not pass it on. there is a different thing again. actually quite an important distinction.- thing again. actually quite an important distinction. when you have a dress that as _ important distinction. when you have a dress that as well. _ important distinction. when you have a dress that as well. in _ important distinction. when you have a dress that as well. in your- a dress that as well. in your statement. —— and you have addressed that. statement. —— and you have addressed that and _ statement. —— and you have addressed that. and there was a stock—take meeting. — that. and there was a stock—take meeting, the meeting to which she referred _ meeting, the meeting to which she referred earlier, that is,, i think, 146558, — referred earlier, that is,, i think, 146558, a — referred earlier, that is,, i think, 146558, a letter from imran shafi, who reported on the meeting, a meeting — who reported on the meeting, a meeting between yourself and the prime _ meeting between yourself and the prime minister, the secretary of state, _ prime minister, the secretary of state, and — prime minister, the secretary of state, and a number of advisers and colleagues — state, and a number of advisers and colleagues. including the national security— colleagues. including the national security adviser. the second paragraph on that page, it is, as it happens. — paragraph on that page, it is, as it happens, the only substantive paragraph that deals with coronavirus. we began with a short update _ coronavirus. we began with a short update on — coronavirus. we began with a short update on coronavirus, following an update _ update on coronavirus, following an update from the cmo, the prime minister— update from the cmo, the prime minister stressed the need to to continue — minister stressed the need to to continue to explain our stance, to main _ continue to explain our stance, to main definite maintain public confidence in the plan. may we presume — confidence in the plan. may we presume that as a reference to the government plan, whatever it might have treen— government plan, whatever it might have been by that date? and for travel— have been by that date? and for travel restrictions, your secretary of state _ travel restrictions, your secretary of state was engaging in a foreign, weatth— of state was engaging in a foreign, wealth office and would defer with a proposal— wealth office and would defer with a proposal forward, wealth office and would defer with a proposalforward, but wealth office and would defer with a proposal forward, but in truth, on the border, — proposal forward, but in truth, on the border, closures or significant restrictions— the border, closures or significant restrictions had already been advised — restrictions had already been advised upon, at least in the first instance. — advised upon, at least in the first instance, because it came back again and again _ instance, because it came back again and again. and will require an assessment of what constitutes a proportion of response, please keep number— proportion of response, please keep number 10 _ proportion of response, please keep number 10 closely involved on responses in the coming days. there would _ responses in the coming days. there would not _ responses in the coming days. there would not appear, on the face of that paragraph, to be much by the way in _ that paragraph, to be much by the way in the — that paragraph, to be much by the way in the way of threat, as you describe — way in the way of threat, as you describe l— way in the way of threat, as you describe. ., way in the way of threat, as you describe. . . . , describe. i agree. can i give a bit of commentary. _ describe. i agree. can i give a bit of commentary, because - describe. i agree. can i give a bit of commentary, because i - describe. i agree. can i give a bit of commentary, because i think. describe. i agree. can i give a bit i of commentary, because i think this is a fundamental issue, not as individuals and want to be clear, i think the private secretary is doing what he should do, he is a outstanding private secretary, he was, and subsequently... you have a situation where the chief medical officer and, as you know from other documents, reported to the prime minister that there was a possibility, wasn't a certainty, of a pandemic, and if this pandemic occurred, my view was it was reasonable to think that this is not the same as a reasonable worst—case tomorrow. the same as a reasonable worst-case tomorrow. ., . . the same as a reasonable worst-case tomorrow. . , , . , ., tomorrow. please be much slower, in this important — tomorrow. please be much slower, in this important issue. _ tomorrow. please be much slower, in this important issue. it _ tomorrow. please be much slower, in this important issue. it was _ this important issue. it was reasonable _ this important issue. it was reasonable to _ this important issue. it was reasonable to think - this important issue. it was reasonable to think that - this important issue. it was reasonable to think that we this important issue. it was - reasonable to think that we would be looking on a first pass, at maybe ice—300,000 deaths. to looking on a first pass, at maybe loo—300,000 deaths. to be clear, thatis loo—300,000 deaths. to be clear, that is pretty accurate to where we are, sadly now. i wasn't saying this was for certain. the important second point, this was not some maverick coming in and saying this, this was on the basis of the sage meeting, chaired by the government scientific adviser, cobra had met, the world health organization has by now declared it a public health emergency of international concern, it was all over the news. the point i would like to make on this, because i think this is actually something where we really do need to think very seriously in government, is that let us say, the general director of mi5 or the chief of staff, come in and said, there is a possibility of 100,000 plus people sadly dying from a terrorist attack from attack —— attack on the uk, the chances that this would have been the response in the letter, and this is what the system would have continued, as it did, next cobra meeting, still chaired by the secretary of state for health and social care, i think is quite small. the recent making that point is that this was not a new consideration. pandemic infection, flu, this is very similar to pandemic flu, has been top of the national risk register for years. been top of the national risk registerfor years. this is not a new potential threat. my worry has always been and, i think, this innocence reflects it, the political threat, are treated in a different way, and might view entirely, this is not a criticism, to ones which are seen as natural threats, all hazards —— or hazards. that i think is something that is collectively that we should think about. without prescribing us to any person. i think the same it could very easily have happened under a number of prime ministers and with a number of others in the room. this is not a statement about the individuals, this is a statement about the system, in my view, underplaying, relative to other threats, the natural threats, including health threats. i think that is quite a fundamental point, because had we had the centre of government electrified by this, i'm not saying the outcome would have been different, but i think it would at least have led to a stronger government think through of all the potential consequences. there government think through of all the potential consequences.— potential consequences. there is a lot in that. — potential consequences. there is a lot in that. a _ potential consequences. there is a lot in that, a professor. _ potential consequences. there is a lot in that, a professor. can - potential consequences. there is a lot in that, a professor. can i- potential consequences. there is a lot in that, a professor. can ijustl lot in that, a professor. can ijust divide _ lot in that, a professor. can ijust divide it— lot in that, a professor. can ijust divide it up— lot in that, a professor. can ijust divide it up briefly? in terms of the system, the inquiry had a degree of evidence _ the system, the inquiry had a degree of evidence in module one, about how the government system is differently designed _ the government system is differently designed depending on whether it is dealing _ designed depending on whether it is dealing with a threat, a terrorist outrage, — dealing with a threat, a terrorist outrage, for example, as opposed to a risi absence _ absence of perhaps an equally or the absence equally sophisticated, ? absence of perhaps an equally or the absence equally sophisticated,? or speedy— absence equally sophisticated,? or speedy system, by which threats can be speedily responded to? in the context— be speedily responded to? in the context of risks and public health emergencies?— emergencies? yes, and this is something _ emergencies? yes, and this is something which _ emergencies? yes, and this is something which was - emergencies? yes, and this is something which was already l emergencies? yes, and this is i something which was already top emergencies? yes, and this is - something which was already top of the national risk register. with understood consequential or across government. and this is probably way we could have moved up a gear or two. across government, and, as i say, i don't suppose this is a personal problem, i suppose this as a systemic problem. you personal problem, i suppose this as a systemic problem.— personal problem, i suppose this as a systemic problem. you have made that oint a systemic problem. you have made that point and _ a systemic problem. you have made that point and i'm _ a systemic problem. you have made that point and i'm not _ a systemic problem. you have made that point and i'm not suggesting i that point and i'm not suggesting that point and i'm not suggesting that this — that point and i'm not suggesting that this is a personal problem. the failure, _ that this is a personal problem. the failure, and — that this is a personal problem. the failure, and if it is, we will debate _ failure, and if it is, we will debate that, then it if it was part of any— debate that, then it if it was part of any individual, but putting aside a very— of any individual, but putting aside a very valid — of any individual, but putting aside a very valid point about whether or not this— a very valid point about whether or not this might have been a different reaction. _ not this might have been a different reaction. it— not this might have been a different reaction, if this had been a national— reaction, if this had been a national crisis, the fact remains that the — national crisis, the fact remains that the massive threat that you describe, — that the massive threat that you describe, is not apparent on the face _ describe, is not apparent on the face of— describe, is not apparent on the face of this— describe, is not apparent on the face of this paragraph. nobody in government appears to have been electrified, to use your word, by the information that there was a massive — the information that there was a massive threat. why was that? i massive threat. why was that? think, in a massive threat. why was that? i think, in a sense, that is my point, is the system is, it is a surprisingly bad, in my view, responding to threats of this kind, which are in the national—security system. i do not think that is an insoluble problem, and i think it is largely to do with the way that the national security apparatus, interprets its role, and i think we can properly make significant changes. can properly make significant chances. ., . , . , changes. you have repeatedly said, we, we in government. _ changes. you have repeatedly said, we, we in government. you, - we, we in government. you, personally, did you see this letter after the meeting, the stock meeting on the _ after the meeting, the stock meeting on the 4th— after the meeting, the stock meeting on the 4th of february? it after the meeting, the stock meeting on the 4th of february?— on the 4th of february? it wouldn't have particularly _ on the 4th of february? it wouldn't have particularly surprise _ on the 4th of february? it wouldn't have particularly surprise me - on the 4th of february? it wouldn't have particularly surprise me if i i have particularly surprise me if i had. have particularly surprise me ifi had. ., . ., . have particularly surprise me ifi had. ., ., ., ., , had. you had, you would have seen this paragraph _ had. you had, you would have seen this paragraph that _ had. you had, you would have seen this paragraph that there _ had. you had, you would have seen this paragraph that there was - had. you had, you would have seen this paragraph that there was a - this paragraph that there was a complete absence to the necessary, of the _ complete absence to the necessary, of the necessary electrification, that there was a complete absence of any understanding that the threat to the united kingdom was of that magnitude. as you have described, a massive _ magnitude. as you have described, a massive threat. would you not have picked _ massive threat. would you not have picked up _ massive threat. would you not have picked up the phone and said to somebody in downing street, you have completely— somebody in downing street, you have completely failed to understand the significance of this threat? the emergency that this constitutes? the magnitude _ emergency that this constitutes? the magnitude of this crisis? | emergency that this constitutes? the magnitude of this crisis?— magnitude of this crisis? i think that the response _ magnitude of this crisis? i think that the response and - magnitude of this crisis? i think that the response and you, - magnitude of this crisis? i think that the response and you, i - magnitude of this crisis? i think i that the response and you, i think you have seen the toing and froing, was to debate which hundreds and thousands was the correct hundreds and thousands, which did not strike me as material, but i was not aware of it at the time. it is neither here nor there. is of it at the time. it is neither here nor there.— of it at the time. it is neither here nor there. , . . ., here nor there. is that reference to the text messages _ here nor there. is that reference to the text messages between - here nor there. is that reference to the text messages between certain chris wormald?— the text messages between certain chris wormald? yes, and it's a chris wormald was _ chris wormald? yes, and it's a chris wormald was trying _ chris wormald? yes, and it's a chris wormald was trying to _ chris wormald? yes, and it's a chris wormald was trying to push - chris wormald? 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 threat, there was a hugely important system... was there a failure, _ hugely important system... was there a failure, was there not? hugely important system. .. was there a failure, was there not?— a failure, was there not? there was a failure, was there not? there was a big question. _ a failure, was there not? there was a big question, about— a failure, was there not? there was a big question, about if— a failure, was there not? there was a big question, about if there - a failure, was there not? there was a big question, about if there a - a big question, about if there a difference as to what would have transpired, because i don't think we need to draw that line to family, but i certainly think that it would have been something which... let me be mealy—mouthed about it, under ideal circumstances, there would have been a different response. for educational training, have been a different response. for educationaltraining, how would have been a different response. for educational training, how would you change _ educational training, how would you change the — educational training, how would you change the approach _ educational training, how would you change the approach to _ educational training, how would you change the approach to a _ educational training, how would you change the approach to a terrorist . change the approach to a terrorist threat _ change the approach to a terrorist threat in — change the approach to a terrorist threat in a — change the approach to a terrorist threat in a natural— change the approach to a terrorist threat in a natural habitat? - change the approach to a terrorist threat in a natural habitat? [- change the approach to a terrorist threat in a natural habitat? i would start out with _ threat in a natural habitat? i would start out with the _ threat in a natural habitat? i would start out with the level _ threat in a natural habitat? i would start out with the level of - threat in a natural habitat? i would start out with the level of damage | start out with the level of damage that the uk would sustain, and start from that, rather than which type of threat it is that we are talking about? because the terrorist threat, for example, threat in a generic sense, ratherthan for example, threat in a generic sense, rather than more narrowly, i think that it... the people in the security apparatus in at number 10 and in other areas, security apparatus in at number 10 and in otherareas, cabinet security apparatus in at number 10 and in other areas, cabinet office, either kind of work that, for example, the uk health security agency does, with the same degree of interest and importance, as they would view, rightly, mi5, special branch, all these kinds of things? and my personal view is, i don't think they do. i think the should be seen as national security problems when they are on this scale, but on a small incident, i think it is perfectly reasonable to take it differently. if we're talking about something is clearly going to have an impact across the whole of government, including very obviously on the economy, in addition to substantial loss of life, education, all these kinds of things, then i think there is a strong argument for saying, why do we not put them, in a sense, on an equal footing, saying, why do we not put them, in a sense, on an equalfooting, in saying, why do we not put them, in a sense, on an equal footing, in terms of the degree of impact they will have on society?— of the degree of impact they will have on society? how do you give them a foot _ have on society? how do you give them a foot in? _ have on society? how do you give them a foot in? is _ have on society? how do you give them a foot in? is at _ have on society? how do you give them a foot in? is at the - have on society? how do you give them a foot in? is at the question of training, — them a foot in? is at the question oftraining. or— them a foot in? is at the question of training, or is _ them a foot in? is at the question of training, or is it— them a foot in? is at the question of training, or is it the _ them a foot in? is at the question of training, or is it the question . of training, or is it the question of training, or is it the question of saving. — of training, or is it the question of saving. when _ of training, or is it the question of saying, when it _ of training, or is it the question of saying, when it does - of training, or is it the question| of saying, when it does become of training, or is it the question . of saying, when it does become a national— of saying, when it does become a national security— of saying, when it does become a national security threat, - of saying, when it does become a national security threat, given - of saying, when it does become a| national security threat, given the level— national security threat, given the level of— national security threat, given the level of potential— national security threat, given the level of potential consequences, i national security threat, given the . level of potential consequences, the national— level of potential consequences, the national adviser,? _ level of potential consequences, the nationaladviser,? how— level of potential consequences, the national adviser, ? how do _ level of potential consequences, the national adviser, ? how do you? - level of potential consequences, the national adviser, ? how do you? [n l national adviser, ? how do you? reality, the only people who can actually operate dominic there are three departments who operate across all government, where government needs to do something, number 10, obviously, treasury, and cabinet office. my view is that should this should have led to them saying, this is not your problem health, this is a huge problem for the system. this is not to say that they want excellent people in the cabinet, in the civil contingencies secretariat, it was that there was no interest from cabinet, individuals and cabinet, but in my view, it was not seized in the way that a similar kind of level of existential threats would have been from another direction. and i think... it is very dangerous for me as a chief medical officer to start doing the job of a cabinet secretary, because i'm clearly not, but what i do think we need to do, is think through, actually, how do we get this very quickly, so it is able to take the necessary steps? you could say, this is secretary for the secretary of state for health, the type cobra meetings, and in my view, this is not how it feels. and i feel this letter is a pretty clear indication of that. ijust letter is a pretty clear indication of that. i just do letter is a pretty clear indication of that. ijust do not letter is a pretty clear indication of that. i just do not think this would have been the letter under different circumstances and the way i talk about it for the... others may disagree, but i think the inquiry will want to take a look at this, but ijust want inquiry will want to take a look at this, but i just want to see this... before the break, may ask you to consider— before the break, may ask you to consider the question i put earlier, your answer— consider the question i put earlier, your answer was not unhelpful, but it did _ your answer was not unhelpful, but it did not _ your answer was not unhelpful, but it did not address the question, which _ it did not address the question, which is, — it did not address the question, which is, on the premise that, on the basis — which is, on the premise that, on the basis that there was however one might— the basis that there was however one might describe it, there was a system — might describe it, there was a system failure or the failure to acknowledge the existential threat, the massive threat, why, as the weeks _ the massive threat, why, as the weeks in — the massive threat, why, as the weeks in the middle and late february— weeks in the middle and late february began to evolve, roll out, you and _ february began to evolve, roll out, you and others who are equally aware of the _ you and others who are equally aware of the nature of that existential threats, — of the nature of that existential threats, were not e—mailing number 10? 0r— threats, were not e—mailing number 10? or shouting out your concern that the — 10? or shouting out your concern that the central government had fundamentally failed to understand the nature of the threat that you had described?— the nature of the threat that you had described? well... is difficult to work out _ had described? well... is difficult to work out where _ had described? well... is difficult to work out where you _ had described? well... is difficult to work out where you can - had described? well... is difficult to work out where you can go - had described? well... is difficultl to work out where you can go once you have talked to all the people i have talked to. there is a very long list of people who said patrick... sir patrick has also come and i think he did not cover it in his oral evidence yesterday, but he has, i think, covered oral evidence yesterday, but he has, ithink, covered it oral evidence yesterday, but he has, i think, covered it in his written one, he also, through the good offices of mr cummings, tries to collate this, in the centre, so i think it is not that there weren't attempts to do this, but i don't think... this, in my view, is a situation which... i'm not convinced that had we done things differently, it would have been very different outcome. i want to say that, but i think nobody looking at this could say that this was ideal. lgratith think nobody looking at this could say that this was ideal.— say that this was ideal. with the treatest say that this was ideal. with the greatest respect, _ say that this was ideal. with the greatest respect, that _ say that this was ideal. with the greatest respect, that is - say that this was ideal. with the greatest respect, that is quite i say that this was ideal. with the | greatest respect, that is quite an understatement. this was a hugely significant — understatement. this was a hugely significant moment and a terrible floor~ _ significant moment and a terrible floor~ -- — significant moment and a terrible floor. —— flaw. | significant moment and a terrible floor- -- flaw— floor. -- flaw. i feel like this was an issue that _ floor. -- flaw. i feel like this was an issue that needs _ floor. -- flaw. i feel like this was an issue that needs to _ floor. -- flaw. i feel like this was an issue that needs to be - floor. -- flaw. i feel like this was| an issue that needs to be thought through. brute an issue that needs to be thought throu:h. ~ . ., ~ an issue that needs to be thought throu:h. ~ , . ,, ., an issue that needs to be thought throu:h. ~ . ., ~ ., ~ an issue that needs to be thought throu:h. ~ , .~ ., . . through. we will break now. we are not ttoin through. we will break now. we are rrot going to — through. we will break now. we are not going to finish _ through. we will break now. we are not going to finish your— through. we will break now. we are not going to finish your evidence . not going to finish your evidence todav. _ not going to finish your evidence today. so— not going to finish your evidence today. so chris. _ not going to finish your evidence today, so chris, i— not going to finish your evidence today, so chris, i think- not going to finish your evidence today, so chris, i think you - not going to finish your evidence today, so chris, i think you werei today, so chris, i think you were born _ today, so chris, i think you were born i_ today, so chris, i think you were born i know— today, so chris, i think you were born. i know the _ today, so chris, i think you were born. i know the burden - today, so chris, i think you were born. i know the burden we - today, so chris, i think you were born. i know the burden we arei born. i know the burden we are placing — born. i know the burden we are placing on _ born. i know the burden we are placing on you _ born. i know the burden we are placing on you and _ born. i know the burden we are placing on you and your - born. i know the burden we are . placing on you and your relatively small— placing on you and your relatively small office. _ placing on you and your relatively small office, and _ placing on you and your relatively small office, and i'm _ placing on you and your relatively small office, and i'm really- placing on you and your relativelyi small office, and i'm really sorry, but you _ small office, and i'm really sorry, but you know _ small office, and i'm really sorry, but you know how— small office, and i'm really sorry, but you know how important - small office, and i'm really sorry, but you know how important this| small office, and i'm really sorry, . but you know how important this is. we will— but you know how important this is. we will return — but you know how important this is. we will return at _ but you know how important this is. we will return at 330. _ but you know how important this is. we will return at 330.. 3:30pm. - studio: you're watching bbc news. that was live evidence taking place in central london, of the: inquiry. you just saw professor whitty. he said that there were not adequate plans for a pandemic of the kind that we witnessed, but in some situations, it is easy to have no plan, he said, but that that did require adama to build —— as a quick building blocks and he conceded that some of those building blocks were rushed in february and march of 2020. -- rushed in february and march of 2020. —— as a quick building blocks. the formulation of plans, professor chris whitty said that the plan often came later, and he said that technocrats such as him were often able to move quicker. he noted that the lack of testing, data, was a bigger barrier to implementing any containing —— containment measures, rather than any particular plan. the chief medical officerfor rather than any particular plan. the chief medical officer for england said that he felt that in hindsight that could feel it might lead to unduly harsh feelings at times. confessed that by professor chris whitty moved on to say that the unilateral measures would have had very little impact. we will come back to the covid—i9 inquiry when that comes back. we will take you the story from north wales, because police are searching for teenagers who have gone missing. the teenagers, are believed to be from shrewsbury, and are thought to be travelling in gwyneth, and camping in the area. harvey's mother, krystal, is frantically worried. —— crystal. police have asked for any reported sightings from the group. alcon respondent to us. —— now corresponded. we could not see anything, but within the past hour, north wales police have said that they have recovered the silver ford fiesta that they were looking for, which we know that the four boys were travelling in, to north wales, they had come on a camping trip over the weekend. i can tell you that it is a particularly wind the, narrow, steep road, and these are people that had only recently passed their driving test or tests, and so it would have been quite a tricky thing to manoeuvre, particularly if you are not used to driving on the sorts of conditions. —— window. their last known location was in porthmadog, on sunday afternoon, around midday, and yesterday there was an appeal from north wales police. we have seen a social media posts from the boys�* families, and also from shrewsbury college, where they were attending, studying for their lives, to say they are concerned. they hope they are returned safe, but in the past hour, we know that the silver ford fiesta that they were travelling in has been recovered further up that road. we also know that an air ambulance was seen in this area, a little time before that. we have had in particularfrom little time before that. we have had in particular from crystal, little time before that. we have had in particularfrom crystal, mother of harveyjones, one of the people he was travelling up here. she said that she did not know that he was coming to north wales. that she would be frantic with worry, and she is not really sure what he was doing here. they are being kept informed by north wales police. he is 17 years old. he was a student at shrewsbury college, doing his a—levels, along with, we believe, the other three people in the car. he left home on saturday night, to come to wales, although they did not know he was coming here. they thought he was going somewhere else. obviously, they have been tearing their hair out over the past 24 hours or so, their hair out over the past 24 hours orso, and their hair out over the past 24 hours or so, and as soon as it became clear that they have been to north wales, and secondly that they had disappeared, that there had been no contact with them at all, since that sighting, or tell a communications that happened around midday in porthmadog yesterday. that was our correspondents, stood outside the exclusion area near where the vehicle was found. phil's continuing to report from the scene. you can follow the developments on the live page on our website. phil has also reported that the air ambulance has been seen in the area, ambulance has been seen in the area, a little around 1:30pm and that also the ambulance had passed through that roadblock. also the report of a forensic police van in the region as well. we will follow the development and search, and follow those boys closely. early today, in the covid—i9 inquiry, chris whitty said it was a good thing to get science on board, but also recognised that it blurred the certain lines for the ministers. is it blurred the certain lines for the ministers. . it blurred the certain lines for the ministers. , , .. , ministers. is it because, ultimately, _ ministers. is it because, ultimately, these - ministers. is it because, - ultimately, these momentous decisions could only be for ministers? that the mantra that they were following the science, was, in your opinion, inaccurate? yes, both as a patrick — your opinion, inaccurate? yes, both as a patrick and _ your opinion, inaccurate? yes, both as a patrick and i, _ your opinion, inaccurate? yes, both as a patrick and i, when _ your opinion, inaccurate? yes, both as a patrick and i, when it _ as a patrick and i, when it initially happened, when ourjob was to get signed into government, we thought it was a good thing, we thought it was a good thing, we thought that the government was finally recognising that science was important, we immediately realised it was a millstone around our necks and did not help government either, because it blurred the distinction between the very firm, clear demarcation, between a technical advice and political decision, for which people are then answerable in the ballot box. that which people are then answerable in the ballot box.— the ballot box. that was so chris whi , the ballot box. that was so chris whitty. speaking _ the ballot box. that was so chris whitty, speaking to _ the ballot box. that was so chris whitty, speaking to the - the ballot box. that was so chris whitty, speaking to the covid-19 whitty, speaking to the covid—i9 inquiry. the morning session and the afternoon session. a quick break for those giving evidence, also those listening to it, including baroness hallett, and the lead counsel for the inquiry. the other person listening throughout the course of the day is our correspondents, any price. what have you been hearing in the last hour or so? —— ellie price. yes, i've been listening inside, not in the cold. the tone has been at different today. we've been hearing over the last few weeks quite a few criticisms for central government. i think chris when the today striking a slightly different tone, really, in that he was avoiding being a terribly critical of certain personalities, specifically boris johnson. he is still in post as the cmo for the uk. really explaining that there were times where boris johnson's decision making was unique, sometimes it was chaotic, but he had to work with anybody. and actually, these were extraordinary times. i have our political correspondent here. it has been a big science to come obviously, we are talking to a scientific adviser, but quite important political applications of how the decisions were made at the centre of government?— were made at the centre of covernment? , . , ., government? yes, it was, what we also not government? yes, it was, what we also got was _ government? yes, it was, what we also got was a _ government? yes, it was, what we also got was a bit _ government? yes, it was, what we also got was a bit of _ government? yes, it was, what we also got was a bit of a _ government? yes, it was, what we also got was a bit of a lifting - government? yes, it was, what we also got was a bit of a lifting the i also got was a bit of a lifting the veil, _ also got was a bit of a lifting the veil. of— also got was a bit of a lifting the veil, of how some of that scientific advice _ veil, of how some of that scientific advice that— veil, of how some of that scientific advice that was being given to the government was arrived at. so professor— government was arrived at. so professor chris whitty was talking about _ professor chris whitty was talking about those sage meetings, remember, sage. _ about those sage meetings, remember, sage. and _ about those sage meetings, remember, sage, and at the beginning of the pandemic. — sage, and at the beginning of the pandemic, perhaps it was too small, and at some — pandemic, perhaps it was too small, and at some point it was too large during _ and at some point it was too large during a pandemic. he was also talking — during a pandemic. he was also talking about claims from the other leading _ talking about claims from the other leading scientific adviser at the time. — leading scientific adviser at the time. the — leading scientific adviser at the time, the former government chief scientific— time, the former government chief scientific adviser, sir patrick vallance. _ scientific adviser, sir patrick vallance, that he had been more cautious— vallance, that he had been more cautious on the idea of lockdown. chris— cautious on the idea of lockdown. chris whitty was saying that no, he thought _ chris whitty was saying that no, he thought that lockdown would need to be taken. _ thought that lockdown would need to be taken, but he thought it was extremely important that the downsides were transparent. he likened — downsides were transparent. he likened it — downsides were transparent. he likened it to when you have an operation. _ likened it to when you have an operation, the doctor does notjust tell you _ operation, the doctor does notjust tell you that you need an operation, they also— tell you that you need an operation, they also tell you what the risks are as _ they also tell you what the risks are as well, and that he felt that government needed to have all of that information to make a decision. and interesting because he mentions about the idea of the government following the science. this is a mantra that, in effect, behave eight millstone around his neck, because it was his job to show the politicians, the politiciansjob to make their decisions, and actually, we have heard the phrase before, earlier in the choirs make inquiries, people being used as human shields. he had something to say on that?— say on that? yes, he has been so careful to — say on that? yes, he has been so careful to criticise _ say on that? yes, he has been so careful to criticise individuals - say on that? yes, he has been so careful to criticise individuals and j careful to criticise individuals and individual— careful to criticise individuals and individual politicians, but he has been _ individual politicians, but he has been quite critical of the system, as a whole — been quite critical of the system, as a whole in places. that was a really— as a whole in places. that was a really interesting... that phrase he used. _ really interesting... that phrase he used. the _ really interesting... that phrase he used, the mantra of following the science. _ used, the mantra of following the science. is— used, the mantra of following the science, is eight millstone around their— science, is eight millstone around their necks. — science, is eight millstone around their necks, notjust science, is eight millstone around their necks, not just for the scientists, but he did not believe it was— scientists, but he did not believe it was helpful for government either~ — it was helpful for government either. because he said it blurred the thinking, the advice that was being _ the thinking, the advice that was being given and the decisions that had to— being given and the decisions that had to be — being given and the decisions that had to be made by the politicians for the _ had to be made by the politicians for the people who would hold them accountable at the ballot box. that was a _ accountable at the ballot box. that was a really clear distinction. he has been — was a really clear distinction. he has been very clear throughout all of his— has been very clear throughout all of his evidence today, to make that distinction. — of his evidence today, to make that distinction, that in his view, his role _ distinction, that in his view, his role was — distinction, that in his view, his role was to— distinction, that in his view, his role was to advise, to go to government and say, look, if you don't _ government and say, look, if you don't want — government and say, look, if you don't want this to happen, you need to do— don't want this to happen, you need to do something like this. he was very clear— to do something like this. he was very clear that at no point did he say to— very clear that at no point did he say to the — very clear that at no point did he say to the politicians, you must not do this _ say to the politicians, you must not do this he — say to the politicians, you must not do this. he said that was not appropriate for him to do. the whole oint of appropriate for him to do. the whole point of this — appropriate for him to do. the whole point of this inquiry _ appropriate for him to do. the whole point of this inquiry is _ appropriate for him to do. the whole point of this inquiry is to _ appropriate for him to do. the whole point of this inquiry is to learn - point of this inquiry is to learn lessons and we have been hearing about the structures. the fact that we have at is almost a by product? the point of this inquiry is a lessons, not to prescribe blame to particularly anyone person. politicians or anybody, but by the wayside there is that public mediation that you might come across. we were getting a little bit today about the structure and how decisions were made. shortly before the break, we were hearing about the scientific community, starting to realise that this pandemic could be an issue, that they could be quite an issue, that they could be quite an enormous death toll, but the structure of the central government are not taking it seriously because they did not take natural disasters in a same way that they might take a terrorist attack or military attack. this was really interesting. he was talking _ this was really interesting. he was talking about the period right back at the _ talking about the period right back at the start of the pandemic, late january. — at the start of the pandemic, late january, early february, and he said that he _ january, early february, and he said that he had — january, early february, and he said that he had told ministers that it was reasonable to think that there would _ was reasonable to think that there would be — was reasonable to think that there would be between 100000 and 300,000 deaths _ would be between 100000 and 300,000 deaths. that was a first glance, what _ deaths. that was a first glance, what he — deaths. that was a first glance, what he thought was a reasonable assumption. it did not, in his word, electrify— assumption. it did not, in his word, electrify government into action. he said that _ electrify government into action. he said that he believed that was a structural— said that he believed that was a structural issue, that if the head of mi5_ structural issue, that if the head of mb had — structural issue, that if the head of mi5 had walked in and said there was an— of mi5 had walked in and said there was an unprovoked terrorist attacks in -- _ was an unprovoked terrorist attacks in -- attack. — was an unprovoked terrorist attacks in —— attack, they would have been a different— in —— attack, they would have been a different idea. he made the interesting point, when he was pressed — interesting point, when he was pressed on it, he said that was something that needed to be thought about _ something that needed to be thought about so _ something that needed to be thought about. so for chris whitty, that was quite _ about. so for chris whitty, that was quite a _ about. so for chris whitty, that was quite a strong thing to say. when the baroness _ quite a strong thing to say. when the baroness chipped _ quite a strong thing to say. when the baroness chipped in - quite a strong thing to say. when the baroness chipped in as - quite a strong thing to say. izfzt�*uéi�*i the baroness chipped in as well, quite a strong thing to say. izfzt�*uéi�*u the baroness chipped in as well, the whole point is that she has always said, the point of this is to learn lessons, because the next pandemic is a case of when and not if. of course, the politicians were gearing up. this is science week this week, they were gearing up for a politicians week next week. we don't know who is one. obviously, this will be any backwards, with a bunch of politicians he will have left the posts, but there are some key people who are still in post. yes. posts, but there are some key people who are still in post.— who are still in post. yes, as you sa , who are still in post. yes, as you say. chris _ who are still in post. yes, as you say. chris whitty _ who are still in post. yes, as you say, chris whitty is _ who are still in post. yes, as you say, chris whitty is one - who are still in post. yes, as you say, chris whitty is one of - say, chris whitty is one of those who are — say, chris whitty is one of those who are still in post. that might explain — who are still in post. that might explain why he's been a bit less keen— explain why he's been a bit less keen on— explain why he's been a bit less keen on making personal accusations, than some _ keen on making personal accusations, than some of the other ministers. in terms _ than some of the other ministers. in terms of— than some of the other ministers. in terms of the — than some of the other ministers. in terms of the politicians, people work _ terms of the politicians, people work we — terms of the politicians, people work we are expecting to hear from is the _ work we are expecting to hear from is the former health secretary, man -- matt— is the former health secretary, man —— matt hancock, borisjohnson, and also rishi _ —— matt hancock, borisjohnson, and also rishi sunak, the then chancellor.— also rishi sunak, the then chancellor. . ., also rishi sunak, the then chancellor. ~ . ., chancellor. we can hand back to you now, we chancellor. we can hand back to you now. we will — chancellor. we can hand back to you now. we will be _ chancellor. we can hand back to you now, we will be hearing _ chancellor. we can hand back to you now, we will be hearing for - chancellor. we can hand back to you now, we will be hearing for the - now, we will be hearing for the ministers first before we had back. thank you to you both. king charles is hosting the president and first lady of korea. visit since his creation. it's the first granted by king charles to a world leader since his coronation. our correspondent helena wilkinson has been getting reaction outside buckingham palace. that ceremonial welcome for the president of south korea and the first lady, that take place along the mall, just a little earlier on today. the prime minister has said the prince and princess of wales, catherine and william were also there, playing their role in this three—day state visit. there was in a very spectacular carriage procession along the mall, and then they all went along to buckingham palace where they had an informal private lunch. in the last half an hour or so, there has been a wreath laying service at the korean war memorial, in central london. let's talk to somebody who has a huge interest in both south korean and british culture. i'm very pleased to say we have a youtube sensation here with us. also known as korean billy. tell our dealers —— viewers what we do. tell our dealers -- viewers what we do. �* ., . . . ,, do. i'm south korean, and i make videos and _ do. i'm south korean, and i make videos and my _ do. i'm south korean, and i make videos and my name, korean - videos and my name, korean billy. make _ videos and my name, korean billy. make videos about the british culture. — make videos about the british culture, british that also includes covering — culture, british that also includes covering british dialects and different regional accents as well. we have _ different regional accents as well. we have had millions of views, so what was the information —— inspiration? i what was the information -- inspiration?—

Related Keywords

Paragraph , Of , Sage Meeting , Page , Sage , Three , 19 , Individuals , Human To Transmission , 24th A 19 , Systematic Transmission Cannot The 24th , 24 , Existence , Tnsofar , Issue , Yes , Somebody , Symptom , Transmission , Cinematic Transmission , Infection , Asymptomatic Transmission , Symptoms , Disease , Sagain , Earlier Were Debating , Thing , Statement , Distinction , Dress , Next Cobra Meeting , Earlier , Imran Shafi , 146558 , National Security , Secretary Of State , Number , Advisers , Colleagues , Meeting , National Security Adviser , Estate , Who , Update , Cmo , On Coronavirus , Deals , Government , Need , Reference , Plan , Travel Restrictions , Stance , Minister , Confidence , Office , Instance , Wealth Office , Restrictions , Border , Proposal Forward , Truth , Closures , Proposalforward , Wealth , Forward , Weatth Of State , Foreign , Response , Responses , Proportion , Assessment , 10 , Threat , Way , Bit , Commentary , Face , Secretary , Chief Medical Officer , Private Secretary , Situation , View , Pandemic , Possibility , Documents , Wasn T A Certainty , Pass , Cobra , Deaths , Loo 300000 Deaths , Thatis Loo 300000 Deaths , 300000 , Basis , Scientific Adviser , Public Health Emergency , Maverick , World Health Organization , Met , Something , Say , Mi5 , Concern , Chief Of Staff , News , Director , Us , People , Attack , Chances , Uk , Terrorist Attack , 100000 , System , Health , Risk Register , Flu , Consideration , Making , Pandemic Flu , Care , It , Worry , Potential Threat , Innocence , Risk Registerfor , Threats , Ones , Hazards , Criticism , Ministers , Person , Others , Room , Underplaying , Health Threats , Centre , Relative , Lot , Consequences , Outcome , Led , Want Inquiry , Evidence , Professor , Degree , Terms , The System , Potential Consequences , It Lot , Ijust , Ijustl , One , Absence , Example , Risk , Equally , Terrorist Outrage , Outrage , It Outrage , Risi , Risks , Emergencies , Context , Public Health , Gear , Two , Failure , Problem , Joint , Part , This , Crisis , Fact , Reaction , Individual , Whether , Debate , Information , Nobody , Word , Point , Kind , Sense , Think , Role , Apparatus , 4th , Stock Meeting , Changes , Letter , 4 , 4th Of February , It Wouldn T , Electrification , Ifi , Magnitude , Understanding , Phone , Emergency , Significance , Downing Street , Toing , Froing , Hundreds And Thousands , Material , Chris Wormald , Text Messages , Wormald , Ormald , Register , Phenomena , Thatis Pandemics , Stick , Big Question , Question , Circumstances , Line , Difference , Family , Training , Level , Terrorist Threat , Approach , Habitat , Terrorist , Educationaltraining , Damage , Type , Cabinet Office , Areas , Security Apparatus , Ratherthan , Health Security Agency , Work , Otherareas , Cabinet Security Apparatus , Interest , Things , Kinds , Importance , Special Branch , Impact , Whole , National Security Problems , Incident , Scale , Saying , Footing , Argument , Education , Loss , Economy , Equalfooting , Addition , Life , Society , Saving , Foot , Question Oftraining , Have On Society , Adviser , Departments , Nationaladviser , Reality , Treasury , Nl , Cabinet , Civil Contingencies Secretariat , Job , Direction , Cabinet Secretary , Steps , Indication , Type Cobra Meetings , Look , Break , Answer , Which , Premise , Why , Existential Threat , System Failure , Roll Out , Nature , 0r Threats , 0 , Patrick , List , Cummings , Offices , Weren T , Don T Think , Ithink , Lgratith , Floor , Respect , Understatement , Treatest , Burden , Flaw , Chris , Todav , Chris Whi , H , Werei Today , Rrot , Born , 30pm , Relativelyi , 330 , 3 , 30 , Professor Whitty , Plans , Place , Studio , Central London , Bbc News , Building Blocks , Situations , Adama , February , March Of 2020 , Technocrats , Formulation , 2020 , Chief Medical Officerfor , Testing , Containment Measures , Barrier , Data , Black , Hindsight , England , Times , Measures , Feelings , North Wales Police , Teenagers , North Wales , Story , Covid I9 , Thought , Area , Crystal , Krystal , Camping , Shrewsbury , Gwyneth , Harvey S , Alcon Respondent , Sightings , Anything , Group , Boys , Ford Fiesta , Weekend , Camping Trip , Steep Road , Narrow , Four , Driving Test , Tests , Manoeuvre , Sorts , Conditions , Window , Posts , Social Media , Midday , Location , Appeal , On Sunday Afternoon , Porthmadog , Families , Shrewsbury College , Lives , Safe , Air Ambulance , Road , Mother , Harveyjones , Student , A Levels , Car , 17 , Hair , Somewhere , Home , Saturday Night , Orso , Correspondents , Exclusion Area , Contact , Communications , Sighting , Developments , Phil , Vehicle , Scene , Website , Ambulance , Region , Roadblock , Development , Report , Search , Forensic Police Van , 1 , Notjust Science , Decisions , Lines , Covid I9 Inquiry , Board , Mantra , Inaccurate , Opinion , Your , Ourjob , Distinction , Necks , Millstone , Firm , Advice , Ballot Box , Decision , Box , Covid 19 Whitty , Demarcation , Speaking , Course , Listening , Lead , Afternoon Session , Counsel , Baroness Hallett , Tone , Ellie , Listening Inside , Cold , Boris Johnson , Central Government , Personalities , Criticisms , Post , Anybody , Decision Making , Correspondent , Applications , Veil , Beginning , Sage Meetings , Covernment , Patrick Vallance , Claims , Chief , Leading , Operation , Lockdown , Idea , No , Doctor , Vallance , Downsides , It Downsides , Wall , Effect , Eight , Politicians , Phrase , Neck , Politiciansjob , Choirs , Inquiries , Human Shields , Scientists , Places , Science , Thinking , Accountable , You Don T , Do Don T , Lessons , Hearing , Appropriate , Structures , Product , Mediation , Anyone , Blame , Wayside , Structure , Community , Death Toll , Military Attack , Disasters , Glance , Start , He Deaths , Terrorist Attacks , Electrify , Head , Electrify Assumption , Assumption , Baroness , Well , Case , Chipped In , Izfzt , Bunch , Some , Accusations , You Sa , Matt Hancock , Chancellor , Chancellor , Rishi , Rishi Sunak , First Lady , President , King Charles , Creation , Korea , Buckingham Palace , World Leader , Coronation , Helena Wilkinson , Mall , Prime Minister , Princess , Has , William , Catherine , Prince , State Visit , Carriage Procession , Lunch , Half , Wreath Laying Service , Youtube , British Culture , Korean Billy , Korean War Memorial , Let S Talk , Videos , Viewers , Dealers , Edo , Accents , My Name , Views , Millions , Covering Culture , Dialects ,