hearing about what went wrong with wilko. ., _, , ., hearing about what went wrong with wilko. ., , ., , ., wilko. you could see in that short cli - , wilko. you could see in that short cli, it wilko. you could see in that short clip, it encapsulated _ wilko. you could see in that short clip, it encapsulated a _ wilko. you could see in that short clip, it encapsulated a large - clip, it encapsulated a large portion of what went on at the hearing. you have lisa wilkinson speaking publicly about the reasons why the chain collapsed. she came out with a lot of very detailed reasons about why these problems occurred. mps were more interested really on her contrition and what money had gone out of the business and then what failures had happened, as opposed to the excuses. for example, we had lisa wilkinson saying that covid was a major factor. she said the shops had stayed open, the company had continued to pay its landlords and its bills and it had called on the furlough scheme to help it cope with the financial impact of the pandemic. the former chief executive added that he thought that was a mistake. you had mps pushing hard for her to show more contrition, and there were also questioning why £9 million in dividends have been taken out of the company between 2019 and its collapse. she said that she thought that the money would not have helped that much, in effect, and would have done nothing to help the around £50 million hole in the pension fund that wilko has. a lot of what lisa wilkinson's explanations were very detailed, but fundamentally what you have here is a business that relied on having a network of high street stores, more than 400 of them up and down the country. those stores came at a price. you have to pay rent on those stores. high rent, long leases were already eroding the position of wilko before the pandemic. the pandemic clearly did not help. lisa wilkinson even introduced the mini budget and your liz truss as being a factor that didn't help the company because it was trying to a new borrowing patcher package and she said when that happened the interest rate that wilko is going to pay went up rate that wilko is going to pay went up to unreasonable levels, so a vulnerable business hit by a lot of different circumstances. according to mps on incompetence and naivety, as well. did to mps on incompetence and naivety, as well. , ., ., , ., ., as well. did we hear any more about what might — as well. did we hear any more about what might happen _ as well. did we hear any more about what might happen next? _ as well. did we hear any more about what might happen next? there - as well. did we hear any more about what might happen next? there are | what might happen next? there are all the staff facing redundancy. what more do we know about the next steps? what more do we know about the next stes? ' i1 i1 i what more do we know about the next stes?’ :: :: :: , .,, what more do we know about the next stes? iiiiii , what more do we know about the next stes? :::::: , steps? 12,000 people lost their “obs over the collapse. i steps? 12,000 people lost their “obs over the collapse. some * steps? 12,000 people lost their “obs over the collapse. some have h steps? 12,000 people lost theirjobs over the collapse. some have been i over the collapse. some have been taken about weekly —— other retailers. poundland lanjaron about 70 stores, and other discount retailer to come 50. negotiations are ongoing about what happens from this point onwards, but so far the majority of what happened that the committee was trying to look at the reasons why wilko collapsed and why it went from a position at the beginning of 2022 £100 million in reserve and at the end of 2022 it was really struggling and then went bustin was really struggling and then went bust in 2023. was really struggling and then went bust in 2023-— an inquiry has found that mortuary abuser david fuller was able to offend without being caught because of "serious failings" at the hospitals where he worked. between 2007 and 2020, fuller abused the bodies of at least 101 women and girls in kent hospitals. the report has made 17 recommendations to prevent "similar atrocities". live now to our news correspondent sanchia berg. what more can you tell us? well, the report which you mentioned is a pretty substantial document. sir jonathan michaels has gone through looking at exactly how this abuse —— this abuser was able to offend. david fuller, it is hard to believe, but he was for 15 years able to get access to bodies in the mortuary and to abuse them there. on one year alone, between december 2019 and december 2020, alone, between december 2019 and december2020, he alone, between december 2019 and december 2020, he was able to enter the mortuary 444 times. the hospital managers had access to that data but nobody was reviewing its or asking questions about it. that is one of the striking thing is that sir jonathan points out, that there was an extraordinary lack of curiosity about this man, about why he was going to the mortuary so often. he was an electrical supervisor. it all set out that the idea that our necrophiliac murderer would seek employment in the nhs to pursue his predilections is, to many people, and unlikely if not incredible scenario, but that is what happens here. this first phase of his work looks very much at what field here, the recommendations for work to change here in this particular trust. the trust has said that of the 17 recommendations it has actioned the majority and what we will be waiting for now is the next phase, phase two, when sirjonathan michael will consider the lessons for the whole of the nhs and the lessons particularly for safeguarding the deceased, who he said should be respected in the way that living patients are.— we've been bringing you the latest covid inquiry coverage where housing secretary michael gove, formerly the chancellor of the duchy of lancaster, has been giving evidence alongside former deputy chief medical officer professor damejenny harries. earlier, the housing secretary apologised to victims and families for mistakes made by government in the covid pandemic. the government body responsible for synthesizing the response of government in the face of this unprecedented crisis was largely, as it must have seemed to you, not fit for purpose in february, march, april, may of 2020. yes. and i want to take this opportunity, if i may, my lady, to apologise to the victims who endured so much pain, the families who endured so much loss as a result of the mistakes that were made by government in response to the pandemic. and as a minister responsible for the cabinet office and who was also close to many of the decisions that were made, i must take my share of responsibility for that. politicians are human beings. we're fallible. we make mistakes and we make errors. and i'm sure that the inquiry will have an opportunity to look in detail at many of the errors i and others made. but i also want to stress that i and those who with whom i worked were also seeking at every point, in circumstances where every decision was difficult and every course was bad, to make those decisions that we felt we could in order to try to deal with an unprecedented virus and a remarkable assault on the institutions of the country. michael gove speaking earlier. he is speaking at the inquiry now, so let's take you straight back to the covid inquiry. i hope out —— i hadn't been clear that what we were seeking to do was to provide horizontal legislation rather than being sector specific. devolved nations. i want to explore with you _ devolved nations. i want to explore with you please some of the legal, technicai— with you please some of the legal, technical and structural problems or issues _ technical and structural problems or issues that— technical and structural problems or issues that presented themselves to the uk _ issues that presented themselves to the uk government in terms of liaising — the uk government in terms of liaising and dealing with the devolved administrations, who of course _ devolved administrations, who of course form a vital part of the united — course form a vital part of the united kingdom. legally, coronavirus what is— united kingdom. legally, coronavirus what is essentially a public health emergency and health is a devolved matter— emergency and health is a devolved matter and — emergency and health is a devolved matter and so was it that feature that gave — matter and so was it that feature that gave rise to the debate about the extent of the devolved settlements on devolution? health was a _ settlements on devolution? health was a matter for the other nations of the _ was a matter for the other nations of the united kingdom, but it was the united kingdom government that .ave the united kingdom government that gave rise _ the united kingdom government that gave rise to, ultimately, quite conceptual debate about the extent of devolution. the united kingdom government had on the statute books the civit— government had on the statute books the civil contingencies act 2004, which _ the civil contingencies act 2004, which had — the civil contingencies act 2004, which had never used provision that allowed _ which had never used provision that aitowed it— which had never used provision that allowed it to produce emergency regulations, which would have required — regulations, which would have required governors being appointed for parts _ required governors being appointed for parts of the united kingdom. it also had _ for parts of the united kingdom. it also had arr— for parts of the united kingdom. it also had an it statute books to public — also had an it statute books to public health control of diseases act, as— public health control of diseases act, as well as the new coronavirus acts, _ act, as well as the new coronavirus acts, which— act, as well as the new coronavirus acts, which came to pass. why did the government is not use the civil contingencies act, why did it use the public— contingencies act, why did it use the public health control of diseases act, and then when it came into force _ diseases act, and then when it came into force the coronavirus act? several — into force the coronavirus act? several reasons. the civil contingencies act was designed to be dealt with... was designed to deal with events like add terrorist attack which paralysed his national infrastructure. the powers within it are draconian and to take that step, to cross that threshold it requires the act to be actively renewed and if it falls away, if the immediate nature of the crisis, the immediate impact, as it were, diminishes, then the case for maintaining it diminishes, too. so it was better to have bespoke legislation. i note that michelle 0'neill, deputy first minister of northern ireland, argues that we should have used the civil contingencies act. i find that we should have used the civil contingencies act. ifind it ironic because for some coming from an irish republican tradition, the civil contingencies act would have undoubtedly seem to have been an unduly draconian way of dealing with the issues. the unduly draconian way of dealing with the issues. .,. unduly draconian way of dealing with the issues. ., . , , the issues. the act itself requires ministers. it— the issues. the act itself requires ministers, it is _ the issues. the act itself requires ministers, it is a _ the issues. the act itself requires ministers, it is a mandatory - ministers, it is a mandatory provision, _ ministers, it is a mandatory provision, to appoint an emergency coordinator — provision, to appoint an emergency coordinator is in the event that the provision _ coordinator is in the event that the provision in — coordinator is in the event that the provision in the act is used, whereby— provision in the act is used, whereby secondary legislation can be introduced. that is a very draconian and almost — introduced. that is a very draconian and almost nightmarish step. there is also _ and almost nightmarish step. there is also a _ and almost nightmarish step. there is also a provision in the act which requires _ is also a provision in the act which requires the — is also a provision in the act which requires the event in respect of which _ requires the event in respect of which one — requires the event in respect of which one is passing the regulations to he _ which one is passing the regulations to be unforeseen. in essence, a judqment — to be unforeseen. in essence, a judgment call was taken that this was a _ judgment call was taken that this was a step too far. it was the nuclear— was a step too far. it was the nuclear option, it had never been used, _ nuclear option, it had never been used. this— nuclear option, it had never been used, this was not the time to do it. . , , ,., ., , it. precisely so. the unforeseen element is _ it. precisely so. the unforeseen element is debatable _ it. precisely so. the unforeseen element is debatable and - it. precisely so. the unforeseen element is debatable and we i it. precisely so. the unforeseen| element is debatable and we did it. precisely so. the unforeseen - element is debatable and we did have that debate with government lawyers, to what extent was the pandemic unforeseen and the general view was, as i say a terrorist attack by definition be unforeseen, but the gathering storm of the pandemic might not meet that. the gathering storm of the pandemic might not meet that.— might not meet that. the united kinudom might not meet that. the united kingdom parliament _ might not meet that. the united kingdom parliament has - might not meet that. the united kingdom parliament has alwaysl might not meet that. the united - kingdom parliament has always retain sovereignty in the context of dealing — sovereignty in the context of dealing with the devolved nations, to legislate over devolved issues, but there — to legislate over devolved issues, but there is a convention under which _ but there is a convention under which the — but there is a convention under which the government will not seek to pass _ which the government will not seek to pass legislation dealing with devolved matters other than with the consent _ devolved matters other than with the consent of— devolved matters other than with the consent of devolved nations themselves. was it thoughts that's was an— themselves. was it thoughts that's was an unpalatable alternative, not a sensible — was an unpalatable alternative, not a sensible route for the government to go— a sensible route for the government to go down? with respect to legislating in the face of the crisis — legislating in the face of the crisis over public health matters, which _ crisis over public health matters, which were — crisis over public health matters, which were necessarily devolved matters? — which were necessarily devolved matters? , . , . which were necessarily devolved matters? , ., , ., ., matters? yes, as a general rule the convention — matters? yes, as a general rule the convention governs _ matters? yes, as a general rule the convention governs how— matters? yes, as a general rule the| convention governs how government operates. we do not normally legislate on devolved matters without the consent of the devolved administration. in without the consent of the devolved administration.— administration. in terms of the decision-making _ administration. in terms of the decision-making structures - administration. in terms of the i decision-making structures which decision—making structures which have _ decision—making structures which have to _ decision—making structures which have to he — decision—making structures which have to be put into place to address the various— have to be put into place to address the various aspects of the coronavirus crisis, was there a choice — coronavirus crisis, was there a choice faced by the government, either— choice faced by the government, either it— choice faced by the government, either it brings to devolved nations fully within its own united kingdom government decision—making structures, cabinet, cobra, so on and so _ structures, cabinet, cobra, so on and so forth, even where other parts of the _ and so forth, even where other parts of the united kingdom government might— of the united kingdom government might not be represented, or you then try— might not be represented, or you then try to— might not be represented, or you then try to bring the men on an ad hoc basis — then try to bring the men on an ad hoc basis as— then try to bring the men on an ad hoc basis as and when they are required — hoc basis as and when they are required to be there, was that the fundamental choice faced by the government? you have crystallised it. it was ultimately, again, contingent. there were couple of occasions when cabinet colleagues bristled at the fact that sometimes the devolved administrations were involved in discussions and influencing decision—making and felt —— and in those they were not represented in. there was a sense with some colleagues, we are the government to get you are discussing these things with nicola sturgeon, michelle o'neill, mark drakeford et al.. balance was... my own view was that we benefited from bringing in the devolved administrations as early as possible during the whole pandemic. you are aware that in the additional witness _ you are aware that in the additional witness statements from nicola sturgeon and baroness forster and mr -iven sturgeon and baroness forster and mr given that _ sturgeon and baroness forster and mr given that their position is that they— given that their position is that they feel— given that their position is that they feel that they were not really hrouqht _ they feel that they were not really brought properly into the decision—making structures but it was more — decision—making structures but it was more of an information route that they— was more of an information route that they were there to be taught what the — that they were there to be taught what the government had decided and it was— what the government had decided and it was a _ what the government had decided and it was a question of giving them information about those pre—existing positions _ information about those pre—existing positions. is that a fair analysis, do you _ positions. is that a fair analysis, do you think? got positions. is that a fair analysis, do you think?— positions. is that a fair analysis, do you think?