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
in the uk. while sajid javid was in front of the inquiry, rishi sunak has been in the commons for the weekly session of prime minister questions. the inquiry was brought up. questions. the inquiry was brought u . , , questions. the inquiry was brought u. h , ., questions. the inquiry was brought up. let s listen. iquote, rishi sunak up. let s listen. iquote, rishi suhakthihgs up. let s listen. iquote, rishi sunak things just up. let s listen. iquote, rishi sunak things just let - up. let s listen. iquote, rishi sunak things just let people i up. let s listen. iquote, rishi. sunak thingsjust let people die up. let s listen. iquote, rishi- sunak thingsjust let people die and sunak things just let people die and thatis sunak things just let people die and that is ok. this was reportedly a 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 d
and develop and therefore avoid the need for a mandatory lockdown? its almost a mirror image of the conversation we were having earlier, coming into the weekend of the 13th of march, the government had not reacted quickly enough because the disease was further advanced than the government believed and we believe. there was no appetite to take it any further. of course, in theory it would have been possible to deliver the stay at home message is an advisory rather than mandatory message but there was some evidence emerging, again some other anecdotal, that having advised people to stay away from crowded indoor spaces like pubs and so on that they wouldn t. i don t know whether it was a focus group, i seem to remember one of the number ten team saying is what we re hearing that if you meant us to stay away from the pubs you would close the pubs. so it seemed necessary to impose mandatory lockdown given how quickly the disease was moving in order to minimise that risk. lard orde