right npis to implement at what time._ based - about the right npis to implement at what time._ basedprotecting _ what time. based on? based on protecting the _ what time. based on? based on protecting the nhs as you - what time. based on? based on protecting the nhs as you said. | protecting the nhs as you said. certainly, we will break until five past12~ — past 12. you are watching past 12. — you are watching live coverage of the covid inquiry in london where the covid inquiry in london where the prime minister rishi sunak has concluded the first part of his evidence to the inquiry. there is going to be a short break but he will return. he is due to give evidence until about 5pm today. rishi sunak was chancellor during the pandemic and has been questioned about the decisions he made at the time. so some highlights of what has been discussed so far. a key focus of the lead counsel's questions are looked at the prime minister's views at the time about the tensions between public health concerns and the impact of lockdowns on people, and also how he put forward his position to the prim

, why wasn't— communication is an important npi, why wasn't more _ communication is an important npi,ng covid to the - at the risk of long covid to the public— at the risk of long covid to the public when _ at the risk of long covid to the public when you _ at the risk of long covid to the public when you had _ at the risk of long covid to the public when you had a - at the risk of long covid to the public when you had a long. at the risk of long covid to the i public when you had a long covid groups _ public when you had a long covid groups repeatedly— public when you had a long covid groups repeatedly raising - public when you had a long covid i groups repeatedly raising concern about _ groups repeatedly raising concern about the — groups repeatedly raising concern about the lack— groups repeatedly raising concern about the lack of— groups repeatedly raising concern| about the lack of communication? groups repeatedly raising concern i about the lack of communication? i am about the lack of communication? am very grateful to you for the about the lack of communication?“ am very grate

. came to that first series of march npis.ere made powerfully and they certainly had a big effect on me. ., y ., and they certainly had a big effect onme. ., , on me. could you assist the inquiry with something _ on me. could you assist the inquiry with something about _ on me. could you assist the inquiry with something about the - on me. could you assist the inquiry with something about the nature i with something about the nature of the heavy responsibility which rested on your shoulders? it is perhaps self—evident that only the most difficult and momentous decisions come from the prime minister. . �* . decisions come from the prime minister. . �* , . decisions come from the prime minister._ were l decisions come from the prime - minister._ were there minister. that's correct. were there an aood minister. that's correct. were there any good or — minister. that's correct. were there any good or easy — minister. that's correct. were there any good or easy decisions - minister. that's correct. were there any good or easy decis

but the decisions were taken on releasing npi is without consideration of long covid.ed - accept that? no, i think they were going to be risks involved in - going to be risks involved in releasing the npi is, they were going to be, releasing the npi is, they were going to he, basically the risk that the disease would spread, that was the disease would spread, that was the thing we wanted to fight. thank ou. the thing we wanted to fight. thank you- please — the thing we wanted to fight. thank you- please can _ the thing we wanted to fight. thank you. please can i _ the thing we wanted to fight. thank you. please can i complete - the thing we wanted to fight. thank you. please can i complete the - you. please can i complete the question — you. please can i complete the question. do you accept that widespread transmission of the disease, — widespread transmission of the disease, without public occasions on the risk— disease, without public occasions on the risk of— disease, without public occasions on the risk of long covid, and without other— the risk of long covid, and

and the only thing _ except for the npis. and the only thing that— except for the npis.up to be and if you are told we have got ample supplies of ppe i find it hard to conceptualise exactly what we should be doing. that debate, that realisation on your part that there is no effective border control, that ppe may be deficient, that there is no effective test and trace scaled up test and trace, is absent. that level of debate does not take, there is no general realisation the virus is no general realisation the virus is coming. it is to present the tally to rate 1%, and we have not got the measures to deal with it, that debate does not take place. find that debate does not take place. and i think that's — that debate does not take place. and i think that's right. i think for the same _ i think that's right. i think for the same reason which is the reason i have _ the same reason which is the reason i have given, — the same reason which is the reason i have given, which is that people can see _ i have given, which is that people can see that it could happen as catherine — ca

saw the npis where to m3, _ not see what...to me, probably what imran is getting at— to me, probably what imran is getting at in his e—mail, pretty... you know. — getting at in his e—mail, pretty... you know, far—fetched in my imagination. i was still gestating that~ _ imagination. i was still gestating that. on — imagination. i was still gestating that. . , ,, imagination. i was still gestating that. ., ,, . . that. on a press conference in march ou said that. on a press conference in march you said we — that. on a press conference in march you said we are _ that. on a press conference in march you said we are as _ that. on a press conference in march you said we are as a _ that. on a press conference in march you said we are as a country - you said we are as a country extremely well prepared. as it turned out that was not so but i want to ask you, that we can before you had received the draft action plan, that contained the delay document which you have been shown in draft form and in that document, there is that assertion, w

“p up on npis, there is going following up on npis, there is going to be a wider cabinet discussion.nd then this at three b, prime minister. i propose the following is the next step, a paper that we can share it with the premise that head of the bilateral, an opportunity for the chancellor to set out his views and the economic analysis for the prime minister without it being watered down by the cabinet office process. do you know what that is a reference to, the watered down by the cabinet office process? because plainly, you as the chancellor are absolutely entitled, you suggested yourself, perhaps constitutionally obligated, to bring the economic angle to the prime minister without it being watered down by any other part of government so what is that a reference to, do you think? obviously i didn't write the e—mail so it's hard for me to comment. and if you flick back to the earlier bit of the e—mail, i think as you can see from that, it clearly mentions a cabinet office process which is right and appropriate, but also, even when it talks about modelling on sectors, to bring that t

of lockdowns , you can of npis of lockdowns, you can see that we were all in failure. it had already spread in the uk. we underestimated we put the peak to too late. the first peak too late. we thought it would be in may, june. that was totally wrong . i don't blame the wrong. i don't blame the scientists for that at all. but that was that was the that was the feeling and it just turned out to be wrong . out to be wrong. >> but the evidence before milady shows that the scientists , at least in part, were were aware by the end of january of the hospitalisation rate of the fact that the number of infections was grossly being was being grossly underestimated, that there was is self—sustaining human to human transmission. they were aware by the beginning of february that there was no effective test trace control, isolate system in the united kingdom. so once the virus spread beyond china and became self—sustaining, there was no effective means of stopping its entry into the united kingdom. that was all known to the scientists , at known to the scientists, at least by the b

we -ot timings of lockdowns, of npis. we got something wrong.re things we should have been differently? unquestionably.— should have been differently? unquestionably. should have been differently? unuuestionabl . _ ., unquestionably. boris johnson, the former prime _ unquestionably. boris johnson, the former prime minister— unquestionably. boris johnson, the former prime minister giving - former prime minister giving evidence in the covid inquiry. this is the first of two days in which he will be doing so and they have really taken will be doing so and they have really ta ken a will be doing so and they have really taken a chronological view of the pandemic, starting with some of now, where they have got to some of the decisions that were being made at the start of the various lockdowns and restrictions. let's listen in. ., ., , ., listen in. you made plain in your statement _ listen in. you made plain in your statement you _ listen in. you made plain in your statement you were _ listen in. you made plain in your statement you were extremely l l

in march and late february through to the sequence of npi and lockdowns, you can see that we were all... system failure ? ..collectively underestimating how fast it had already spread in the uk. we underestimated, we put the peak too late, the first peak too late, we thought it would be may orjune and that was totally wrong. i do not blame the scientists for that at all. but that was the feeling. itjust turned out to be wrong. our panel tonight the writer and broadcaster christina patterson, and steve hanke, professor of applied economics at thejohns hopkins university. welcome to you both, thank you for being with us. i don't know if you watched a lot of this today, but what did you learn that you did not already know? i what did you learn that you did not already know?— already know? i learned that boris johnson already know? i learned that boris johnson has _ already know? i learned that boris johnson has some _ already know? i learned that boris johnson has some extremely - johnson has some extremely expensive, to repair —— lawyers working with him to prepare him for today and it

it except for the npis . and that it except for the npis.y thing that i'd been i'd been given and we had we had no plan for that. and i don't think the concept of lockdown or the or even the word lockdown had yet emerged . had yet emerged. >> and indeed there was a 25th of february sage meeting where non—pharmaceutical interventions were debated, but they didn't include lockdown. there was a debate about extreme social distancing in the beginning of march . lockdown doesn't appear march. lockdown doesn't appear to your answer, mr to leave, but your answer, mr johnson, is . i think the problem johnson, is. i think the problem is that if you exclude borders and trace is not as and test and trace is not as good as it's cracked up to be, and if you're told we've got ample supplies of ppe, i was finding it hard to conceptu analyse exactly what we should be doing . that debate, be doing. that debate, that realisation on on your part that there is no effective border control. the ppe may be deficient , that there is no deficient, that there is no e

think it probably would be fair to say that the cabinet was, on the whole, more reluctant to impose npishat was true of almost every member of the cabinet but that would be a general comment. the cabinet but that would be a general comment. ,, ., . , ., ., comment. the lockdown decision of the 23rd of march _ comment. the lockdown decision of the 23rd of march 2020 _ comment. the lockdown decision of the 23rd of march 2020 was - comment. the lockdown decision of i the 23rd of march 2020 was debated, as you rightly say, at great length on the sunday, on the monday, by the various bodies, but in particular by cobra but it was debated on monday the 23rd in cobra and the public announcement, we all recall, was made that evening and it went to cabinet on the tuesday. in relation to the first lockdown decision, it is obvious that cabinet debated it after the event. in relation to the second lockdown, that of november 2020, mrjohnson, do you recall whether or not that decision was made by covid ministerial committee or cabinet? i’m made by covid ministerial committee or cabinet? �* . . made by

we will see this specifically following up on npis, there is going to be a wider cabinet discussion.he bilateral, an opportunity for the chancellor to set out his views and the economic analysis for the prime minister without it being watered down by the cabinet office process. do you know what that is a reference to, the watered down by the cabinet office process? because plainly, you as the chancellor are absolutely entitled, you suggested yourself, perhaps constitutionally obligated, to bring the economic angle to the prime minister without it being watered down by any other part of government so what is that a reference to, do you think? 0bviously reference to, do you think? obviously i didn't write the e—mail so it's hard for

day was one of the most impto evaluate is the extent to has to evaluate is the extent to which the npisthe progress virus. the progress of the virus. the inquiry , unbelievably, is not inquiry, unbelievably, is not looking at that . but, you know, looking at that. but, you know, let's for purposes of let's assume for the purposes of this conversation that they did work, assess if the work, how can you assess if the intervention was right if you have not attempted to evaluate harm and you're right in bringing in the csj report from today because it is yet another example of the kind of indiscriminate long lasting harm that these policies caused . that these policies caused. >> do you seriously contend that britain should not have had a lockdown or simply that the lockdown or simply that the lockdown was is too long applied to the wrong people? et cetera. >> i think there is a serious case to be made that you shouldn't have had an indiscriminate lockdown that impacted everyone , including impacted everyone, including those who were not at serious risk from the virus . and, you risk from t

just asking more restrictions and asking for more restrictions and non—pharmaceutical interventions, npiscalled , then you were discarded. called, then you were discarded. you weren't consulted, you were dropped weren't dropped off emails, you weren't part conversation. part of the conversation. i think that will be proven the think that will be proven by the inquiry detrimental to the inquiry to be detrimental to the wider how wider argument of how the government better government could have better handled pandemic to do what handled this pandemic to do what it exactly set out to do, what it exactly set out to do, what it set out to do, which is to protect and livelihoods . protect lives and livelihoods. >> i mean, matthew, do you think actually well, things, actually well, two things, really. think the labour really. do you think the labour party could have done any better a job? and secondly, do you not think that this shows leadership qualities in that qualities in rishi sunak in that actually probably the actually he was probably the most around the most senior person around the cabi