accepting your point that ultimately it is for— accepting your point that ultimately it is for politicians and their teams _ it is for politicians and their teams to— it is for politicians and their teams to either accept or reject the advice _ teams to either accept or reject the advice they— teams to either accept or reject the advice they are given, it can't have been _ advice they are given, it can't have been regarded as a positive that the evidence _ been regarded as a positive that the evidence we have heard is that one had a _ evidence we have heard is that one had a group — evidence we have heard is that one had a group of behavioural scientists suggesting one thing and a group _ scientists suggesting one thing and a group of— scientists suggesting one thing and a group of communications people in number_ a group of communications people in number ten — a group of communications people in number ten essentially ignoring them and get _ number ten essentially ignoring them and get a _ number ten essentially ignoring them and get a and doing their own thing. that can _ and get a and doing their own thing. that can be — and get a and doing their own thing. that can be regarded as being a successful outcome. | that can be regarded as being a successful outcome.— that can be regarded as being a successful outcome. i think there are lessons _ successful outcome. i think there are lessons to _ successful outcome. i think there are lessons to be _ successful outcome. i think there are lessons to be learned. - successful outcome. i think there are lessons to be learned. one i successful outcome. i think there l are lessons to be learned. one that is important is to get the advice and the papers out quickly in the public domain because then it is very obvious when ministerial decisions are deviating from that advice. ideally, you would like to know what other advice they have received that meant they had gone down a different route. he said li qian suggested it was focus group advised that he wanted to pay attention to. that seems to me to be attention to. that seems to me to be a decision that is one that the ministers and officials can follow, but i agree with you that the advice from behavioural science needs to be prominent, clearand from behavioural science needs to be prominent, clear and accessible to everybody and it wasn't a good outcome that some of these things were ignored. let outcome that some of these things were ignored-— were ignored. let me move on and ick u- were ignored. let me move on and pick tip that — were ignored. let me move on and pick up that theme. _ were ignored. let me move on and pick up that theme. the _ were ignored. let me move on and pick up that theme. the solution i were ignored. let me move on and i pick up that theme. the solution you have suggested is transparency, which _ have suggested is transparency, which echoes an approach you took with sage — which echoes an approach you took with sage that we will come to. it may he _ with sage that we will come to. it may be that some of the documents suggest _ may be that some of the documents suggest that precisely one of the problems with spi—b and perhaps more broadly— problems with spi—b and perhaps more broadly was _ problems with spi—b and perhaps more broadly was with scientists expressing their views publicly. if we look_ expressing their views publicly. if we look for example back at the schedule — we look for example back at the schedule of your notes on page 50, you say— schedule of your notes on page 50, you say that, sorry, may 2020, spi—b had to— you say that, sorry, may 2020, spi—b had to calm _ you say that, sorry, may 2020, spi—b had to calm them down about the role of advice _ had to calm them down about the role of advice over decisions, so that clearly— of advice over decisions, so that clearly at — of advice over decisions, so that clearly at division you have explain _ clearly at division you have explain. immediately afteranother explain. immediately after another article _ explain. immediately after another article in _ explain. immediately afteranother article in the guardian with quotes from _ article in the guardian with quotes from people and spi—b, disgraceful. if from people and spi—b, disgraceful. if part _ from people and spi—b, disgraceful. if part of— from people and spi—b, disgraceful. if part of the solution you're suggesting is that spi—b's view should — suggesting is that spi—b's view should be made public, why was it disgraceful that they were doing that _ disgraceful that they were doing that. , �* disgraceful that they were doing that. , ,, �* that. this wasn't spi-b, it was individuals _ that. this wasn't spi-b, it was individuals and _ that. this wasn't spi-b, it was individuals and spi-b. - that. this wasn't spi-b, it was individuals and spi-b. one - that. this wasn't spi-b, it was individuals and spi-b. one of| that. this wasn't spi-b, it was i individuals and spi-b. one of the individuals and spi—b. one of the problem that did occur was a very number of people, one, two or three, made policyjudgments very visible in the press and statements on existing and planned policy, including on occasions even discussion that had taken place in spi-b in discussion that had taken place in spi—b in the press. that had the effect of undermining spi—b and it undermined its —— undermine trust in spi-b in undermined its —— undermine trust in spi—b in government. my understanding discussions was that it also undermined the weight that spi-b it also undermined the weight that spi—b works sometimes because people were concerned about expressing their views for fear that that was then going to appear in a newspaper. this is my personaljudgment, there was too much policy, too much commentary on things that were behavioural science sometimes, and too many individuals who didn't distinguish between them as an individual and them as spi—b and sage. i think it is very difficult to run a government advisory committee if things are perpetually being discussed in the press. flan committee if things are perpetually being discussed in the press. cami being discussed in the press. can i ask ou being discussed in the press. can i ask you about _ being discussed in the press. can i ask you about a — being discussed in the press. can i ask you about a different - being discussed in the press. can i ask you about a different document that touches on the same issue, but this time _ that touches on the same issue, but this time in— that touches on the same issue, but this time in relation to sage itself rather— this time in relation to sage itself rather than spi—b? if you look at the bottom half, this is a treasury e-maii_ the bottom half, this is a treasury e—mail which summarises a sage meeting — e—mail which summarises a sage meeting. we see the first bullet point _ meeting. we see the first bullet point there we can see that the date was april— point there we can see that the date was april 2020. it says vallance started — was april 2020. it says vallance started the meeting by highlighting its seen _ started the meeting by highlighting its seen various reports in the media — its seen various reports in the media commenting on the science behind _ media commenting on the science behind the — media commenting on the science behind the government's approach. he highlighted that this wasn't helpful and said _ highlighted that this wasn't helpful and said that no one should be speaking — and said that no one should be speaking to the media. of course scientists— speaking to the media. of course scientists are independent and in that sense they had a right to speak to the _ that sense they had a right to speak to the media, but was this something to the media, but was this something to -o to the media, but was this something to go back— to the media, but was this something to go back to your point about spi-b, — to go back to your point about spi—b, which increases transparency and makes _ spi—b, which increases transparency and makes it easier for the government to be held to account, or is it as _ government to be held to account, or is it as you're — government to be held to account, or is it as you're suggesting here was it something that undermined the advice _ it something that undermined the advice function itself and therefore ought _ advice function itself and therefore ought to— advice function itself and therefore ought to be discouraged or even prohibited? | ought to be discouraged or even prohibited?— ought to be discouraged or even prohibited? i will take issue with the minute _ prohibited? i will take issue with the minute because _ prohibited? i will take issue with the minute because the - prohibited? i will take issue with the minute because the chair's l prohibited? i will take issue with i the minute because the chair's brief and the repeated commentary that was made up sage was any of you can speak to your own topic, your own expertise in the press and should feel free to do so, so we had a very open policy to people speaking to the press about their own areas of expertise. we ask that people did not comment on policy, because that then would confound the sage remit with their policy views and we would ask them to try not stray into areas that were not part of their expertise because that would reflect back on sage and we asked not to report on the discussions taking place in the meetings because the meetings would not come out by that stage. that is what the restriction was. it was absolutely not that people could not speak to the media and if you asked fiona fox from the science media centre, she would say there have been more scientists out speaking to the media to try to get them to understand than in any pandemic before. we encouraged where it was appropriate for people to go out and speak about their own area of expertise, but not policy. 50 of expertise, but not policy. so that is not an accurate summary of what _ that is not an accurate summary of what you _ that is not an accurate summary of what you would have said. there is more _ what you would have said. there is more nuanced traits. yes. with that nuance, _ more nuanced traits. yes. with that nuance, is _ more nuanced traits. yes. with that nuance, is at — more nuanced traits. yes. with that nuance, is at your reflection that that was— nuance, is at your reflection that that was the best way of dealing with this — that was the best way of dealing with this issue of how scientists should — with this issue of how scientists should speak publicly without being able to _ should speak publicly without being able to stop them completely? i don't know if it was the best, there may be better ways of doing it. i did know that it was very, very difficult when scientists spoke about policy and other areas because it then undermined trust in the committee is happy so that later in the pandemic with some departments and some ministers saying i would bring something to sage because it willjust bring something to sage because it will just leak bring something to sage because it willjust leak and people will talk about it. the science media centre felt that we got it about right. i'm not sure what more could be done here. i definitely believe that people should be free to speak about their own areas and i also believe that it their own areas and i also believe thatitis their own areas and i also believe that it is very difficult for a government committee to operate if people are apparently reporting government advisory views in the press outside the formal mechanisms. it becomes really difficult to build the trust required to get influence inside government.— the trust required to get influence inside government. thank you. we are auoin to inside government. thank you. we are going to stick — inside government. thank you. we are going to stick with _ inside government. thank you. we are going to stick with spi-b _ inside government. thank you. we are going to stick with spi-b but _ inside government. thank you. we are going to stick with spi-b but to - going to stick with spi—b but to related — going to stick with spi—b but to related issue, not so much them commenting publicly, but several of them _ commenting publicly, but several of them joining independent sage and for these _ them joining independent sage and for these purposes, perhaps we can look at _ for these purposes, perhaps we can look at some e—mail exchanges between — look at some e—mail exchanges between you and stewart wainwright. 197-131. _ between you and stewart wainwright. 197—131, please. if we can go on to the next page, please _ if we can go on to the next page, please yes. _ if we can go on to the next page, please. yes, we see at the top there an email— please. yes, we see at the top there an e—mailfrom please. yes, we see at the top there an e—mail from stewart wainwright, an e—mail from stewart wainwright, an exchange between him and james rubin, _ an exchange between him and james rubin, and _ an exchange between him and james rubin, and you can see that they are discussing _ rubin, and you can see that they are discussing the fact that i think at that stage a small number of members of spi-b_ that stage a small number of members of spi—b had joined sage, independent sage that is, mr wainwright says it issues real issues — wainwright says it issues real issues of— wainwright says it issues real issues of trust and policy makers to bring _ issues of trust and policy makers to bring things to committee as a safe space _ bring things to committee as a safe space if— bring things to committee as a safe space. if you look at the e—mail before — space. if you look at the e—mail before that, so back to the next page _ before that, so back to the next page you — before that, so back to the next page. you can see professor rubin saving _ page. you can see professor rubin saying that — page. you can see professor rubin saying that the hse will presumably want us _ saying that the hse will presumably want us to— saying that the hse will presumably want us to adopt membership arrangements, and that is the appropriate time for refreshed set of terms _ appropriate time for refreshed set of terms of reference. if we can look _ of terms of reference. if we can look at — of terms of reference. if we can look at a — of terms of reference. if we can look at a subsequent e—mail, this time _ look at a subsequent e—mail, this time it— look at a subsequent e—mail, this time it did — look at a subsequent e—mail, this time it did involve you. we see an email. _ time it did involve you. we see an email. two— time it did involve you. we see an e—mail, two thirds of the way down, from _ e—mail, two thirds of the way down, from you _ e—mail, two thirds of the way down, from you to — e—mail, two thirds of the way down, from you to professor you —— professor _ from you to professor you —— professor rubin. james, the effect is that— professor rubin. james, the effect is that government appointments are becoming _ is that government appointments are becoming very wary of putting things to spi-b _ becoming very wary of putting things to spi—b due to your risk of leaks or misuse — to spi—b due to your risk of leaks or misuse. we should think about how to deal— or misuse. we should think about how to deal with _ or misuse. we should think about how to deal with this bizarre behaviour. so, to deal with this bizarre behaviour. so. related — to deal with this bizarre behaviour. so, related problem, sir patrick. it is what— so, related problem, sir patrick. it is what we — so, related problem, sir patrick. it is what we see here at chilling effect, — is what we see here at chilling effect, that hmg becomes less wiiiing — effect, that hmg becomes less willing to ask questions of spi—b because — willing to ask questions of spi—b because, in this instance, there is a concern — because, in this instance, there is a concern about whether that information will simply be passed to independent sage? yes, information will simply be passed to independent sage?— information will simply be passed to independent sage? yes, i think that is what was happening. _ independent sage? yes, i think that is what was happening. there - independent sage? yes, i think that is what was happening. there were l is what was happening. there were confidential papers that came to spi-b confidential papers that came to spi—b and to sage and it was important that the people who put those papers then knew that they weren't going to disappear somewhere else and it was important that the outputs of those committees came to ministers with a chance for them to reflect upon them before it was widely articulated elsewhere. i'm second to none in my belief of academic freedom, but if you join a government committee it is slightly odd to then be on a committee that is set up to challenge the government committee. it doesn't seem quite right to me. hamlisch 20 was very good on this and said that they were focused on quite a lot of they were focused on quite a lot of the time to be focused on policy rather than science advice, with direct links to some of the papers that came confidentially to spi—b. there are some examples where there was a chilling effect where people didn't want to bring things to either sage or subcommittees as a result of either this or the transparency of publishing all of our minutes and papers. looking forward and _ our minutes and papers. looking forward and thinking _ our minutes and papers. looking forward and thinking about - our minutes and papers. looking forward and thinking about how, | our minutes and papers. looking i forward and thinking about how, as we stand _ forward and thinking about how, as we stand now, some of these committees have been disbanded, some others _ committees have been disbanded, some others are _ committees have been disbanded, some others are getting on with their work. _ others are getting on with their work. but — others are getting on with their work, but of course in an environment that is completely different and there is of the blaze of publicity, we don't hear santas debating — of publicity, we don't hear santas debating these issues in the press all the _ debating these issues in the press all the time, but as you have said there _ all the time, but as you have said there witi— all the time, but as you have said there will be another pandemic and we can— there will be another pandemic and we can imagine that similar circumstances might well arise. what have we _ circumstances might well arise. what have we learned from this experience? are there ways of controlling what scientists do? there — controlling what scientists do? there was a reference to the nervtag arrangements. i�*m there was a reference to the nervtag arrangements-— arrangements. i'm not entirely sure what the nervtag — arrangements. i'm not entirely sure what the nervtag arrangements - arrangements. i'm not entirely sure l what the nervtag arrangements were. there were guidelines on what you should and shouldn't do in terms of speaking to the press, and the rules that i said, please speak about your own area, but don't go outside that, and about membership of other organisations, that it needs to be declared upfront and there needs to be discussion with the chair before it is agreed whether that is appropriate or inappropriate. before it became public and it became difficult to deal with. let it became public and it became difficult to deal with.— it became public and it became difficult to deal with. let me move on, difficult to deal with. let me move on. although _ difficult to deal with. let me move on, although sticking _ difficult to deal with. let me move on, although sticking with - difficult to deal with. let me move on, although sticking with this - on, although sticking with this theme — on, although sticking with this theme of— on, although sticking with this theme of transparency. you talk on your witness statements about sage transparency and in particular we know— transparency and in particular we know that — transparency and in particular we know that at the outset the pandemic sage minutes, attendees of sage, was not something that was published, and this— not something that was published, and this was something you took on yourself— and this was something you took on yourself and after a few months that changed _ yourself and after a few months that changed and minutes and list of attendees were published. you describe — attendees were published. you describe that step in a very positive _ describe that step in a very positive way in your witness statement. he regarded it as important but a reputational matter but also _ important but a reputational matter but also i _ important but a reputational matter but also i think this is the context in which _ but also i think this is the context in which you raised it with spi—b as a of providing challenge and allowing people to understand whether the government had made appropriate decisions or not. yes, we made the _ appropriate decisions or not. yes, we made the decision _ appropriate decisions or not. yes, we made the decision to - appropriate decisions or not. yes we made the decision to publish the minutes in march and the backlog catch by may. i do think, and this has been put in the sage development plan, i think there should be a process for publishing minutes and papers as soon as is reasonable after the meeting, with some caveats. those would be national security, and if there was a need to delay things for a little bit to give ministers a chance to be able to consider policy options in advance. but i believe both the evidence for sage, but also more widely believed the scientific evidence that underpins advice to department should be made public, because that is what is —— that is what science does best. if it things out there, other scientists can challenge it, and that creates the right environment. i think that is a valuable thing and we had to go through quite a lot to make that happen during the pandemic, including operationally it is quite difficult to get these things done because zeek need to get permission from the authors, in the right format come up on the website, and that was with the team that was very busy doing other things. i describe it in the 100 day mission, it is about trying to get the rule sorted out in advance, not during the pandemic. he out in advance, not during the pandemic-— out in advance, not during the andemic. ,. , , ., pandemic. he described very well all the advantages _ pandemic. he described very well all the advantages that _ pandemic. he described very well all the advantages that flow _ pandemic. he described very well all the advantages that flow from - pandemic. he described very well all the advantages that flow from this i the advantages that flow from this policy— the advantages that flow from this policy of— the advantages that flow from this policy of transparency, but there are problems that come with it, are there _ are problems that come with it, are there not? — are problems that come with it, are there not? one of them is the problem — there not? one of them is the problem we have just been discussing in the _ problem we have just been discussing in the context of spi—b, which is a chilling _ in the context of spi—b, which is a chilling effect. if we look at your notes. _ chilling effect. if we look at your notes. i— chilling effect. if we look at your notes, i will ask you, but at least on the _ notes, i will ask you, but at least on the face — notes, i will ask you, but at least on the face of it, it seems that this policy— on the face of it, it seems that this policy of transparency did indeed — this policy of transparency did indeed create this type of chilling effect _ indeed create this type of chilling effect with sage itself during the pandemic. if we can go to the schedule _ pandemic. if we can go to the schedule and look at three references, first of all this one. this— references, first of all this one. this is— references, first of all this one. this is in— references, first of all this one. this is injune 2020 and she writes, you refer— this is injune 2020 and she writes, you refer to— this is injune 2020 and she writes, you refer to a — this is injune 2020 and she writes, you refer to a paper given to number ten, you— you refer to a paper given to number ten. you say— you refer to a paper given to number ten, you say someone has completely rewritten _ ten, you say someone has completely rewritten it. _ ten, you say someone has completely rewritten it, they have just cherry picked. _ rewritten it, they have just cherry picked, quite extraordinary. then for our— picked, quite extraordinary. then for our purposes here, apparently simon _ for our purposes here, apparently simon case, i can't remember at that stage. _ simon case, i can't remember at that stage. he _ simon case, i can't remember at that stage, he was a permanent secretary within_ stage, he was a permanent secretary within the — stage, he was a permanent secretary within the cabinet office at that point, _ within the cabinet office at that point, simon kay said don't bring new schools advice questions to sage as the _ new schools advice questions to sage as the minutes get published. if you move _ as the minutes get published. if you move onto _ as the minutes get published. if you move onto page 102. another note, the secretary of state for education says don't— the secretary of state for education says don't ask sage as minutes get published — says don't ask sage as minutes get published. then, moving forward a few months, both of those references were in— few months, both of those references were injune, we can move forward to october— were injune, we can move forward to october on _ were injune, we can move forward to october on a — were injune, we can move forward to october on a similar theme, apparently the cabinet office now cautious— apparently the cabinet office now cautious about putting things to sage _ cautious about putting things to sage because we publish it all. that is a very— sage because we publish it all. that is a very bad — sage because we publish it all. that is a very bad outcome. it is a bad outcome — is a very bad outcome. it is a bad outcome i— is a very bad outcome. it is a bad outcome. ijust want to ask is a very bad outcome. it is a bad outcome. i just want to ask for your reflections — outcome. i just want to ask for your reflections on where the balances. for all— reflections on where the balances. for all the — reflections on where the balances. for all the reasons you have given there _ for all the reasons you have given there is— for all the reasons you have given there is a — for all the reasons you have given there is a lot to be said for publishing the minutes, but on the other— publishing the minutes, but on the other hand — publishing the minutes, but on the other hand if the consequence of publishing the minutes of an advisory— publishing the minutes of an advisory body is that its customers don't _ advisory body is that its customers don't come — advisory body is that its customers don't come to it for advice any more. — don't come to it for advice any more. isn't _ don't come to it for advice any more, isn't that something of a mixed — more, isn't that something of a mixed situation? on more, isn't that something of a mixed situation?— more, isn't that something of a mixed situation? on the very first one ou mixed situation? on the very first one you read _ mixed situation? on the very first one you read out, _ mixed situation? on the very first one you read out, about - mixed situation? on the very first. one you read out, about somebody rewriting the science, that was an internal paper in cabinet office and that rewrite never went anywhere. but this is a very important question and there is no doubt that dfe took this view at times, and cabinet office, there was an alarm that that might happen. i don't think in the end it stopped us doing anything on schools that we wanted to do, but it did mean sometimes we didn't get precise questions. i do think it is a problem and i don't know what the answer to it is, but i believe there is a cultural issue which can be overcome which is the more the principle is accepted that the evidence is published, not the policy position, but the evidence, the better government policy would be. the more that happens during normal time, the more it will become a culturally acceptable and rigid gas reasonable thing. there is a fear sometimes that if the evidence is out there it will force a minister because my hand. i think you need to give ministers time to do things before it becomes public, but my approach has been, and i have had this discussion during peacetime government as well as during the pandemic, is that the evidence itself can neither be harmful nor beneficial, just is it is. provided all of the evidence is published, ministers are free to completely do something different. it is a worry and it was a concern particularly during this period, but i don't think the answer is to reach for more redaction or more secrecy around this. i think it is to get into a normalised position where evidence publication is seen as the right route. evidence publication is seen as the riaht route. ., evidence publication is seen as the right route-— evidence publication is seen as the riaht route. ., , .,, , . right route. you emphasise evidence in contrast to — right route. you emphasise evidence in contrast to advice. _ right route. you emphasise evidence in contrast to advice. what _ right route. you emphasise evidence in contrast to advice. what we - right route. you emphasise evidence in contrast to advice. what we have l in contrast to advice. what we have seen _ in contrast to advice. what we have seen in _ in contrast to advice. what we have seen in these extracts about the sage _ seen in these extracts about the sage minutes being published. surely those minutes contain advice. the minutes those minutes contain advice. iie: minutes usually those minutes contain advice. tie: minutes usually contain evidence those minutes contain advice. ti9 minutes usually contain evidence and haveit minutes usually contain evidence and have it couched in terms of if the aim is to do x, then the following would be necessary. given the state of the pandemic at the moment, without a decrease it is likely to lead to the following situations. it is usually not the case that it is giving direct advice on precisely what the science is suggesting a minister should do. we what the science is suggesting a minister should do.— what the science is suggesting a minister should do. we don't want to slit hairs minister should do. we don't want to split hairs about _ minister should do. we don't want to split hairs about this, _ minister should do. we don't want to split hairs about this, but _ minister should do. we don't want to split hairs about this, but thinking i split hairs about this, but thinking about— split hairs about this, but thinking about the — split hairs about this, but thinking about the practical situation that in this— about the practical situation that in this case the department for education — in this case the department for education seem to have been in, the thought— education seem to have been in, the thought process appears to be we have this — thought process appears to be we have this policy that we are considering, why don't we ask sage about— considering, why don't we ask sage about it _ considering, why don't we ask sage about it. one reason not to ask them about— about it. one reason not to ask them about it _ about it. one reason not to ask them about it is _ about it. one reason not to ask them about it is if— about it. one reason not to ask them about it is if we do their minutes will record — about it is if we do their minutes will record that discussion and you can call— will record that discussion and you can call it — will record that discussion and you can call it evidence if you like, but anyone _ can call it evidence if you like, but anyone reading it will see if this is— but anyone reading it will see if this is the — but anyone reading it will see if this is the view that they took, if it is a _ this is the view that they took, if it is a bad — this is the view that they took, if it is a bad idea, and that means if we go _ it is a bad idea, and that means if we go ahead with it, people will criticise — we go ahead with it, people will criticise it~ — we go ahead with it, people will criticise it.— criticise it. that is the problem. a . ain, criticise it. that is the problem. again. the _ criticise it. that is the problem. again, the more _ criticise it. that is the problem. again, the more you _ criticise it. that is the problem. again, the more you focus i criticise it. that is the problem. again, the more you focus on i criticise it. that is the problem. | again, the more you focus on at criticise it. that is the problem. i again, the more you focus on at -- again, the more you focus on at —— on evidence rather than advice it is a problem. i don't know what the answer to it is. my instinct is that greater transparency is helpful all round in my experience from the pandemic was that, in the end, none of these came to be a problem. in other words, of these came to be a problem. in otherwords, dfe of these came to be a problem. in other words, dfe did tried not to bring things to sage, we overcame that and they did bring them and we also did work on it. there were bumps on the road, they want blocks. stuart wainwright laid out the pros and cons in his evidence. i would not wish to see less transparency of the science evidence. let not wish to see less transparency of the science evidence.— not wish to see less transparency of the science evidence. let me ask you briefly about — the science evidence. let me ask you briefly about a _ the science evidence. let me ask you briefly about a similar— the science evidence. let me ask you briefly about a similar but _ the science evidence. let me ask you briefly about a similar but slightly i briefly about a similar but slightly different — briefly about a similar but slightly different issue. here we are discussing the question of whether sage _ discussing the question of whether sage were asked at all about issue. there _ sage were asked at all about issue. there was— sage were asked at all about issue. there was another issue that emerges from the _ there was another issue that emerges from the notes where sage was asked about— from the notes where sage was asked about their— from the notes where sage was asked about their advice was either ignored _ about their advice was either ignored or even apparently attempts made _ ignored or even apparently attempts made to— ignored or even apparently attempts made to change their advice. can we look at _ made to change their advice. can we look at some — made to change their advice. can we look at some entries in your schedule _ look at some entries in your schedule please. first of all, page 56. schedule please. first of all, page 56 so _ schedule please. first of all, page 56 so here — schedule please. first of all, page 56. so here we have a comment that we have _ 56. so here we have a comment that we have been excluded from the pm's strategy— we have been excluded from the pm's strategy meeting. chris is sure that it is because the economic secretariat in the cabinet office want _ secretariat in the cabinet office want to — secretariat in the cabinet office want to be able to present things about— want to be able to present things about reopening without us contradicting them. page 94, please. due to _ contradicting them. page 94, please. due to metre rule meeting made it abundantly clear that no one in number— abundantly clear that no one in number ten abundantly clear that no one in numberten with a abundantly clear that no one in number ten with a cabinet office had really— number ten with a cabinet office had really read _ number ten with a cabinet office had really read or taken time to understand the science advice. quite extraordinary. page 98 please. number— extraordinary. page 98 please. number ten pushing hard on releasing measures. _ number ten pushing hard on releasing measures, they are pushing very hard and want _ measures, they are pushing very hard and want the — measures, they are pushing very hard and want the science altered. we need _ and want the science altered. we need to— and want the science altered. we need to hold onto your hats, there will likely— need to hold onto your hats, there will likely be a second peak. page 112. will likely be a second peak. page 112~ in _ will likely be a second peak. page 112~ in the — will likely be a second peak. page 112. in the economic meeting earlier in the _ 112. in the economic meeting earlier in the day— 112. in the economic meeting earlier in the day they didn't realise cm was there — in the day they didn't realise cm was there and the chancellor said it is all— was there and the chancellor said it is all about— was there and the chancellor said it is all about handling the scientists, not handling the virus. they— scientists, not handling the virus. they then — scientists, not handling the virus. they then got flustered when the cmo chipped _ they then got flustered when the cmo chipped in _ they then got flustered when the cmo chipped in. all of these around may, june, _ chipped in. all of these around may, june, july, _ chipped in. all of these around may, june, july, reopening in 2020. the common— june, july, reopening in 2020. the common theme is that either sage is being _ common theme is that either sage is being ignored or it is not being asked — being ignored or it is not being asked or— being ignored or it is not being asked or even a suggestion that the sage _ asked or even a suggestion that the sage should be handled in some way, that their— sage should be handled in some way, that their advice should be altered. was there — that their advice should be altered. was there a feeling particularly at that time — was there a feeling particularly at that time that perhaps you weren't being _ that time that perhaps you weren't being asked for your advice in good faith? _ being asked for your advice in good faith? i_ being asked for your advice in good faith? ~' , faith? i think there were definitely eriods faith? i think there were definitely periods when _ faith? i think there were definitely periods when it _ faith? i think there were definitely periods when it was _ faith? i think there were definitely periods when it was clear - faith? i think there were definitely periods when it was clear that i faith? i think there were definitely periods when it was clear that the | periods when it was clear that the unwelcome advice we were given was as expected, not loved. that meant we had to work doubly hard to make sure that the science evidence and advice was being properly heard. it doesn't surprise me that there were meetings that we were not included in. that's normal. we were probably a number ten for in. that's normal. we were probably a numberten foran in. that's normal. we were probably a number ten for an hour and there were things going on holiday, and political decisions as well, so it is not surprising we weren't invited to things sometimes. there were times when, because we were giving unpalatable evidence and advice, people would rather not hear it. i think that is probably a normal part of politics and ourjob was to make sure that we weren't in the politics, we were continuing to make that as vice as hard as we could make it. i now ask for your view, did you feel that you were in some way being manipulated or handled or that your advice, people were asking you to change it?— that your advice, people were asking you to change it? nobody nobody got us to change — you to change it? nobody nobody got us to change our— you to change it? nobody nobody got us to change our advice. _ us to change our advice. an — us to change our advice. an example of somebody putting pressure on us to do it, we wouldn't do it. there is a whatsapp exchange where matt hancock asked me to change something and i said no, we are not going to change our advice because that is where the evidence bit comes in. you have to at least eight, even if you don't want to do it. but i'm absolutely sure because politicians are politicians that there were attempts to manage as and make sure that we were not always given the access that we might need overall, i think we managed to get through all that and make sure that the advice and evidence was heard, so i don't know what damage it did. i'm not sure exactly what i would recommend for the future on that because it seems to me that is partly the nature of the way the political system seems to operate. one thing we do know your evidences that around _ one thing we do know your evidences that around this time, the period 'ust that around this time, the period just after— that around this time, the period just after it, there were a series of government initiatives in respect to which— of government initiatives in respect to which stage was not asked to provide — to which stage was not asked to provide advice, eat out to help out in the _ provide advice, eat out to help out in the summer of 2020, the tears, the rule _ in the summer of 2020, the tears, the rule of— in the summer of 2020, the tears, the rule of six later in the year. do you — the rule of six later in the year. do you know whether the type of thinking — do you know whether the type of thinking that is evidenced in these notes _ thinking that is evidenced in these notes was — thinking that is evidenced in these notes was part of the reason why you want asked? — patrick vallance giving evidence to covid—19 inquiry, he was chief science adviser to the government at the time, working through his diary. speaking at the public inquiry, sir patrick vallance expressed i'm not convinced that there was a very effective operational response to that. speaking at the public inquiry, sir patrick vallance expressed concerns about early government reaction to the looming threat of the virus. rishi sunak says the government's attention is turning to cutting tax, with two days until the autumn statement. a safety incident on a royal navy nuclear sub — we'll explain what we know about what happened. singer shakira pays millions to avoid trial in spain after facing fraud allegations. and some of the dark hedges made famous by game of thrones are facing the chop. we'll tell you why. and coming up on bbc news: gareth southgate says performance is the priority for his england side ahead of their final euro qualifier against north macedonia, with their place already assured. good afternoon and welcome to the bbc news at one. sir patrick vallance, the government's chief scientific

Related Keywords

Spi B , Advice , Government , Spi , Others , Fact , Dominic Cummings , Alex Deakin , Things , Decision , Input , Income , Science , Areas , Area , Accountability , Same , Senate , Four , Behavioural Science , Lessons , Evidence , Spi B One , Politicians , Point , Teams , Positive , One , People , Number , Scientists , Thing , A Group , Of Scientists , Ten , Outcome , Papers , Outcome , That , Public Domain , Decisions , Li Qian , Route , Group , Deviating , Ministers , Attention , Officials , Wasn T , Theme , Some , Solution , U Were Ignored , Everybody , Tip , Pick , Clearand , Don T Ask Sage , Transparency , Problems , Approach , Documents , Sage , Page , Notes , Views , Schedule , Example , Broadly , 50 , Article , Role , Quotes , Guardian , Division , 2020 , May 2020 , View , Part , Public , Problem , Press , Wasn T Spi B , Individuals , Statements , Made Policyjudgments , Spi B That , Three , Two , Policy , Discussion , Place , Spi B In The Press , Occasions , It , Effect , Trust , Discussions , Weight , Its , Fear , Personaljudgment , Newspaper , Commentary , Didn T , Individual , Issue , Being , The Press , Document , Flan Committee , Government Advisory Committee , Cami , Half , Relation , Touches , E Mail , Meeting , Vallance , Bullet Point , Sage Meeting , April 2020 , To The Media , Science , Reports , Course , Media , Something , Course Scientists , Right , Sense , Account , Advice Function , Function , Expertise , Chair , Topic , Policy Views , Sage Remit , Meetings , Stage , Fiona Fox , Restriction , Science Media Centre , Pandemic , Summary , Traits , Yes , Way , Reflection , Nuance , Dealing , Best , Committee , Ways , It Willjust , Departments , It Willjust Leak , Government Committee , Influence , Advisory , Mechanisms , Several , Purposes , Stewart Wainwright , 197 , 131 , Whatsapp , Stewart Wainwright , Professor Rubin , Top , E Mailfrom , Members , Rubin , Spi B , Issues , Space , Makers , Professor , Hse , Safe Space , Reference , Terms Of Reference , Saying , Membership Arrangements , James , It Look , Down , Behaviour , Misuse , Leaks , Risk , Government Appointments , Patrick , Chilling Effect , Deal , Hmg , Questions , Concern , Information , Instance , Wiiiing Effect , Somewhere , Committees , Chance , None , Outputs , Elsewhere , Belief , It Doesn T , Freedom , Hamlisch 20 , 20 , Lot , Science Advice , Links , Examples , Subcommittees , Thinking , Result , Work , Publicity , Environment , Santas , Blaze , Witi , Experience , Circumstances , Nervtag , Controlling , Arrangements , Shouldn , Terms , Rules , Nervtag Arrangements , Guidelines , Membership , Organisations , Don T Go , It , Attendees , Sage Transparency , Witness , Outset , Step , Witness Statement , Yourself , List , Matter , Context , Challenge , Think , Sage Development Plan , Put , Backlog Catch , May , Need , Process , Caveats , Security , Advance , Bit , Policy Options , It Things , Department , Permission , Zeek , Rule , Team , Website , Format , Authors , 100 , Advantages , Flow , Type , Face , References , Someone , Paper , Injune 2020 , Cherry , Apparently Simon Case , Cabinet Office , Schools , Isn T Don , Secretary , Permanent Secretary , Simon Case , Simon Kay , Secretary Of State , Education , Both , Note , 102 , Injune , Were Injune , Reasons , Balances , Reflections Outcome , Reflections , The Reflections On , Ijust , More , Customers , Hand , Hand Publishing , Publishing , The Minutes , Advisory Body , Body , Consequence , Situation , Isn T , Rewrite , Somebody Rewriting , Anywhere , One Ou , Times , Dfe , Us , Question , Alarm , In The End , Doing Anything , No Doubt , Answer , Government Policy , Policy Position , Principle , Minister , Peacetime , Wall , Worry , Beneficial , Publication , Secrecy , Normalised Position , Redaction , Riaht Route , Contrast , Evidence Publication , Extracts , Estate , Sex , Following , Aim , Tie , Iie , Case , Situations , Decrease , Hairs , Slit Hairs Minister , Department For Education , Reason , Why Don T We Ask Sage , It Evidence , Idea , Anyone , Record , This , Instinct , We Go , Rain , Words , Ground , Otherwords , The End , Stuart Wainwright , On The Road , Cons , Blocks , Pros , Science Evidence , Similar , Whether , Wish , Comment , Entries , Strategy , Chris , 56 , Secretariat , Reopening , Cabinet Office Want To Secretariat , 94 , No One , Due To Metre Rule , Measures , 98 , Peak , Cm , Hats , 112 , Virus , Chancellor , Cmo , Suggestion , Common , June , July , Feeling , Weren T , Faith , I , We Weren T , Holiday , Numberten Foran In , Politics , Ourjob , Nobody , Somebody , Pressure , Matt Hancock , Attempts , Eight , Access , Nature , System , Respect , Government Initiatives , Dust , Series , Tears , Summer , Six , Patrick Vallance , Covid 19 Inquiry , 19 , Science Adviser , Diary , Response , Public Inquiry , Autumn Statement , Concerns , Threat , Tax , Safety Incident , Reaction , Royal Navy , Rishi Sunak , Shakira , Trial , Millions , Fraud Allegations , Spain , Dark Hedges Made Famous , Chop , Game Of Thrones , England , Gareth Southgate , Priority , Performance , Euro Qualifier , Bbc News , North Macedonia , Afternoon , Bbc News At One , Chief Scientific ,