with cabinet as it is, i nature, with cabinet as it is, i think we probably struck probably the right balance between testing views but making sure we took action. . r' views but making sure we took action. ., ., views but making sure we took action. ., ,~' i. ., ,., ., action. let me ask you about a different matter, _ action. let me ask you about a different matter, and - action. let me ask you about a different matter, and that - action. let me ask you about a different matter, and that is i action. let me ask you about a l different matter, and that is the role, _ different matter, and that is the role, the — different matter, and that is the role, the influence of dominic cummings in downing street during 2020 _ cummings in downing street during 2020. again, the inquiry has heard evidence _ 2020. again, the inquiry has heard evidence about what he did. we've heard _ evidence about what he did. we've heard from — evidence about what he did. we've heard from him, of course. various people _ heard from him, of course. various pe0ple have — heard from him, of course. various people have described his influence, his decisions. what was your impression of him, and what your understanding of the role he played in decision—making in the early months — in decision—making in the early months of— in decision—making in the early months of the pandemic? you may need to break this down, or

i will end up rambling on, the let me give you the headline view. the first thing is to have a chief of staff in number ten who does the organisational, structural role. if you think about how precious every minute is of the prime minister's time, and we accept it is finite, how you organise that time authoritatively. ten times as many people want to see the prime minister or one that part of his or her time than is physically possible, and that is really important role. —— want that part of his or her under borisjohnson, i thought he was in there as a sort of eminence agrees, a wise pair of hands. in terms of dominic cummings, thatis hands. in terms of dominic cummings, that is not why he was there, whatever the title. —— eminence grise. he was there to drive forward delivery, and was certainly well disposed and well—suited to this, trying amidst the daily hustle and bustle of events brought up by the

media, whatever was the issue of the day, take a hard step back and try to look strategically, and i think that was the intention of his role. and i also thought, and you will come onto this, in terms of diagnosis, quite a few of the things that he diagnose that were wrong, i think he was right about, and actually, the pandemic was a proving ground for some of those things, like data in whitehall, for example, like data in whitehall, for example, like accountability in relation to the brilliant civil servants we have. i will not delve too much into that until you lead me there, but equally, i was six years in a civil servant as a foreign office lawyer, and have very fond memories not only of my time as a civil servant, but also of the professionalism there. you are not talking to someone who is down on the civil service by

design. and what you are looking for in my view, and i think sp ads, including the most senior ones like dominic cummings, were trying to form this synergy between the role civil servants play, advice, checking, and fundamentally executing policy, and ministerial accountability to the public for those decisions. i don't think any government gets this perfectly, but you are looking for that synthesis. spads and dominic cummings are therefore a particular purpose, and i think that is critical. that therefore a particular purpose, and i think that is critical.— i think that is critical. that is an answer about _ i think that is critical. that is an answer about what _ i think that is critical. that is an answer about what they - i think that is critical. that is an answer about what they might i i think that is critical. that is an - answer about what they might have been therefore in principle. but lete— been therefore in principle. but let's talk— been therefore in principle. but let's talk about mr cummings in practice — let's talk about mr cummings in practice i— let's talk about mr cummings in practice. i will read you one statement from mrjavid to present a witness _ statement from mrjavid to present a witness statement. i felt the elected _ witness statement. i felt the elected prime minister was not in charge _ elected prime minister was not in charge of— elected prime minister was not in charge of what was happening in his name _ charge of what was happening in his name and _ charge of what was happening in his name and was largely content with mr cummings— name and was largely content with mr cummings running the government. do you agree _ cummings running the government. do you agree with that? no, _ you agree with that? no, i_ you agree with that? no, i don't, you agree with that?

no, idon't, but you agree with that? no, i don't, but let me say at the outset, and i don't say this as a disparagement on this committee or this inquiry, but there is a whole circus that can be built up in the media and elsewhere around the internal battles between individuals, and some of that is natural and healthy. if you have tensions between civil servants, between civil servants and spads, and all of those and ministers, and of course between ministers. by the way, i have worked closely with sajid javid, and indeed worked for him when he was housing minister. i like him, and i think he is a great decision maker in the wayjust described. so i have no beef with mr javid. but equally, i don't think thatis javid. but equally, i don't think that is quite right. i think dominic cummings, certainly on diagnosis, but also trying to galvanise direction of travel, was much needed, some grit in the oyster. i think if you look at some of the things he said, we may come onto

this, but i think this covers the osmosis between professionals from outside the government in government. funnily enough, chris whitty and patrick vallance are great examples of this, when it came to the vaccine trials and the rest of it. having someone who has not only been a scientist who knows how government works, but also has been a major multinational taking a drug from trials to conclusion is just gold dust. i think chris whitty was superb as well. one of the things dominic cummings had observed is that sometimes, whitehall can feel like a closed shop, and so i want to give you a sense in which he correctly identified some of the structural challenges without getting into some of the he said, she said, frankly soap opera of westminster bubble politics. the question arising about whether boris johnson was a puppet, i'm afraid i don't find that a serious

allegation. i think borisjohnson certainly relied on his key advisers. by the way, i think you have to do if you want to get through the work, particularly in the pandemic. i don't think looking back at the prime minister's past or present, if you look at theresa may or tony blair in the role of his chief of staff, director of communications, it is natural. if you present me with something in a specific scenario, i am happy to comment on it. and boris, just like anyone else who occupies an incredible role, and ifeel some empathy with anyone who has done the job of prime minister, because i did it for a month, and job of prime minister, because i did it fora month, and i job of prime minister, because i did it for a month, and i think it made me a better secretary of state, because i can see the pressures that the prime minister has to deal with, but you constantly have this challenge of wanting to control the levers that affect government policy but also knowing that to run an effective government, you need to delegate, and of course, you should delegate, and of course, you should delegate fundamentally through your secretaries of state and ministers, but you also delegate with advice

and reliance on your special advisers, just as you do through senior members of the civil service. that is natural and proper, and i just don't accept the characterisation that there was some sort of puppet regime. let's move on, mr raab, and look at the early— let's move on, mr raab, and look at the early months of the pandemic. before _ the early months of the pandemic. before we — the early months of the pandemic. before we do, can i issue another assurance as i did yesterday? mr raab, when we are looking at whether or not there was a toxic atmosphere, it is not from some prurient interest that we want to hear rude words or anything, it is that we want to see whether there was something wrong in the decision—making process. i decision—making process. i understand and respect that. but we also know that there is and, if you like, parallel soap opera in the media that will play out. i media that will play out. i understand. i _ media that will play out. i understand. i want - media that will play out. i understand. i want to - media that will play out. i | understand. i want to give media that will play out. i - understand. i want to give you honest answers, _ understand. i want to give you honest answers, candid - understand. i want to give you - honest answers, candid examples, the best evidence they can for the bereaved, and fundamentally, this is

a lessons learned exercise. i want us to understand where we have just got political noise and where we have substantive issues, and try and assist inquiries as best i can. thank you. assist inquiries as best i can. thank yon-— thank you. let's turn to the chronology. _ thank you. let's turn to the chronology, mr _ thank you. let's turn to the chronology, mr raab. - thank you. let's turn to the chronology, mr raab. your| thank you. let's turn to the - chronology, mr raab. your witness statement — chronology, mr raab. your witness statement sets out in some detail what _ statement sets out in some detail what you — statement sets out in some detail what you were being told, what you were doing — what you were being told, what you were doing in the first few weeks of 2020 _ were doing in the first few weeks of 2020 i_ were doing in the first few weeks of 2020 i am — were doing in the first few weeks of 2020. lam really were doing in the first few weeks of 2020. i am really talking about january— 2020. i am really talking about january and very early february here, _ january and very early february here, but — january and very early february here, but we may come back to some of this— here, but we may come back to some of this detait~ — here, but we may come back to some of this detail. is it fair to say at least _ of this detail. is it fair to say at least two — of this detail. is it fair to say at least two of the things you were principally concerned within that regarding the pandemic were first of all amendments to the uk travel advice _ all amendments to the uk travel advice for— all amendments to the uk travel advice for china, considering whether— advice for china, considering whether or not to make amendments and over— whether or not to make amendments and over time whether or not to make amendments and overtime making whether or not to make amendments and over time making those amendments, and also dealing with various— amendments, and also dealing with various issues regarding the repatriation of british nationals? yes, _ repatriation of british nationals? yes. to— repatriation of british nationals? yes, to the extent that myjob and role covered the pandemic there is a whole string of other things, every

crisis, and you can imagine what it was like then compared to now. yes, and i think i was clearing my question— yes, and i think i was clearing my question i— yes, and i think i was clearing my question i wasjust asking yes, and i think i was clearing my question i was just asking you about those _ question i was just asking you about those matters. question i was 'ust asking you about those matters.— question i was “ust asking you about those matters.— those matters. yes, and the other thint , those matters. yes, and the other thin , ifi those matters. yes, and the other thing. if i may _ those matters. yes, and the other thing. if i may say. _ those matters. yes, and the other thing, if i may say, and _ those matters. yes, and the other thing, if i may say, and travel- thing, if i may say, and travel advice, trying to explain throughout government, which may be helpful just to echo here, the difference between travel advice and changes that are made to it, compared to, for example, border restrictions, and that these are different decisions for different purposes, naturally, were legally constrained. i'm sure we will flesh this out. in the way that that took place. but yes, they do that very carefully, along with taking advice from the cmo and others on that. you also detail, mr — cmo and others on that. you also detail, mr raab, _ cmo and others on that. you also detail, mr raab, that _ cmo and others on that. you also detail, mr raab, that of— cmo and others on that. you also detail, mr raab, that of the - cmo and others on that. you also detail, mr raab, that of the two l detail, mr raab, that of the two cobra — detail, mr raab, that of the two cobra meetings that took place in january— cobra meetings that took place in january that we have heard some detail— january that we have heard some detail about, you did not attend the first meeting, but sent one of your ministers — first meeting, but sent one of your ministers to— first meeting, but sent one of your ministers to attend that meeting, but you _ ministers to attend that meeting, but you did attend the second

meeting — but you did attend the second meeting on the 29th ofjanuary. i want _ meeting on the 29th ofjanuary. i want to— meeting on the 29th ofjanuary. i want to move a week or so forward in the chronology, because the inquiry has heard _ the chronology, because the inquiry has heard about a meeting that took place _ has heard about a meeting that took place on _ has heard about a meeting that took place on the 4th of february between the prime _ place on the 4th of february between the prime minister and chris whitty, the prime minister and chris whitty, the chief— the prime minister and chris whitty, the chief medical officer. as far as we know. — the chief medical officer. as far as we know, this was not a meeting that you were _ we know, this was not a meeting that you were at — we know, this was not a meeting that you were at. you may not have heard anything _ you were at. you may not have heard anything about it. that was one of the questions i was going to ask you _ the questions i was going to ask you but — the questions i was going to ask you. but what we have heard is, first— you. but what we have heard is, first of— you. but what we have heard is, first of all. — you. but what we have heard is, first of all, this was the first time — first of all, this was the first time that— first of all, this was the first time that chris whitty briefed the prime _ time that chris whitty briefed the prime minister relating to covid, and in _ prime minister relating to covid, and in summary, what chris whitty told the _ and in summary, what chris whitty told the prime minister was that there _ told the prime minister was that there was— told the prime minister was that there was a reasonable chance that there _ there was a reasonable chance that there would be a pandemic in this country— there would be a pandemic in this country involving between 100000 and 300,000 _ country involving between 100000 and 300,000 deaths if the covid—19, which _ 300,000 deaths if the covid—19, which was — 300,000 deaths if the covid—19, which was then in china, spread internationally and became a pandemic, and we have heard from chris—

pandemic, and we have heard from chris whitty that that range, the 100,000 — chris whitty that that range, the 100,000 - 300,000, was not chris whitty that that range, the 100,000 — 300,000, was not presented to the _ 100,000 — 300,000, was not presented to the prime — 100,000 — 300,000, was not presented to the prime minister as a sort of format, _ to the prime minister as a sort of formal, reasonable worst—case scenario — formal, reasonable worst—case scenario. they were intended as an indication— scenario. they were intended as an indication of— scenario. they were intended as an indication of the seriousness of the situation _ indication of the seriousness of the situation if— indication of the seriousness of the situation if a pandemic of this new infection— situation if a pandemic of this new infection were to emerge. i'm sure you would — infection were to emerge. i'm sure you would agree with me, first of all, you would agree with me, first of all. that— you would agree with me, first of all, that that was a very grave piece — all, that that was a very grave piece of— all, that that was a very grave piece of advice that chris whitty was giving to the prime minister. of course — was giving to the prime minister. of course it is, yes. may i ask whether you were aware of that meeting or what chris whitty had conveyed to the prime minister at yt? _ at yt? i- at yt? i can't et yt? — i can't recollect, but et ytt — i can't recollect, but it et yt? — i can't recollect, but it is et ytt — i can't recollect, but it is not remotely unusual that i would not have been at that meeting. no, i am not suggesting have been at that meeting. no, iam not suggesting it have been at that meeting. no, i am not suggesting it was, have been at that meeting. no, iam not suggesting it was, i no, lam not suggesting it was, i 'ust no, lam not suggesting it was, i just want— no, lam not suggesting it was, i just want to _ no, lam not suggesting it was, i just want to understand whether you were or— just want to understand whether you were or whether you had understood it at the _ were or whether you had understood it at the time. let's - it at the time. let's go, if we may come paragraph

58 of— let's go, if we may come paragraph 58 of your— let's go, if we may come paragraph 58 of your witness statements on page _ 58 of your witness statements on page 18~ — 58 of your witness statements on page 18. you describe there that in fact, on— page 18. you describe there that in fact, on the — page 18. you describe there that in fact, on the day of that meeting, you went — fact, on the day of that meeting, you went on a prearranged trip, undertaking your official duties as foreign— undertaking your official duties as foreign secretary to australia, japan, — foreign secretary to australia, japan, singapore, malaysia, and you were gone— japan, singapore, malaysia, and you were gone for about a week, as we can see _ were gone for about a week, as we can see there. and i think it is also _ can see there. and i think it is also right— can see there. and i think it is also right to say that later in february. _ also right to say that later in february, after your return from that trip, — february, after your return from that trip, you went on a family holiday— that trip, you went on a family holiday or— that trip, you went on a family holiday or a personal trip skiing, is that— holiday or a personal trip skiing, is that right give a that holiday or a personal trip skiing, is that right give a— is that right give a that is correct- _ correct. in fairness, if you are taking the whole chronology, and this is the life of any modern foreign secretary, i was in brussels first week of january, secretary, i was in brussels first week ofjanuary, in the us and canada the second, third week, or around the same time, i am in

paris... i around the same time, i am in paris... , , , ., paris... i will 'ust interrupt you, because paris... i will 'ust interrupt you, heeeusewe— paris... i willjust interrupt you, because we have _ paris... i willjust interrupt you, because we have limited - paris... i willjust interrupt you, | because we have limited time... paris... i willjust interrupt you, - because we have limited time... yes, but i think it — because we have limited time... yes, but i think it is _ because we have limited time... yes, but i think it is important, _ because we have limited time... yes but i think it is important, because i think i know when you are going with this, just to briefly say, i went to australia, japan, singapore and malaysia, vital countries for the uk's foreign policy, and as it turns out, the relationships over covid, and the first week of march, i was on the way back to istanbul and saudi arabia. that is thejob of any foreign secretary. don't worry, i don't think there was a suggestion you were on jollies, mr raab. just wait for the question and thenit raab. just wait for the question and then it will be clear. the raab. just wait for the question and then it will be clear.— then it will be clear. the question i want to ask _ then it will be clear. the question i want to ask you, _ then it will be clear. the question i want to ask you, mr _ then it will be clear. the question i want to ask you, mr raab, - then it will be clear. the question i i want to ask you, mr raab, focuses on the _ i want to ask you, mr raab, focuses on the same — i want to ask you, mr raab, focuses on the same in february where, as we have seen. _ on the same in february where, as we have seen, you did this official tour— have seen, you did this official tour to— have seen, you did this official tour to australia and to those of countries, — tour to australia and to those of countries, and secondly, after you -ot countries, and secondly, after you got back, — countries, and secondly, after you got back, i— countries, and secondly, after you got back, i think you have agreed, went— got back, i think you have agreed, went on— got back, i think you have agreed, went on a — got back, i think you have agreed, went on a family holiday. what _ went on a family holiday. what we can read into that, alongside the fact that at the

beginning of that month, the prime minister— beginning of that month, the prime minister had been told of this grave news _ minister had been told of this grave news about the covid pandemic, which one might _ news about the covid pandemic, which one might have thought, and certainly— one might have thought, and certainly with hindsight now, we can perhaps— certainly with hindsight now, we can perhaps see, demanded a considerable upgrading _ perhaps see, demanded a considerable upgrading of the government's response. were you aware at that time — response. were you aware at that time of— response. were you aware at that time of anyone suggesting to you that it _ time of anyone suggesting to you that it might not have been a good idea for— that it might not have been a good idea for you to leave the country, that you — idea for you to leave the country, that you were needed, perhaps, in your role _ that you were needed, perhaps, in your role as — that you were needed, perhaps, in your role as first secretary, to be involved — your role as first secretary, to be involved and work towards preparing the pandemic, orthat it involved and work towards preparing the pandemic, or that it would not be advisable for you to take holiday during _ be advisable for you to take holiday during that period? so. _ during that period? so, three points. first of all, of course, the advice you cite from professor whitty to the prime minister was hedged with all sorts of caveats and uncertainty, and is a common theme of the pandemic, we had potential scenarios with evidence

which was hedged, and i think a range of moments... you would have to ask the former prime minister, and i'm sure you will, where you have formative evidence coming through which is still being tested and at what point you make a go, no—go decision, or whatever that might be. i think when i have looked at the minutes from the meeting you referred to with the prime minister, i think it is hedged again with all those caveats and uncertainties, so i think... studio: we willjust step away from the covid inquiry for a few moments to bring you a breaking news story. the armed wing of the palestinian militant group hamas says a ten—month—old baby, his sibling and anotherfamily member ten—month—old baby, his sibling and

another family member were freed. relatives had issued a special appeal for relatives had issued a special appealfor the relatives had issued a special appeal for the family's freedom after the children and their parents were excluded from the group freed on tuesday. our correspondent paul adams has more from jerusalem. they certainly were, and in some ways, this ten—month—old, nine months old when he was snatched and now ten months old, has become in some ways, particularly in the last few days, the face of the missing hostages. hopes have been really high that in this current phase of exchange of hostages for palestinian prisoners, that the bibas family would be released. a short time ago, there was a statement from hamas saying that the three members of the family had died as a result of an israeli air strike. they did not give any more details than that. in

the last few minutes, we have heard that the israeli defence forces have beenin that the israeli defence forces have been in touch with the bibas family to inform them of this claim, and it is only a claim at this stage, and so, this is going to cause enormous anxiety, because we are reaching the point at which all of the children, and there are about eight or so children who have not yet been released, we are going to reach the point where all the children will have been released as a result of this process that has now been going on for the sixth day, and if the bibas family were not on that list and if this claim from hamas is confirmed, this will be a devastating blow to the families, their friends, devastating blow to the families, theirfriends, and devastating blow to the families, their friends, and frankly, devastating blow to the families, theirfriends, and frankly, the country as a whole. paul adams there. we will bring you any developments in that event comes into us. let us now return to dominic brad giving evidence at the

covid inquiry. —— dominic raab. enough evidence, and persuasive, overwhelming decisive evidence, not just strands here or there, or faeces that had not been tested, but conclusive evidence on which you can act, actionable evidence, —— theses that had not been tested. a whole range of contingency planning was under way, range of contingency planning was underway, but range of contingency planning was under way, but what is important is that the government did not seize up paralysed because we could see evolving a pandemic or an emergency, whether it was limited to china, engulfing the world, to the extent that it affected the uk. we need to try and function as best we could whilst preparing for that. but we come back to the same point. contingency planning without knowing, without sufficient

evidence, what the threat was, you just end up rewriting it. and i think one of the things i learned during this process is that when it comes to plans during a crisis, this is probably true in wartime, though this is not my experience, and in terms of direct more time for the uk, and certainly in an emergency like a pandemic, you need to stay in what i call perpetual beta. i don't know if you with the phrase, the tv are testing a drug or a technology, the last test you do before you put it to marketers with real—time users. you have your plan, but you are constantly testing, reiterating and refining the prototypes. i think we, and whitehall, need to get much better at that. curiously, one of the people that knew most about that, and i don't want to be an apologist for dominic cummings, was dominic cummings. in retrospect, you ask whether february was a decisive month. i think it was, but you can

see that in hindsight, and it was the tipping point where we really learnt more sufficiently about the pandemic to tip the balance into, 0k, at pandemic to tip the balance into, ok, at least now we have enough evidence to take some actionable decisions. and i think that is the conclusion i came to.— decisions. and i think that is the conclusion i came to. well, mr raab, we can all think _ conclusion i came to. well, mr raab, we can all think of _ conclusion i came to. well, mr raab, we can all think of our _ conclusion i came to. well, mr raab, we can all think of our own _ we can all think of our own management speak to describe these decisions _ management speak to describe these decisions -- — management speak to describe these decisions —— with the greatest respect, — decisions —— with the greatest respect, it— decisions —— with the greatest respect, it is not management speak, it is a _ respect, it is not management speak, it is a science, — respect, it is not management speak, it is a science, the people who have looked _ it is a science, the people who have looked at. — it is a science, the people who have looked at, for example, forecasting, peopie _ looked at, for example, forecasting, people have looked at why people make _ people have looked at why people make decisions that are wrong both in government and on the outside, inciuding _ in government and on the outside, including nobel prize winners, so notiust_ including nobel prize winners, so notjust management including nobel prize winners, so not just management speak including nobel prize winners, so notjust management speak in the pejorative — notjust management speak in the pejorative sense, but they would say that you _ pejorative sense, but they would say that you need to strike this balance between _ that you need to strike this balance between making decisions and moving forward, _ between making decisions and moving forward, and if you like, digesting the evidence. 50 forward, and if you like, digesting the evidence. sol forward, and if you like, digesting the evidence.— forward, and if you like, digesting the evidence. so i think, and by the wa , if it

the evidence. so i think, and by the way. if it comes _ the evidence. so i think, and by the way, if it comes to _ the evidence. so i think, and by the way, if it comes to a _ the evidence. so i think, and by the way, if it comes to a piece - the evidence. so i think, and by the way, if it comes to a piece of- way, if it comes to a piece of learning for this inquiry about how government works, i think it is probably the single most important thing, and i don't think you should be quite so dismissive, if i may say so, with respect, as management speak. i am trying to give you a thoughtful, considered answer about how government works. can i ask you a direct question? are you — can i ask you a direct question? are you telling the inquiry that at the beginning of february, the government had inadequate evidence with which— government had inadequate evidence with which to take further steps that it _ with which to take further steps that it could and should have taken? we constantly peppered chris whitty and patrick balance with these kind of questions, and then there was frustration with the science itself, not just the evidence frustration with the science itself, notjust the evidence we were getting all the propositions we were getting, and i had a long conversation with both chris and patrick, who both are usefully said, you can't think of the science is something which is decisive and then set in stone, which is why i come

onto the perpetual beta point. it is something constantly being tested. on the point i am making is, i don't think we have a definitive enough answer about what the pandemic was doing, the rate at which it was spreading, what it would mean for the uk, let alone the other knocked on questions that inevitably need to be asked, such as what does that mean for the nhs, in particular ventilators, beds and i see you, and another big question, how long can you credibly stay in lockdown in a liberal democracy like the uk? so i think what i am trying to help you with is, i'm sure with the benefit of hindsight, if we took a decision on whatever date it was, you can always ask, where you are not versed enough the day before to take that decision? that is the luxury of hindsight. i think we genuinely tried to move decisively at the point at which the evidence was compelling, and we would notjust

then be buffeted between competing evidence that was so up the next day or next week, and that is the balance. we will pause there. thank you. 25 to four, is that right? we will complete your evidence today, and i guarantee that. we will take a break. studio: dominic rab there, the foreign secretary during the covid pandemic, giving evidence to the covid inquiry, asked very much about how government operated at the time. he denied any suggestion is that borisjohnson, the prime minister at the time, of course, was a puppet of his top aide dominic cummings, who we heard give evidence a couple of weeks ago. he also appeared to contradict some evidence from sajid javid, who gave evidence earlier this morning and this afternoon, he was health secretary at some stages of the pandemic. he said that many of the pandemic. he said that many

of the pandemic. he said that many of the key decisions at the start of the outbreak were made by dominic cummings, the chief adviser, and not borisjohnson himself. while sajid javid has been in front of the covid inquiry, rishi sunak was in front of the commons for the weekly session of p and os, and the inquiry was brought up by the labour mp tulip siddiq. let brought up by the labour mp tulip siddit. , , siddiq. let us listen. i quote. _ siddiq. let us listen. i quote, rishi- siddiq. let us listen. | i quote, rishi thinks, siddiq. let us listen. - i quote, rishi thinks, let siddiq. let us listen. _ i quote, rishi thinks, let people die, and that is ok. this is reportedly the view of the prime minister of covid during late 2020, as recorded by the then chief scientific adviser in his diary. this came to light last week in the covid inquiry, and i was shocked that downing street didn't categorically deny it. so could i ask the prime minister to day how is it that people who were closest to this issue, who were here works with

day in, day out, at the top of government, how on these people get the impression that the prime minister was ok with people in our country dying? i minister was ok with people in our country dying?— country dying? i think he has got the question- — the question. prime - the question. . prime minister. the question. - prime minister. as the the question. — prime minister. as the honourable lady knows, there is an ongoing inquiry— lady knows, there is an ongoing inquiry into covid. it is right the processes— inquiry into covid. it is right the processes followed, and i look forward — processes followed, and i look forward to providing my own evidence, but if she had taken the time _ evidence, but if she had taken the time to— evidence, but if she had taken the time to actually read the evidence submitted to the inquiry, she will have _ submitted to the inquiry, she will have seen— submitted to the inquiry, she will have seen the person she mentioned, the chief— have seen the person she mentioned, the chief science adviser, confirmed that he _ the chief science adviser, confirmed that he did — the chief science adviser, confirmed that he did not hear me say that, and that's— that he did not hear me say that, and that's because i didn't. welt, — and that's because i didn't. well, the _ and that's because i didn't. well, the covid inquiry has been hearing, as i mentioned, from sajid javid this morning, the former health secretary. he has delayed —— detail the structure of the top of government at the start of the pandemic, including what he called indecision. you felt dominic cummings was making key decisions,

not the prime minister. do, llat cummings was making key decisions, not the prime minister.— not the prime minister. a lot of those requests, _ not the prime minister. a lot of those requests, once _ not the prime minister. a lot of those requests, once probed, l not the prime minister. a lot of- those requests, once probed, were not coming from the prime minister. then might be anything from a request for detail to a policy preference. on probing further, they would be looking for mr cummings. if it was one or two times, i would not have thought anything unusual of that, but it was constantly. it seemed so many requests of that nature were coming from mr cummings. it was different in my experience. obviously, i can't speak to other governments. certainly, in my perspective, i think the extent of dysfunctionality was something i had not experienced before any government. four teenage friends found in a crashed car earlier this month in north wales were found to have died from drowning. jevon hirst, harvey owen, wilf fitchett and hugo morris

were found in an overturned, partially submerged car in gwynedd on the 21st of november. this update is from the inquest. the inquest this morning in caernarfon lasted just four minutes, none of the families of the four young men were present, either in the building or on the end of a video link or similar. senior coroner kate morrison confirmed the names and ages of all four. harvey owen and wilf fitchett had just turned 17 in the weeks before the crash. hugo morris was 18. all four were described as being simply from shropshire. we were told they were in north wales on a camping trip that weekend before last. the coroner said postmortem examinations had taken place and showed all four had taken place and showed all four had drowned when the car they were travelling and left the ali08 just north of a village in snowdonia. the car was found upside down in a flooded debts. the coroner stressed this was not the end of the hearing as far as the inquest was concerned.

very much adjourned while an official investigation goes on, trying to piece together what happened and when, whilst that is taking place, the coroner adjourned the inquest to a date to be decided in the future. she ended it by sending his sympathies today to the families of all four young men who died, and also asking for some privacy for the families while they continue to grieve, saying that compassion will achieve more the media curiosity. we will have plenty more from the covid inquiry, where dominic raab is continuing to give all his evidence. you can keep up with that on our website and then the app. you are watching bbc news.

this is bbc news. the headlines... hamas claims three members of the family kidnapped and taken hostage have died in an israeli air strike. israel say they are investigating the claim. hopes a truce between israel and hamas can be extended for a second time, talks continue in qatar. counterclaims over an israeli military operation. israel says to members are dead, the health industry says two children have died. just a reminder of the news that has

broken in the