yes, and it's a chris wormald was _ chris wormald?ld? yes, and it's a chris wormald was trying to push others. | wormald was trying to push others. he was the person that was pushing on this... the point i'm making here is that this is done like the system is that this is done like the system is not designed to understand the threat, even when it is top of the national register, where it is a health or other natural phenomena, in fact, but let's stick to pandemics because what did you make thatis pandemics because what did you make that is what this inquiry is about. —— because that is what this is about. -- because that is what this is about. ., . ., ., about. the toing and froing, to understand _ about. the toing and froing, to understand the _ about. the toing and froing, to understand the degree, - about. the toing and froing, to understand the degree, the . about. the toing and froing, to - understand the degree, the magnitude of the _ understand the degree, the magnitude of the massive threat, there was a hugely— of the massive

i presume chris wormald _ is that chris whitty? i presume chris wormald but _ is that chris whitty?ut i _ is that chris whitty? i presume chris wormald but i don't - is that chris whitty? i presume chris wormald but i don't know is that chris whitty? i presume - chris wormald but i don't know why i would have said that.— would have said that. further down the page- -- — would have said that. further down the page-- l _ would have said that. further down the page... i mostly— would have said that. further down the page... i mostly blame - would have said that. further down i the page... i mostly blame hancock, deja vu, that was how we spent the early spring. and then, i only have just realised we have no senior officials anywhere near this, where was the lead dg? there is no one around driving the policy side of operational lockdown on matt's behalf. and you say, welcome to the last six months. two points, firstly, the process by which mr hancock's truthfulness or candour or lack of candour, however you describe it, and it is a matterfor the inquiry, was not an issue that was confine

i spoke to chris wormald about _ afterwards. i spoke to chris wormald about it _ afterwards. and i hear your very cross with me — about it and i hear your very cross with me his— about it and i hear your very cross with me. his response was, there are ways of— with me. his response was, there are ways of doing this that we need to make _ ways of doing this that we need to make sure — ways of doing this that we need to make sure it is structured and ordered — make sure it is structured and ordered and goes with the proper process— ordered and goes with the proper process rather than i had set it as a statement. we agreed to differ a bit on _ a statement. we agreed to differ a bit on that — a statement. we agreed to differ a bit on that. i a statement. we agreed to differ a bit on that-— bit on that. i would actually fear reaction on _ bit on that. i would actually fear reaction on that. _ bit on that. i would actually fear reaction on that. very _ bit on that. i would actually fear reaction on that. very well, - bit on that. i would actually fear reaction on that. very well, a

and also chris wormald now giving his view that the first lockdown was too late. people will take their own personal view as to what that really means in terms of the cost, the personal cost and the potential lives that may have turned out differently if the government had acted earlier. and let's hear how some of that sounded actually in the inquiry room itself. with hindsight, we were at least a week late at all points of the mpi decisions. i agreed with the decisions at the time and the timing but, looking back, we should have done each of the things onthe12th, 16th, 23rd. if we had got to the 23rd at least a week earlier, at least a week earlier. and i suppose, again, that's an interesting combination of stuff that seems eye—popping but is also maybe not that surprising because we knew that, for a large chunk of the build—up to the first lockdown, the government was operating on the assumption that covid was like flu. and basically there wasn't much you could do to stop people getting it. so what you needed to do was just mitigate how high the peak of infectio

i subsequently spoke to chris wormald and asked him why he thought— chris wormald and asked him why hethe meeting rather than the substance that he _ meeting rather than the substance that he was concerned about and i had thrown — that he was concerned about and i had thrown it into a ministerial meeting. — had thrown it into a ministerial meeting, whereas it should have gone through— meeting, whereas it should have gone through more due process, but i stand _ through more due process, but i stand by— through more due process, but i stand by the fact i think it was the i’ili'lt stand by the fact i think it was the right thing — stand by the fact i think it was the right thing to say at the time. and that was the _ right thing to say at the time. fiflc that was the reprimand right thing to say at the time. fific that was the reprimand as right thing to say at the time. e"ic that was the reprimand as well, right thing to say at the time. el"ic that was the reprimand as well, was it? i that was the reprimand as well, was it? ., , ., ., �* that was the reprimand as well, was it? ., ., ., �*

this point, i would ask people i trusted for advice, i had long discussions with for instance chris wormald responding, we work in a trusted environment, we were self—critical about how we were responding, that's only natural because we could see what was happening and we could see that we were in the middle of something that had not happened for decades and it was on a watch, so to speak. it's also, i also thought it was necessary and i can understand how some people would have interpreted the way that i now know that they did but i did not know any of this at the time because nobody raised issues with me at the time, i can see how, my sense of needing to keep the driving system forward might have had this impact on some people, especially those who were more sceptical of the need of the government to act, frankly. we have seen some of the evidence that the same people who are accusing me of overconfidence at the same time blocking the action that i was saying we needed. and so i can now see the dynamics of if they were against action being taken and i was going in the same way, we must do

so chris wormald.ot everyone testifies to this, but i also have high opinion of matt hancock as minister. however, i believe that too much was asked of dhse at that point and it goes to the heart of one of the challenges i mentioned earlier. we should have collectively recognised it was in crisis at an earlier point and taken on to other parts of government responsibility for delivery that was being asked of dhse at that time. i think with the benefit of hindsight those within dhse thought we can do it. we can meet this hour. i think that while that degree of commitment and leaning in is admirable in spirit, the truth is that at an earlier stage we have —— we should have broadened responsibility. we did in due course with the setting up did in due course with the setting up of the dual information groups and the covid—i9 task force, but i believe it should have happened earlier. ., , believe it should have happened earlier. ., . earlier. you said there may be have been an element _ earlier. you said th

now, simon stephens avoided criticising mr hancock and like another civil servant, chris wormald, saide of the inquiry lawyers, "he reassured me that he was, quote, �*loving responsibility�* "and to demonstrate this took up a batsman's stance outside "the cabinet room and said �*they bowl them at me, i knock them away�*". i'm trying to explainjust how jarring some of that was and how different places lots of us who are all in the same, theoretically in the same place, that we were. and it does partly go back to my point about, kind of, nuclear levels of confidence. being the health secretary during a once—in—a—century pandemic was a tough job. some argue matt hancock was one of the government's best communicators, even if others felt his approach was a little too hands—on. dominic cummings has proved to be one of mr hancock's most constant critics, this week saying he was, quote, "a proven liar". but perhaps the most revealing claim, that borisjohnson resisted attempts to sack mr hancock to ensure he would be a sacrificial lamb for this very public inquiry. the former pm's team have no

and now from the evidence, think it was the 22nd of january, that chris wormald delegated all other responsibilities_ forgive me if ijust remind you please to keep your— forgive me if ijust remind you please to keep your answers i forgive me if ijust remind you. please to keep your answers as concise — please to keep your answers as concise as _ please to keep your answers as concise as you _ please to keep your answers as concise as you feel _ please to keep your answers as concise as you feel you - please to keep your answers as concise as you feel you can? in| please to keep your answers as - concise as you feel you can? in your statement _ concise as you feel you can? in your statement you — concise as you feel you can? in your statement you nevertheless - concise as you feel you can? in your statement you nevertheless said - concise as you feel you can? in your. statement you nevertheless said that others _ statement you nevertheless said that others appeared _ statement you nevertheless said that others appeared to _ statement you nevertheless said that others appeared to be _ statement you ne