seekers to rwanda, saying he will finish the job. rishi sunak insisted his new law would end the merry go round of legal challenges and insisted it was the toughest anti immgration law. he was speaking at a news conference in downing street after the immigration minister robertjenrick, resigned, saying the plans didn t go far enough. our political editor chris mason is in westminster the prime minister tonight stares down the narrowest footpaths, a general, a snicket, with high walls on either side. he faces political, practical and legal challenges, which means the whole future of the policy is on the line, and his authority is on the line too. autumn of last year. rishi sunak becomes prime minister, the rwanda plan is already six months old. but as the seasons turn, no migrants are sent to east africa. winter becomes summer, and still no planes are leaving. and then the supreme court, this autumn, said it was unlawful. the slogan on the lectern is familiar, and boat cross
so the recommendation was keep prevalence low, that was not happening, and the consequence of thatis happening, and the consequence of that is more people with long covid. and i don t think that was something that policymakers were keen to factor in. ., . factor in. one more reference, lease, factor in. one more reference, please. in factor in. one more reference, please. in the factor in. one more reference, please, in the same factor in. one more reference, | please, in the same document, factor in. one more reference, - please, in the same document, page 166, in weeks earlier, here we see matt hancock, as you say, explained things well, fonts, and reminded them about long covid. can we take it that matt hancock was alive to theissues it that matt hancock was alive to the issues of long covid at about this time? it the issues of long covid at about this time? . . , the issues of long covid at about this time? . ., , , the issues of long covid at about thistime? . ., ,
thatis build up that social mixing. now, that is fine if you are intent on never having to do suppression measures again. but, from all of the evidence we have received from all of the advice that we have received, it was incredibly clear we were certainly going to have to do suppression measures again. we knew that all the way through. that was from the start. so, to then move forward and say, were going to get back into work when business wasn t even asking for people to come back into work, they were encouraging employees to stay at home, still. we developed all of these tools for remote working. but it was governments on its own demanding people go to work when the research we had were saying people were still quite cautious, businesses do not want to do it. the scientific opinion was that we would have to have another lockdown. to me it made absolutely no sense whatsoever why we were talking about getting everyone back to work and that were the stories that ended up bein
interested in politics led evidence, not evidence led policy. no, actually, iwould make the same criticism of them. i desperately don t want to have a row here over this because there is huge uncertainty. all of the evidence. not all of it. the number of people who have died is very certain but the number of people who have died of covid rather than with covid is perhaps less certain, so there is a huge room for debate in all of these things. what i would say is that some scientists were absolutely insisting that we had to have a circuit breaker lockdown, but wales did have one and it didn t seem to do very much good. and when i compare, as anyone can, on our world in data for example the experience of germany, the uk, and sweden, it does look rather like it doesn t matter what you do on the non pharmaceutical interventions, the restrictions of liberty, you get about the same progression of the disease.
more people died in that period than had died in the first one. do you accept that what one scientist put to me, that you guys are sometimes interested in politics led evidence, not evidence led policy? no, actually, iwould make the same criticism of them. i desperately don t want to have a row here over this because there is huge uncertainty. all of the evidence. not all of it. the number of people who have died is very certain but the number of people who have died of covid rather than with covid is perhaps less certain, so there is a huge room for debate in all of these things. what i would say is that some scientists were absolutely insisting that we had to have a circuit breaker lockdown, but wales did have one and it didn t seem to do very much good. and when i compare, as anyone can, on our world in data for example the experience of germany, the uk, and sweden, it