the impact on education, _ meant. and also talking about the impact on education, something l meant. and also talking about the - impact on education, something we've heard about, children forced to stay at home and parents educating them. yes, that keeps coming of time and time again, and we hear the lawyers for the inquiry who asked the main questions and then other participants. a high prevalence of covid—19 strategy— a high prevalence of covid—19 strategy was being pursued, is that right? _ strategy was being pursued, is that right? i�*m — strategy was being pursued, is that riuht? �* :, , ., i. ., strategy was being pursued, is that riuht? �* :, , ., ., _ right? i'm not sure what you mean by a hiuh right? i'm not sure what you mean by a high prevalence _ right? i'm not sure what you mean by a high prevalence strategy. _ a high prevalence strategy. if i can assist, on the 20th of july, — if i can assist, on the 20th of july, a — if i can assist, on the 20th of july, a paper was presented entitled hi-h july, a paper was presented entitled high prevalence planning some response. that sets out effectively

moving _ response. that sets out effectively moving through the major cross departmental risks of high prevalence. this is the policy in place _ prevalence. this is the policy in place in — prevalence. this is the policy in place in the summer. npis have been relaxed _ place in the summer. npis have been relaxed at— place in the summer. npis have been relaxed at this stage. plan b is yet to come _ relaxed at this stage. plan b is yet to come so — relaxed at this stage. plan b is yet to come. so it is effectively living with a _ to come. so it is effectively living with a higher incidence of covid—19. my question in relation to that aspect— my question in relation to that aspect is, _ my question in relation to that aspect is, various patient representative groups, long covid sos. _ representative groups, long covid 505. long — representative groups, long covid sos, long covid support, long covid kits, had _ sos, long covid support, long covid kits, had written letters to you outlining — kits, had written letters to you outlining the move to step forward at that _ outlining the move to step forward at that point slightly earlier in the pandemic. they complained and made _ the pandemic. they complained and made representations to you that long _ made representations to you that long covid was being ignored and those _ long covid was being ignored and those policy—making decisions in relation — those policy—making decisions in relation to— those policy—making decisions in relation to high prevalence strategy moving _ relation to high prevalence strategy moving forwards. this was barely mentioned — moving forwards. this was barely mentioned in the road map out of lockdown — mentioned in the road map out of lockdown. they asked that that be considered in policy. you may also remember— considered in policy. you may also remember they were participants in

cabinet _ remember they were participants in cabinet office discussions and cross whitehall— cabinet office discussions and cross whitehall groups at the time, and round _ whitehall groups at the time, and round tables. we have heard about some _ round tables. we have heard about some of— round tables. we have heard about some of those already, sol round tables. we have heard about some of those already, so i will not io some of those already, so i will not go into— some of those already, so i will not go into them in detail. but given at that stage — go into them in detail. but given at that stage there were no pharmaceutical interventions to treat— pharmaceutical interventions to treat long covid, as is the position now, _ treat long covid, as is the position now. was— treat long covid, as is the position now, was there a conscious decision to accept— now, was there a conscious decision to accept the — now, was there a conscious decision to accept the increased incidence of cases— to accept the increased incidence of cases of— to accept the increased incidence of cases of long covid arising from that corresponding increase in infection— that corresponding increase in infection from covid—19? | that corresponding increase in infection from covid-19? i think it was well understood _ infection from covid-19? i think it was well understood that - infection from covid-19? i think it was well understood that as - infection from covid-19? i think it was well understood that as we i infection from covid-19? i think it. was well understood that as we start removing the npis, or keeping some in place but removing a large number of npis, i think what the words high prevalence then refer to is that there would be at least for some period, an increase in the number of infections. i think that was understood. and addressing your point, around long covid, it would

mean, to get long covid you have to be infected in the first place, and then as infections rise, there would be a rise. i think no one at the time perhaps new to what extent, but there would be at least a rise that had to be considered. to there would be at least a rise that had to be considered.— there would be at least a rise that had to be considered. to what extent was that factor _ had to be considered. to what extent was that factor taken _ had to be considered. to what extent was that factor taken into _ had to be considered. to what extent was that factor taken into account - was that factor taken into account when _ was that factor taken into account when reaching those policies, relaxing — when reaching those policies, relaxing those restrictions, not maintaining testing, and so on? my view is maintaining testing, and so on? view is that maintaining testing, and so on? i view is that overall, maintaining testing, and so on? m: view is that overall, it was maintaining testing, and so on? m; view is that overall, it was taken into account in the... for a couple of reasons. first, i would say it was well understood, certainly by me and i think by the key people making the decisions, including the prime minister and his office, that having npis in place were not a risk—free option. there were costs with them. 0bviously, option. there were costs with them. obviously, i was concerned about health more than anything else, and obviously top of that list for me was the virus and the pandemic. but there were also associated health

factors linked directly to the pandemic in terms of, for example, mental health issues, the fact people were not able to go to the nhs in the normal way to see their other health challenges dealt with, and so i had broader health concerns, but also, within cabinet, so more broadly within government, there were understandably... you referred in our earlier session to some of the concerns around education for children, around people being able to go to work in the normal way. there were concerns that every department would have some issues. we were talking about the transport department. so the government was trying to take a balanced approach to all of this, but on the basis that npis should not exist a moment longer than they are necessary, and if the evidence supported, we have to find a time to

remove the npis. if i may add, one thing i distinctly remember at the time and came up in a number of discussions with the advice i was receiving and i'm sure the prime minister was receiving from the cmo, csa, and others, was that when we asked about the timing of removing these npis, and what do they think and does it make sense, one thing that was said a number of times is that was said a number of times is that there is no perfect time to remove npis. there never will be. but if you are going to do this and considerate, it is much better to do it in the summer. in the winter, people are more likely indoors, new variants have typically appeared, though we could not be sure then, of course, and children are off school in the summer. so summer was a better time versus winter to do it, and if you don't do it in summer, remove some of your npis, you are likely left with those going into the winter, then it is too late, and therefore you have this really

extended period of npis, and all the costs that come with that as well. so those are all the sorts of factors that went into making that decision injuly factors that went into making that decision in july 2021. picking decision injuly 2021. picking up on that, that was when the vaccine — picking up on that, that was when the vaccine roll—out was also of course — the vaccine roll—out was also of course going to be continuing, throughout that period. yes. _ throughout that period. yes. at _ throughout that period. yes, at a very strong pace. so in terms of a policy decision, was it— so in terms of a policy decision, was it considered that was a trade-off— was it considered that was a trade—off with making in terms of those _ trade—off with making in terms of those other issues you have identified, whether it be schools, mental— identified, whether it be schools, mental health, or so on? yes, identified, whether it be schools, mental health, or so on? yes, and i would broaden _ mental health, or so on? yes, and i would broaden that _ mental health, or so on? yes, and i would broaden that a _ mental health, or so on? yes, and i would broaden that a bit. _ mental health, or so on? yes, and i would broaden that a bit. to - mental health, or so on? yes, and i would broaden that a bit. to govern| would broaden that a bit. to govern is to choose, and ministers are always making trade offs. pretty much every decision i ever made as a minister is a trade—off. this was a decision that was made for the reasons ijust decision that was made for the reasons i just articulated, decision that was made for the reasons ijust articulated, but it is important... what we had then, unlike the previous some of the year before, we had a vaccine, millions of people getting vaccinated, and

many turning up for their second vaccine. we had more treatments. i understand what you said, and you are quite right, about treatments, i think specifically for long covid. it was still the early days of the virus then, and it was hard to make a determination around the long—term impact of infection when we only have the short term experience at that time. but there was a lot more testing, there was lateral flow testing, there was lateral flow testing, there was lateral flow testing, there were the test might trace and isolate rules and international border rules. so, yes, the number of npis were removed, but a number of protections and precautions were kept in place as well. i ask you one final question in relation — i ask you one final question in relation to— i ask you one final question in relation to long covid? given that was the _ relation to long covid? given that was the choice taken, why was there not at _ was the choice taken, why was there not at the _ was the choice taken, why was there not at the same time, then, a public awareness _ not at the same time, then, a public awareness campaign warning people of the potential risks specifically of long _ the potential risks specifically of long covid? so people were aware that although they may not have a

severe _ that although they may not have a severe reaction, for example, to the infection. _ severe reaction, for example, to the infection, like people at low risk for the _ infection, like people at low risk for the actual covid infection itself. — for the actual covid infection itself, may nonetheless still contract _ itself, may nonetheless still contract long covid?- itself, may nonetheless still contract long covid? yes, i think certainl contract long covid? yes, i think certainty that— contract long covid? yes, i think certainly that from _ contract long covid? yes, i think certainly that from the _ contract long covid? yes, i think certainly that from the health i certainly that from the health department, and also if i recall the things i was saying at the time, including, notjust in parliament, but in media appearances, long covid was something i was very much aware of and concerned about. for example, during a round about that summer, there were a number of decisions i made around long covid, for example, to increase the funding available for research from 30 million to 50 million. if i can pause you there, though, the question is specifically about the question is specifically about the public health communication strategy. — the public health communication strategy, a campaign so people were aware _ strategy, a campaign so people were aware of— strategy, a campaign so people were aware of the potential risks of contracting long covid, so they could _ contracting long covid, so they could take _ contracting long covid, so they could take their own precautions if they so— could take their own precautions if they so chose. was any thought given

to that. _ they so chose. was any thought given to that. to— they so chose. was any thought given to that. to a _ they so chose. was any thought given to that, to a public campaign? if you to that, to a public campaign? you ask me to that, to a public campaign? if you ask me do i recall specifically discussion around a campaign on long covid, i don't. discussion around a campaign on long covid, idon't. i discussion around a campaign on long covid, i don't. i recall many discussions that included the issues and concerns around long covid, specifically, and that is, for example, why i increase the research spending... figs example, why i increase the research sendinu... r example, why i increase the research spending-u— spending... as i say, i understand that, and spending... as i say, i understand that. and i— spending... as i say, i understand that, and i think _ spending... as i say, i understand that, and i think you _ spending... as i say, i understand that, and i think you have - spending... as i say, i understand i that, and i think you have answered the question, and the short answer is no _ the question, and the short answer is no i— the question, and the short answer is no. :, �* , :, is no. i don't remember thought bein: is no. i don't remember thought being given _ is no. i don't remember thought being given to — is no. i don't remember thought being given to a _ is no. i don't remember thought being given to a specific- is no. i don't remember thought i being given to a specific campaign. thank you. if i can move on through the time. _ thank you. if i can move on through the time, there was a time the omicron — the time, there was a time the omicron variant was discovered, first identified in november of 2021. — first identified in november of 2021, south africa, and then, of course. — 2021, south africa, and then, of course. you _ 2021, south africa, and then, of course, you were updated in your role by— course, you were updated in your role by the — course, you were updated in your role by the chief medical officer and others. role by the chief medical officer and others— role by the chief medical officer and others. yes. just dealing with that and moving _ and others. ies just dealing with that and moving through that for a moment. — that and moving through that for a moment, at that stage, the advice was that— moment, at that stage, the advice was that it — moment, at that stage, the advice was that it was highly infectious.

it was that it was highly infectious. it was _ was that it was highly infectious. it was unclear if vaccines would work _ it was unclear if vaccines would work for — it was unclear if vaccines would work for this particular variant, but at — work for this particular variant, but at that _ work for this particular variant, but at that stage, severity was unknown — but at that stage, severity was unknown in terms of morbidity and mortalitv — unknown in terms of morbidity and mortali . . . unknown in terms of morbidity and mortali . . , . unknown in terms of morbidity and mortality-_ if- unknown in terms of morbidity and mortality-_ if i - mortality. that is correct. if i could call— mortality. that is correct. if i could call no _ mortality. that is correct. if i could call up sir— mortality. that is correct. if i could call up sir patrick - mortality. that is correct. if i - could call up sir patrick vallance's notes _ could call up sir patrick vallance's notes at _ could call up sir patrick vallance's notes at page 529 for a moment, please. _ notes at page 529 for a moment, please. i_ notes at page 529 for a moment, please. i want to deal with some of the discussions taking place in late november— the discussions taking place in late november 2021. the discussions taking place in late november2021. nervtag the discussions taking place in late november 2021. nervtag and sage have met and _ november 2021. nervtag and sage have met and discussed the position, and he recalls. _ met and discussed the position, and he recalls, how bad is this, we don't _ he recalls, how bad is this, we don't know _ he recalls, how bad is this, we don't know. jonathan van tam says he has never— don't know. jonathan van tam says he has never seen nervtag so rattled. the prime — has never seen nervtag so rattled. the prime minister very down about new variant. — the prime minister very down about new variant, exasperated. afterwards, numberten new variant, exasperated. afterwards, number ten says they are at war— afterwards, number ten says they are at war with _ afterwards, number ten says they are at warwith numberii. afterwards, number ten says they are at war with number 11. if i canjust ask you _ at war with number 11. if i canjust ask you about that very briefly, where — ask you about that very briefly, where you _ ask you about that very briefly, where you are aware of any concerns at that _ where you are aware of any concerns at that point. _ where you are aware of any concerns at that point, issues between number ten and _ at that point, issues between number ten and number" at that point, issues between number ten and number 11 with regards to covid? _ ten and number“ with regards to covid? :, ,, . , .,

ten and number“ with regards to covid? :, ., covid? not specifically. for most thins, covid? not specifically. for most things. my _ covid? not specifically. for most things, my experience _ covid? not specifically. for most things, my experience was - covid? not specifically. for most things, my experience was that i covid? not specifically. for most i things, my experience was that the two moved together at that time. thank you. secondly, when we move on, thank you. secondly, when we move on. they— thank you. secondly, when we move on. they say. — thank you. secondly, when we move on, they say, anything javid says, i assume. _ on, they say, anything javid says, i assume. is — on, they say, anything javid says, i assume, is wrong. what was your relationship — assume, is wrong. what was your relationship like at that point with number— relationship like at that point with number ten? relationship like at that point with numberten? it relationship like at that point with number ten?— number ten? it was getting testy because of omicron. _ number ten? it was getting testy because of omicron. as _ number ten? it was getting testy because of omicron. as you - number ten? it was getting testy because of omicron. as you say, | number ten? it was getting testy . because of omicron. as you say, this was dated november 26. things were moving very fast. the first briefing i received an omicron, full briefing, was on the 24th of november, and i was very concerned by what i had heard and what the experts had told me. to pick up a point on the vaccines, so, as you said, they said it was much, much more infectious than turned out to be the case at the time, and what

was in my mind then was, i knew each new variant, so when we had alpha, beta, delta, they had been much more infectious than the other, and this was much more infectious than delta, which was already highly infectious. i was deeply concerned about that. but with regards to the vaccines, i was told not that they didn't work, but they may be much less effective. so their effectiveness would be much less. even a sort of five percentage point decline would be significant if you have a lot more infections, and the point about severity is that we could not be sure and severity. at the time, there was no data. so i was deeply concerned, especially about the infectiousness, and they wanted us to take action, and some action taken asap, and i did start to take action straightaway. the next day, i announced some travel restrictions and made a statement in parliament on the 26th...

i willjust instruct you there, mr javid. _ i willjust instruct you there, mr javid, because we will move through some _ javid, because we will move through some key— javid, because we will move through some key moments, but there are some structural— some key moments, but there are some structural issues ijust want to deal— structural issues ijust want to deal with— structural issues ijust want to deal with in relation to omicron, and we — deal with in relation to omicron, and we have your witness statement, which _ and we have your witness statement, which sets _ and we have your witness statement, which sets out the chronology. so to quickly _ which sets out the chronology. so to quickly summarise, throughout that november— december period, the advice _ november— december period, the advice from sage was that the infection— advice from sage was that the infection rate was rising rapidly and with— infection rate was rising rapidly and with regard to that, they were advising _ and with regard to that, they were advising certain actions potentially be considered to be taken. as i understand from your witness statement, in terms of some of those frictions _ statement, in terms of some of those frictions that were rising, you were certainly— frictions that were rising, you were certainly more on the cautious side and wanted — certainly more on the cautious side and wanted some more additional restrictions put in place because of your concern about omicron. is that right? _ your concern about omicron. is that riuht? . if your concern about omicron. is that riuht? , if i your concern about omicron. is that right?- lfl can _ your concern about omicron. is that right?- lfl can go _ your concern about omicron. is that right? yes. if i can go through, on right? yes. ifi can go through, on the 8th of— right? ies if i can go through, on the 8th of december, plan b is announced, and comes into force, i think. _ announced, and comes into force, i think. on— announced, and comes into force, i think. on the— announced, and comes into force, i think, on the tenth.— announced, and comes into force, i think, on the tenth. yes. if i can 'ust call think, on the tenth. yes. if i can just call ops _ think, on the tenth. yes. if i can just call ups and _ think, on the tenth. ies if i can just call ups and meetings very quickly— just call ups and meetings very

quickly now, page 555, plays of patrick— quickly now, page 555, plays of patrick vallance's diaries. there is a meeting — patrick vallance's diaries. there is a meeting on the 18th of december, 2021. _ a meeting on the 18th of december, 2021. and _ a meeting on the 18th of december, 2021, and that records that you were not invited _ 2021, and that records that you were not invited to the meeting yesterday. i'm - yesterday. i'm afraid it must be a subsequent... but in any event, it recalls _ subsequent... but in any event, it recalls that — subsequent... but in any event, it recalls that you were not invited, and indeed, what we see again on december— and indeed, what we see again on december 30 one, 2021, and indeed, what we see again on december30 one, 2021, is and indeed, what we see again on december 30 one, 2021, is a similar meeting _ december 30 one, 2021, is a similar meeting taking place with discussions about plan b, about what to do. _ discussions about plan b, about what to do. and _ discussions about plan b, about what to do. and in— discussions about plan b, about what to do, and in fact, indeed, in relation _ to do, and in fact, indeed, in relation to— to do, and in fact, indeed, in relation to your advice also. but again. _ relation to your advice also. but again. it — relation to your advice also. but again. it is _ relation to your advice also. but again, it is regarded that it is bizarre — again, it is regarded that it is bizarre to _ again, it is regarded that it is bizarre to have this meeting without the department of health and social care _ the department of health and social care. when you are where these meetings — care. when you are where these meetings were taking place at the

time? _ meetings were taking place at the time? :, meetings were taking place at the time? no. and when did you first find out time?- and when did you first find out about _ time? he. and when did you first find out about them? time? no. and when did you first find out about them? yesterday, | time? no. and when did you first - find out about them? yesterday, when i first saw find out about them? yesterday, when i first saw this — find out about them? yesterday, when i first saw this extract. _ find out about them? yesterday, when i first saw this extract. why _ find out about them? yesterday, when i first saw this extract. why do - find out about them? yesterday, when i first saw this extract. why do you - i first saw this extract. why do you consider you _ i first saw this extract. why do you consider you were _ i first saw this extract. why do you consider you were not _ i first saw this extract. why do you consider you were not invited - i first saw this extract. why do you consider you were not invited and l consider you were not invited and present— consider you were not invited and present at— consider you were not invited and present at those? i consider you were not invited and present at those?— consider you were not invited and present at those? i cannot be sure. those are decisions _ present at those? i cannot be sure. those are decisions for _ present at those? i cannot be sure. those are decisions for others. - present at those? i cannot be sure. those are decisions for others. one thing i can tell you, it would be odd to... 0bviously thing i can tell you, it would be odd to... obviously i don't know about this meeting, i was not there. but it sounds from this extract, i can only go on that, like it was an important meeting. they were very senior people there, obviously discussing the omicron crisis, and my centraljob and role was to respond to that, and that is how i was spending basically every minute of the day around that time, and not to have my input and therefore the input of my department, including notjust the cmo, but input of my department, including not just the cmo, but the input of my department, including notjust the cmo, but the nhs, which was obviously a huge factor in this. we would not want to see our hospitals overwhelmed. so i do not

know why i was not included. you would have to ask the former prime minister. : . . ., minister. and again, at the same time, the advice _ minister. and again, at the same time, the advice you _ minister. and again, at the same time, the advice you are - minister. and again, at the same time, the advice you are giving, l time, the advice you are giving, your— time, the advice you are giving, your views — time, the advice you are giving, your views at the time, certainly, 24th— your views at the time, certainly, 24th of— your views at the time, certainly, 24th of december, was, we need to prepare _ 24th of december, was, we need to prepare for— 24th of december, was, we need to prepare for a massive increase in cases. _ prepare for a massive increase in cases. but— prepare for a massive increase in cases, but hope it does not happen. so, cases, but hope it does not happen. so. planning — cases, but hope it does not happen. so, planning and preparation. yes. the prime minister _ so, planning and preparation. yes. the prime minister then _ so, planning and preparation. ies the prime minister then concludes there _ the prime minister then concludes there is— the prime minister then concludes there is no— the prime minister then concludes there is no overwhelming case for doing _ there is no overwhelming case for doing anything. in relation to planning _ doing anything. in relation to planning and preparation, in the event _ planning and preparation, in the event there was a subsequent wave, aside _ event there was a subsequent wave, aside from _ event there was a subsequent wave, aside from vaccines and your role in terms _ aside from vaccines and your role in terms of— aside from vaccines and your role in terms of the — aside from vaccines and your role in terms of the nhs, were you aware of any other— terms of the nhs, were you aware of any other planning taking place at that point? you any other planning taking place at that oint? :, ., :, , , that point? you mean outside my department? _ that point? you mean outside my department? outside _ that point? you mean outside my department? outside your - that point? you mean outside my - department? outside your department, and considering — department? outside your department, and considering the _ department? outside your department, and considering the use _ department? outside your department, and considering the use of _ department? outside your department, and considering the use of npis - department? outside your department, and considering the use of npis or- and considering the use of npis or any other— and considering the use of npis or any other measures. | and considering the use of npis or any other measures.— and considering the use of npis or any other measures. i was not aware, no. i any other measures. i was not aware, no- i wasn't _ any other measures. i was not aware, no- i wasn't aware — any other measures. i was not aware, no. i wasn't aware of— any other measures. i was not aware, no. i wasn't aware of any _ any other measures. i was not aware, no. i wasn't aware of any other - no. i wasn't aware of any other planning taking place, in terms of your specific question, but in more

detail, we had already... i know you start with a plan b, which was implemented on december the 8th, but on the 29th —— november the 8th, but on the 29th —— november the 8th, but on the 29th of november, within days of me learning about omicron, i had already announced in parliament a set of npis around pcr tests, coming in, 10—day isolation rules for contacts, and facemasks and shops... i appreciate that, but we are talking — i appreciate that, but we are talking about what you are advising on the _ talking about what you are advising on the 24th of december. yes, talking about what you are advising on the 24th of december.— on the 24th of december. yes, by then, on the 24th of december. yes, by then. having _ on the 24th of december. yes, by then, having learnt _ on the 24th of december. yes, by then, having learnt a _ on the 24th of december. yes, by then, having learnt a lot - on the 24th of december. yes, by then, having learnt a lot more - on the 24th of december. yes, by i then, having learnt a lot more about omicron, my advice was to look at taking further measures, and then the advice coming from my department, based on the expert advice i was getting, and there was advice i was getting, and there was a cabinet meeting... i can't be sure, iwant to a cabinet meeting... i can't be sure, i want to say december 20. the

prime minister, aware that i wanted to go further, wanted to seek the cabinet's view, and when we had that meeting, i recall the only people in the cabinet that were supporting what i was saying about going further work michael gove and simon clarke. i further work michael gove and simon clarke. . further work michael gove and simon clarke. :, :, :, ., :, clarke. i want to turn to another to - ic clarke. i want to turn to another topic coming _ clarke. i want to turn to another topic coming out _ clarke. i want to turn to another topic coming out the _ clarke. i want to turn to another topic coming out the other - clarke. i want to turn to another topic coming out the other side, effectively, dealing with the living with covid strategy, so coming into 2022. _ with covid strategy, so coming into 2022. very— with covid strategy, so coming into 2022, very briefly. you set out in some _ 2022, very briefly. you set out in some detail _ 2022, very briefly. you set out in some detail on your statement that there _ some detail on your statement that there was— some detail on your statement that there was a — some detail on your statement that there was a disagreement with treasury— there was a disagreement with treasury in relation to funding and apparatus. — treasury in relation to funding and apparatus, effectively the tools, as you see _ apparatus, effectively the tools, as you see them, in relation to a pandemic. _ you see them, in relation to a pandemic, particularly in respect of infrastructure and testing, scientific research, and so on. you considered — scientific research, and so on. you considered that the funding ought to be maintained. what you your statement is that as a consequence of that. _

statement is that as a consequence of that. the — statement is that as a consequence of that, the prime minister required further— of that, the prime minister required further cuts — of that, the prime minister required further cuts to the health budget if that infrastructure was to stay in place _ that infrastructure was to stay in place is — that infrastructure was to stay in place. is that right? that that infrastructure was to stay in place. is that right?— place. is that right? that is correct- — place. is that right? that is correct. and _ place. is that right? that is correct. and did _ place. is that right? that is correct. and did any - place. is that right? that is correct. and did any of- place. is that right? that isj correct. and did any of that infrastructure _ correct. and did any of that infrastructure ultimately i correct. and did any of that l infrastructure ultimately end correct. and did any of that - infrastructure ultimately end up staying — infrastructure ultimately end up staying in place? not infrastructure ultimately end up staying in place?— infrastructure ultimately end up staying in place? not to the extent i wanted staying in place? not to the extent i wanted it- — staying in place? not to the extent i wanted it. like _ staying in place? not to the extent i wanted it. like the _ staying in place? not to the extent i wanted it. like the prime - i wanted it. like the prime minister, i was keen that we find clear ways to deal with covid. 0micron was not over, but i think by the time we were putting together the time we were putting together the living with covid strategy, both infections, hospitalisations and deaths were significantly falling. the poster campaign, which i spent a lot of my time on, i know we not talking about vaccines, it made a huge difference at that time. within six or seven weeks, we had something like 30 million people boosted, faster than any other country of comparable size. but on this specific issue, ifelt comparable size. but on this specific issue, i felt that as we now remove a lot of the

restrictions, which i was keen to do, that we must have a capability in place to detect any future variant or perhaps even a future virus with a new pandemic, but to have better surveillance and also to be able to surge support and protection very quickly. so i wanted more lab capacity, more scientific capability, more random testing, to keep some mobile lab units, to continue waste water testing and a stockpile of lateral tests, for example. these are the kinds of things i wanted that i was only able at the end to secure a small portion of all of that, and also, for example, i wanted to keep the government's commitment to the centre for pandemic preparedness. i was going to come on to that in due course _ was going to come on to that in due course that — was going to come on to that in due course. that centre was announced, and what _ course. that centre was announced, and what happened to it? it

course. that centre was announced, and what happened to it?— and what happened to it? it was announced _ and what happened to it? it was announced before _ and what happened to it? it was announced before i _ and what happened to it? it was announced before i was - and what happened to it? it was announced before i was health | announced before i was health secretary. i believe it was when the uk was hosting the g7 in cornwall, so i think it would have been december 2020, so i think it would have been december2020, if so i think it would have been december 2020, if i am not mistaken, but around them. the uk had rightly made this commitment to have, you know, as it sounds, a centre that focused on nothing but pandemic preparedness, working with the uk, usa, and others, and i thought it was vitalfor usa, and others, and i thought it was vital for lessons learned. indeed. i was vital for lessons learned. indeed. , :, :, was vital for lessons learned. indeed. :, :, indeed. i pointed out to the prime minister at — indeed. i pointed out to the prime minister at the _ indeed. i pointed out to the prime minister at the time _ indeed. i pointed out to the prime minister at the time that - indeed. i pointed out to the prime minister at the time that we - indeed. i pointed out to the prime| minister at the time that we would not be able to have this, because there was no funding for it. indeed, there was no funding for it. indeed, the funding offered by uk hsa was the funding offered by uk hsa was the same as what it was funded by random pre—pandemic. the same as what it was funded by random pre-pandemic._ the same as what it was funded by random pre-pandemic. indeed. ifi can take you _ random pre-pandemic. indeed. ifi can take you back _ random pre-pandemic. indeed. ifi can take you back to _ random pre-pandemic. indeed. if i can take you back to the _ random pre-pandemic. indeed. ifi can take you back to the centre - random pre-pandemic. indeed. if i| can take you back to the centre for pandemic— can take you back to the centre for pandemic preparedness, in terms of that. _ pandemic preparedness, in terms of that. did _ pandemic preparedness, in terms of that, did the prime minister continue _ that, did the prime minister continue with that plan or abandon it? :, :, , , , :, :, it? no, he dropped the plan, and he decided we — it? no, he dropped the plan, and he decided we are _ it? no, he dropped the plan, and he decided we are not _ it? no, he dropped the plan, and he decided we are not going _ it? no, he dropped the plan, and he

decided we are not going to - it? no, he dropped the plan, and he decided we are not going to have . it? no, he dropped the plan, and he decided we are not going to have it, | decided we are not going to have it, let's drop it. but he asked me not to say anything about it publicly, and let's just wait and see if people notice, was his attitude. 50. people notice, was his attitude. so, let's stay quiet and see if it disappears?— let's stay quiet and see if it disappears? let's stay quiet and see if it disauears? �*, , ., disappears? let's stay quiet about the centre for _ disappears? let's stay quiet about the centre for pandemic - the centre for pandemic preparedness.— the centre for pandemic prearedness. ., :, , . preparedness. the final topic, briefl , preparedness. the final topic, briefly. mr — preparedness. the final topic, briefly, mrjavid, _ preparedness. the final topic, briefly, mrjavid, which - preparedness. the final topic, briefly, mrjavid, which you i preparedness. the final topic, i briefly, mrjavid, which you have cover— briefly, mrjavid, which you have cover in— briefly, mrjavid, which you have cover in detail in your witness statement, and that's why i will touch— statement, and that's why i will touch on— statement, and that's why i will touch on it _ statement, and that's why i will touch on it briefly, if i may come is that— touch on it briefly, if i may come is that about inequalities in health disparities. your statement speaks of a number of different initiatives you undertook in your role as secretary _ you undertook in your role as secretary of state throughout that pandemic period. one of them was a review— pandemic period. one of them was a review into _ pandemic period. one of them was a review into inequalities in respect of the _ review into inequalities in respect of the efficacy of medical equipment on the _ of the efficacy of medical equipment on the grounds of race, looking particularly at the use of oximeters and so _ particularly at the use of oximeters and so on — particularly at the use of oximeters and so on. that consultation ran between — and so on. that consultation ran between august 2022 and october 2022~ _ between august 2022 and october 2022. has that been published?

my understanding is it has not been published. in dealing again very briefly in terms — in dealing again very briefly in terms of— in dealing again very briefly in terms of future recommendations, what do _ terms of future recommendations, what do you think could and should be implemented to improve equity for future _ be implemented to improve equity for future pandemics in respect to health? — health? so, could ijust be hearth? — so, could ijust be clear? when you say equity, do you mean disparities? yes, addressing those disparities that arrive — yes, addressing those disparities that arrive in a pandemic. yes. _ that arrive in a pandemic. yes. i_ that arrive in a pandemic. yes, i think a lot can be done, and the pandemic clearly sadly hit people from deprived communities and was very unequal on how it affected people. by and large, working people were hit harder than middle—class people that can lock themselves in their homes and order food and things like that, in lockdown is, and that is not surprisingly, my opinion is, that is not unique in terms of health disparities, to

people living in deprived areas or neighbourhoods, who are hit a lot harder. brute neighbourhoods, who are hit a lot harder. ~ . ., ., :, neighbourhoods, who are hit a lot harder. . ., ., :, :, harder. we have heard a lot of evidence about _ harder. we have heard a lot of evidence about that _ harder. we have heard a lot of evidence about that already. l harder. we have heard a lot ofl evidence about that already. so harder. we have heard a lot of. evidence about that already. so in answer to your — evidence about that already. so in answer to your question, - evidence about that already. sr “i answer to your question, what evidence about that already. 5r “i answer to your question, what could be done, i thought it required, the whole approach required a cross government strategy, because it is notjust government strategy, because it is not just the government strategy, because it is notjust the health department government strategy, because it is not just the health department that can deal with these issues, and that is why, within months of arriving in the department, because this issue was so important to me, i commissioned a white paper on health disparities and i even took... 0ne disparities and i even took... one part that was split was called oh h p. part that was split was called oh h p, and i changed it to the office of health improvement and disparities. the white paper was a piece of work my department did, and it is extensive. we talk to every other government department, a lot of arm's—length bodies, civil society bodies, putting together a lot of analysis of what could be done to

combat health disparities. by the time i left the department, i would say it was 99.9% done. it was virtually done. we were just looking for a slot for publication. but it was never published. just one, and hopefully this can be answered — just one, and hopefully this can be answered very briefly, short... one potential— answered very briefly, short... one potential possibility or solution that has— potential possibility or solution that has been suggested is the creation — that has been suggested is the creation of an equalities department with the _ creation of an equalities department with the secretary of state for the quality _ with the secretary of state for the quality is _ with the secretary of state for the quality is leading on that cross governmentally. is that something you can _ governmentally. is that something you can see working or not? i you can see working or not? i don't — you can see working or not? i don't know whether it requires its own department. there is, of course, the equalities minister, which i was for a short time as well, but i think it needs a specific and dedicated minister. when i was equalities minister, i was also ministerfor equalities minister, i was also minister for culture, equalities minister, i was also ministerfor culture, media equalities minister, i was also minister for culture, media and sport, and i think it would be better to have a designated minister for that role. if there is one other

thing to say and equalities, specifically in pandemics, you refer to pulse oximeters, and that is something i had read about and knew about before i was health secretary and was deeply concerned, which is why i commissioned the independent review by dame margaret whitehead, which has still not been published, for some reason, looking into medical instruments and how they work and people of all races and of all genders. 0ne one thing 0ne thingi one thing i wanted to pursue was that i felt if the uk and the us had a new set of rules for procurement of any medical instrument to require, that it must be demonstrated it works for all races, and it is something the manufacturer has thought about. with the purchasing power of the us and us,

all manufacturers globally would start to follow this standard.