i'm a student so i have to get into campus. i mean, we have to not come in and stuff like that, and sometimes you miss lectures. ijust think it's affecting the wrong people, that's my view on it. it needs to affect the people upstairs, not us. it seems to be a permanent state of affairs, unfortunately. - it's something you've got to get used to. l there are more strikes tomorrow, friday, saturday and next monday, with different train companies affected each day. they will run either no services or very limited timetables. other rail unions including the rmt have struck deals to end their strikes, at least for now. but it was back in april last year that aslef�*s committee turned down the latest offer from the train companies, and there hasn't been any progress in their dispute since. the operators and ministers want aslef to give members a vote on that deal, which they say would bring average driver pay to £65,000 a year. the finances on the railways still haven't got back to where they were before the pandemic. taxpayers are putting an extra £54 million a week into the railway network. we want to give our colleagues a pay rise but it has to be sustainable.

but the union says it can't agree to unacceptable changes and accuses the other side of not trying to reach a settlement. we have had no contact with the transport ministerfor14 months. we've had no contact with the rail ministerfor 13 months. we haven't seen the employers since we rejected the deal last april. this isn't us not coming to the table. a new law means train companies could now require enough staff to work on strike days to provide 40% of usual services. the prime minister says he wants them to do it, but none of them are this time around. industry sources say minimum service levels would be challenging to put in place. if operators do try it in future, aslef says it would respond by putting on more strikes. dozens of major roads around paris and several other cities in france remain blocked this morning by farmers who are protesting about several issues. among their grievances, falling incomes, increasing

environmental regulations, and growing competition from imports. the farmers say their protests are open—ended — so far, they've rejected concessions put forward by the french government as not going far enough. there is a fire there, and that's one of the roads on the outskirts of paris because they've managed to block many of the main roads into paris as part of the demonstration at one stage they were trying to reach the big food market, but the french government has deployed around 15,000 officers to keep the protests under control. julien de cledat is a farmer from gien in the loire valley — i spoke with him earlier, and i began by asking what the main issues are that he's protesting about.

i think the main issue is the price. we talk about many, many things here. we talk about norms. of course, the issue about the norms to many norms and lack of liberty of what we do. but the main thing is that all the farmers, they work very hard and they are not getting paid for the prices in accordance with the works they do and the amounts of investment they do. and we understand that the unions have been meeting the government. are you getting any sense that there's progress on this issue? no, because here we talk about a change in the model and the government only talking about after the changes. so it's a vision. i think the farmers have lost the confidence in the government's. it needs to be revamped. it's notjust a few announcing money like this. how much of it is an issue with the french government and how much is it to do with the eu? because we understand that president macron has said

that he's going to meet ursula von der leyen, the european commission president, this week, to try to get eu measures in favour of french farmers. is that likely? do you expect that to happen? and if so, what would you be wanting from the eu? you are right that we have the feeling that now it's not even the governments. the decision are made in the eu and that's one of the points. for example, they sign free trade agreements with canada, for example. it has not been ratified by the french parliaments. and now it's the same case with the ukraine where ursula von der leyen opened the gates in europe. but it's not a national decision. so how far do you think the farmers are going to go? because i saw a report this morning that there were some farmers who were heading towards the big internationalfood market, and they want to block it. is that is that a good idea, do you think? we have one farmer that commits suicide every three days. so it's a big sign of we are not going well and we stayed silent

because we don't have much time. there is a lot of work. and so if we started this movement, i think it again can go far because people are desperate here. the imf has grown its forecast citing resilience in major markets around the world and has advised against immediate tax cuts which had been hinted at by the uk government. 0ur economics editor has more. this update comes out every couple of years and we are used to the slew of years and we are used to the slew of bad news from the various crises that have come but a sense of light at the end of the tunnel in the latest global forecast. 0ver at the end of the tunnel in the latest global forecast. over 3%, at the end of the tunnel in the latest globalforecast. over 3%, as you just said, normalfor global

growth would be 3.8 but what they are pointing to and even using the words are soft landing for the global economy from this three years of crisis and the huge upsurge we saw in energy prices and the us economy proving more resilient, as we saw in the us growth figures in the past few days. that resilience from the energy shock, as the worst of those sorts of crises measures seemed to be going into the rear—view mirror. and there is obviously still a delicate balancing act over the rate of cuts to interest rates and we expect the cuts to happen after a delay over the course of the year, so a variety of interesting stories and also advice to the uk economy, to the uk chancellor ahead of the key budget that perhaps now is not the time for tax cuts as it's a sensitive issue in an election year for the uk treasury, but in general terms, more

resilient world economy perhaps not light at the end of the tunnel but the possibility of a path to softer landing. the possibility of a path to softer landinu. �* , ., the possibility of a path to softer landinu. v ., ., the possibility of a path to softer landinu. �*, ., ., ., ., landing. let's go to scotland and the covid inquiry _ landing. let's go to scotland and the covid inquiry and _ landing. let's go to scotland and the covid inquiry and we - landing. let's go to scotland and the covid inquiry and we are - landing. let's go to scotland and . the covid inquiry and we are hearing from the former deputy first minister, john swinney and he said he manually deleted text exchanges with nicola sturgeon but made sure relevant information was placed on the official record. let's have a listen in to the inquiry. if the official record. let's have a listen in to the inquiry.- listen in to the inquiry. if the cabinet says _ listen in to the inquiry. if the cabinet says we _ listen in to the inquiry. if the cabinet says we see - listen in to the inquiry. if the cabinet says we see cases i listen in to the inquiry. if the l cabinet says we see cases are listen in to the inquiry. if the - cabinet says we see cases are rising and we think there should be something done about that, that might be deemed to be the direction but all of the means by which the rising cases were then combated and the means open to do that, if those decisions about the practical aspects were taken elsewhere, all of the decisions are taken out of cabinet. i the decisions are taken out of cabinet. ., �* ., u , the decisions are taken out of cabinet. ., �* , ., cabinet. i wouldn't accept that because the — cabinet. i wouldn't accept that because the nature _ cabinet. i wouldn't accept that because the nature and - cabinet. i wouldn't accept that l because the nature and content cabinet. i wouldn't accept that - because the nature and content of cabinet _ because the nature and content of cabinet minutes will show that both of the _

cabinet minutes will show that both of the elements that you raise in your— of the elements that you raise in your question are happening in cabinet — your question are happening in cabinet. cabinet is saying we are concerned — cabinet. cabinet is saying we are concerned in the rising cases and we need _ concerned in the rising cases and we need to— concerned in the rising cases and we need to do— concerned in the rising cases and we need to do something about it and here are _ need to do something about it and here are the things we are going to do about_ here are the things we are going to do about it — here are the things we are going to do about it and what might be left to a delegation might be what i would — to a delegation might be what i would describe us and i think i used the word _ would describe us and i think i used the word in— would describe us and i think i used the word in my statement, marginal statements questions which would then be _ statements questions which would then be the subject of interaction with advisers and then the mir knitting — with advisers and then the mir knitting of what is the conclusion of that— knitting of what is the conclusion of that process of delegation. is of that process of delegation. is apart of that process of delegation. apart from of that process of delegation. i3 apart from the matter is that are acceptable parts of telephone conversations and what they were concerned with, is it your position that all of those things, the discussions around the progress on the pandemic and comments on advice and the nature of decisions the scottish government might take and the decisions they did take and the decisions the scottish government had taken, is your position that all of the salient features of those discussions are on the corporate

record? i discussions are on the corporate record? ., _ ,., discussions are on the corporate record? ., , , discussions are on the corporate| record?_ and discussions are on the corporate i record?_ and of record? i would say so, yes. and of course, record? i would say so, yes. and of course. as — record? i would say so, yes. and of course. as i — record? i would say so, yes. and of course, as i said _ record? i would say so, yes. and of course, as i said earlier, _ record? i would say so, yes. and of course, as i said earlier, similarly. course, as i said earlier, similarly as regard to whatsapp, we can check that by checking the corporate record and the paperwork given by the inquiry about the pandemic with what we can see from other messages because your messages generally aren't available through you. yes. could i as aren't available through you. yes. could i as a _ aren't available through you. yes. could i as a point _ aren't available through you. yes. could i as a point of _ aren't available through you. yes. could i as a point of clarification, you rightly pulled me up earlier when i was asking the question about the point at which the first minister announced there is likely to be a public inquiry and you asked about the month and you are right to do so, because i thought it was march. and it was made 2020 when the comments were made, and that would be more consistent with the way in which information about the care home situation arose. is that broadly right?— home situation arose. is that broadl riuht? . , ., , broadly right? that is what confused me. ithink broadly right? that is what confused me- i think it _ broadly right? that is what confused me. i think it might— broadly right? that is what confused me. i think it might be _ broadly right? that is what confused me. i think it might be what - me. i think it might be what confused — me. i think it might be what confused me _ me. i think it might be what confused me because - me. i think it might be what confused me because it - me. i think it might be what confused me because it was

me. i think it might be what - confused me because it was march when a lot of the people in the care homes were being infected and ultimately dying, is that right? there was a period when there was a cute pressure in care homes and that went on— cute pressure in care homes and that went on for— cute pressure in care homes and that went on fora — cute pressure in care homes and that went on for a long time and that was an intense _ went on for a long time and that was an intense period of pressure which would _ an intense period of pressure which would be _ an intense period of pressure which would be in — an intense period of pressure which would be in the march and april period — would be in the march and april period 50 _ would be in the march and april eriod. , ., ., ., ., period. so the period where a lot of the infections _ period. so the period where a lot of the infections were _ period. so the period where a lot of the infections were occurring - period. so the period where a lot of the infections were occurring which | the infections were occurring which led to 50% of the deaths in the first wave occurred in march and april? first wave occurred in march and aril? . . first wave occurred in march and aril? ., ,_, . first wave occurred in march and april?_ and - first wave occurred in march and april?_ and it - first wave occurred in march and | april?_ and it was april? that is correct. and it was onl in april? that is correct. and it was only in may _ april? that is correct. and it was only in may when _ april? that is correct. and it was only in may when the _ april? that is correct. and it was only in may when the comments| april? that is correct. and it was - only in may when the comments were referred to earlier at the lack of a public inquiry and it was coming to light and being discussed earlier and in other places?— light and being discussed earlier and in other places? that's right. as regards _ and in other places? that's right. as regards one _ and in other places? that's right. as regards one further— and in other places? that's right. as regards one further aspect - and in other places? that's right. as regards one further aspect to | and in other places? that's right. l as regards one further aspect to do with your phone, before i moved to other areas. the phone you use throughout the period was a personal

phone, is that right?— phone, is that right? that's correct- _ phone, is that right? that's correct. and _ phone, is that right? that's correct. and you _ phone, is that right? that's correct. and you gave - phone, is that right? that's correct. and you gave the l phone, is that right? that'sl correct. and you gave the ex nationwide _ correct. and you gave the ex nationwide your _ correct. and you gave the ex nationwide your statements | correct. and you gave the ex l nationwide your statements to correct. and you gave the ex - nationwide your statements to the effect that it was convenient for you to use a personal phone —— and you to use a personal phone —— and you gave to those statements, it was easier to use on your blackberry than your personal phone. given your vast ministerial experience think that there might be other concerns about senior ministers like yourself using personal phones and that that might be something to be looked at by the scottish government in future? i by the scottish government in future? . . by the scottish government in future? , ., ., ., ,, , future? i understand that our knees and the issues _ future? i understand that our knees and the issues for _ future? i understand that our knees and the issues for me _ future? i understand that our knees and the issues for me -- _ future? i understand that our knees and the issues for me -- i - and the issues for me —— i understand that our needs and the issues _ understand that our needs and the issues for— understand that our needs and the issues for me, i can provide the enail— issues for me, i can provide the e—mail account as i said in the session— e—mail account as i said in the session before lunch. it is one i used _ session before lunch. it is one i used habitually, all the time to submit — used habitually, all the time to submit e—mails and respond to e-mails — submit e—mails and respond to e—mails from my private office. i had that— e—mails from my private office. i had that securely on my personal

device _ had that securely on my personal device and — had that securely on my personal device and it meant i only had one phone _ device and it meant i only had one phone number and one phone to carry about— phone number and one phone to carry about because the dangers of losing phone _ about because the dangers of losing phone are _ about because the dangers of losing phone are enormous, the more you have _ phone are enormous, the more you have. �* ., , have. but there might also be dancers have. but there might also be dangers associated _ have. but there might also be dangers associated using - have. but there might also be - dangers associated using personal phones which are not fully within the control of the scottish government. i the control of the scottish government. , . ., m government. i understand that. can i move something _ government. i understand that. can i move something i _ government. i understand that. can i move something i touched _ government. i understand that. can i move something i touched on, - government. i understand that. can i move something i touched on, to - government. i understand that. can i move something i touched on, to do | move something i touched on, to do with the decision—making process, and as you've accepted you are a fun metal part, i would like to ask you by way of clarification —— a fundamental part. i would like to ask you by way of clarification for the evidence she gave in module one and if we start off where we left off —— and if we move into the decision—making process that happened during the covid period, you gave some evidence in a module number one that you had responsibility for resilience matters prior to the pandemic. that's correct.— that's correct. and you gave evidence _ that's correct. and you gave evidence related, _ that's correct. and you gave evidence related, and - that's correct. and you gave evidence related, and this . that's correct. and you gave evidence related, and this is that's correct. and you gave - evidence related, and this is the point of clarification, not to the

resilience system itself, but the the resilience subcommittee which was involved in discussing and preparing the way in which resilience might work. is that correct? if resilience might work. is that correct? .., resilience might work. is that correct? , ., , , resilience might work. is that correct? , ., ,, , ., correct? ifi can perhaps provide some detail. _ correct? ifi can perhaps provide some detail. the _ correct? ifi can perhaps provide some detail. the cabinet - correct? ifi can perhaps provide some detail. the cabinet in - correct? ifi can perhaps provide some detail. the cabinet in the| some detail. the cabinet in the period — some detail. the cabinet in the period up— some detail. the cabinet in the period up until about 2010 and an operational cabinet subcommittee on resilience _ operational cabinet subcommittee on resilience and that met very infrequently but it was essentially looking _ infrequently but it was essentially looking at strategic preparation for any resilience event, whatever it might— any resilience event, whatever it might be — any resilience event, whatever it might be. we have become more accustomed to winter weather arrangements than pandemic. we had more of— arrangements than pandemic. we had more of them. that arrangements than pandemic. we had more of them-— arrangements than pandemic. we had more of them. that is why score met? correct. more of them. that is why score met? correct- we — more of them. that is why score met? correct. we found _ more of them. that is why score met? correct. we found after _ more of them. that is why score met? correct. we found after 2010 - more of them. that is why score met? correct. we found after 2010 that - more of them. that is why score met? correct. we found after 2010 that it i correct. we found after 2010 that it was meeting on a regular basis and

the same _ was meeting on a regular basis and the same cast list was largely round the same cast list was largely round the table _ the same cast list was largely round the table that would be round the table _ the table that would be round the table for — the table that would be round the table for the cabinet subcommittee so all— table for the cabinet subcommittee so all business got transacted in score _ so all business got transacted in score which met frequently over the years— score which met frequently over the years after— score which met frequently over the years after 2010, so the idea that a resilience _ years after 2010, so the idea that a resilience grouping stopped in 2010 and nothing else happened, that was not the _ and nothing else happened, that was not the case. the resilience activity— not the case. the resilience activity was undertaken under the umbrella — activity was undertaken under the umbrella of score which tended to have the _ umbrella of score which tended to have the first minister, deputy first _ have the first minister, deputy first minister, other cabinet members around the table with senior officials _ members around the table with senior officials and that met very frequently in the aftermath of 2010. fiscal subcommittee had a rule in organising and preparing for the way in which resilience would work. there was an operational role for that body as opposed to itself. i would say that's probably a fair assessment but what the score

arrangements did was they recognised the fact— arrangements did was they recognised the fact we _ arrangements did was they recognised the fact we had to have a whole range _ the fact we had to have a whole range of— the fact we had to have a whole range of different players involved in our _ range of different players involved in our resilience activity. we tended — in our resilience activity. we tended to _ in our resilience activity. we tended to develop our strategic thinking — tended to develop our strategic thinking around the scottish resilience partnership which i put on the _ resilience partnership which i put on the record to the module one hearings — on the record to the module one hearings through together figures from local government, police scotland. _ from local government, police scotland, the scottish fire and rescue — scotland, the scottish fire and rescue service, the scottish environmental protection agency and other organisations who were critical— other organisations who were critical to— other organisations who were critical to enable us to have effective _ critical to enable us to have effective resilience arrangements. and from — effective resilience arrangements. and from that initiatives such as the scottish risk assessment emerged, which was a strategic overview— emerged, which was a strategic overview of what were the likely potential — overview of what were the likely potential threats or resilience issues — potential threats or resilience issues that scotland may have to face _ issues that scotland may have to face that — issues that scotland may have to face. that became a focal point for our planning for future events. was

it the case that _ our planning for future events. —" it the case that the